Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rogwar on September 08, 2006, 08:15:27 AM
-
First of all, I’m for combating terrorism aggressively and protecting America. I fly a lot all over the world so I’ve got a personal interest as well. This post is not intended to be racists or to incite a posting riot. Just want people to think is all.
Often hear people say or read the comment, “we should just kill them all”, or “we should nuke them”. What would that entail?
Scenario 1:
Well assuming “them all” means all muslims and therefore “killing them all” means to kill all Muslims, here we go…
1. Round up all muslims in the USA into extermination camps. Some type of mass killing and body disposal system for each camp would need to be developed. Many such camps would need to be created across the USA. We would have to develop some type of internal military force to round up everyone and chase down folks in hiding. Suppose such a group would get started by seizing the membership records of all mosques in the USA.
2. Noteworthy muslim populations exist in other western countries. For example, Canada would either have to be severely intimidated or invaded so that all muslims in Canada could be exterminated. The same would apply to the likes of England, Germany, and France as well as other European countries.
3. Simultaneously on the hit list, and this is often heard as well, would be a nuclear strike against all major muslim countries. Strike all major population centers over lets say 10,000 people? The USA would certainly have to boost up nuke production because it would take thousands. As a comparison, consider what it would take to nuke all population centers in Texas over 10,000 inhabitants. Just some of the countries would include (in no particular order):
- Chad, Senegal, Ethiopia, Qatar, Guinea, Somalia, Syria, Niger, Afghanistan, Libya, Central African Republic, Mauritania, Jordan, Turkey, Malaysia, Bangladesh, Kuwait, Mali, Morocco, Albania, Algeria, Oman, Yemen, Togo, Guinea-Bissau, United Arab Emirates, Lebanon, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Tanzania, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Bahrain, Maldives, Cameroon, Pakistan, Tunisia, Egypt, and Indonesia.
The environmental impact from such a substantial number of nuclear detonations is bound to have substantial worldwide consequences. The global economic impact would be devastating. Times would be extremely difficult for the USA given we are a member of a global economy. Look around your house and se how many things you have manufactured in other countries.
Scenario 2:
Assuming the “kill them all” phrase means all countries associated with or sponsoring terrorism, as well as individual religious groups promoting radical islam….here we go…
1. The USA would have to set a definition level of “radical islam”. All muslim people in the USA identified within such a category would be rounded up and put into re-education camps. Those not surrendering would be imprisoned or executed.
2. The USA would have to apply substantial pressure to other western nations to do the same as in number 1. Another alternative would be to send groups of covert hit teams would need to be created and sent to countries to take out specific radical targets or target groups in western countries. Such would likely be difficult to remain covert. There would be many targets, maybe hundreds.
3. Launch a nuclear strike against all significant population centers in muslim countries associated with terrorism. Probably several hundred nuclear devices would be required. Some of the countries would likely include (in no particular order):
- Iran, Syria, Sudan, and maybe Pakistan, Somalia, and North Korea (designated sponsor of terrorism). Cuba is on the sponsor list but they don’t have much history with radical muslim terrorists. Consider engaging Cuba with conventional forces. Libya is currently off the list but should be evaluated.
The environmental impact from such a number of nuclear detonations would have a substantial impact on neighboring countries and possibly worldwide.
The execution of Scenario 2 would likely generate such a backlash in the worldwide muslim community that we would be back to Scenario 1 eventually. It would likely create hundreds of thousands of jihad Johnnies.
Imagine the human impact as well. Would you want a job in the extermination camps? What type of society would we become? Throw the whole US Constitution out the window. The USA would become the largest mass exterminator of people in history.
Japan and the Soviet Union were clear targets. The major problem with combating terrorism is there is no definitive target. With radical Islamic terrorism, they believe in an afterlife reward by being martyred. How can such be combated using the threat of death?
The USA could target the leadership, the Mulas and such, but another would be there to step up and fill the void. It's somewhat difficult to kill a belief.
Anyhow, the next time “kill them all” pops into the conversation, just think of the consequences.
-
We simply have to hold them off until their religion catches up to basic human rights.
Once their religion makes it past the 12th century and into say the 19th or 20th... the problem will go away.
The more computers and TV's they get and levis and ipods.... the less beheading people on tv we will have.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
The more computers and TV's they get and levis and ipods.... the less beheading people on tv we will have.
lazs
Yup... you get the beheadings on Youtube.com instead :p
-
The muslim religion at one time was the most advanced in the world. Now they are centuries behind.
Do you honestly think that this is going to change?
-
They are very good at growing stuff and they have some really great sandals. My freind bought a pair in Egypt and they are really nice.
-
don't forget the great quality of egyptian ctton and the great sheets that can be made from it.
-
Dot kill them all, just the mean ones.
-
Here's my take:
Drop a few brigades into Saudi and capture the oilfields, give the muslim world 72 hours to hand over suspects, if the don't then we drop a bomb on various holy sites, for example Bomb #1 goes on the Dome of the Rock, bomb # 2 goes on Medina and bomb # 3 goes on Mecca.
I bet you any money you like that they will soon be singing like Canaries.
-
Originally posted by Hawco
if the don't then we drop a bomb on various holy sites, for example Bomb #1 goes on the Dome of the Rock, bomb # 2 goes on Medina and bomb # 3 goes on Mecca.
I bet you any money you like that they will soon be singing like Canaries.
I have only one question: What do we use to threaten them after we've ran out of holy sites?
-
Originally posted by Fishu
I have only one question: What do we use to threaten them after we've ran out of holy sites?
cariactures of Mohammed seemed to piss them off before.
-
Oh, come on guys, anyone in the media, purchasing a Mocha Chai at Starbucks or residing in Eurabia can tell you, Islam isn't dangerous. You need to get over it, and stop upsetting them by responding so violently to actions that we've brought upon ourselves by hording all of the world's resources and making them look bad.
After all, if we hadn't made Germany so resentful with the whole losing WW1 debacle followed by the Treaty of Versailles thing and then responded so violently to the whole "invasion of Poland" thing, then a lot of needless bloodshed might have been avoided. Obviously though, men like Churchill needed to use a mythical Fascist "bogey" to frighten people so they could advance their narrow minded conservative social agendas, control our thinking, and get elected. Besides, only a tiny proportion of the German population were violent members of organizations like the SA or SS.
It's dangerous Christian fundamentalists like me you have to worry about, after all my wife can vote and I might grab a bible and start preaching at any moment. It's high time our ability to vote and serve in the government was removed, our ability to teach in schools was eliminated, and our children were taken away and sent for reeducation before they are irrevocably damaged. And besides, we urgently need to act because a little over 900 years ago people calling themselves Christians responded to conquest of Jerusalem by the Seljuk Turks by starting the CRUSADES! Which as any rational person can tell you is a much bigger problem and threat than an Islamic Jihad in the 21st century.
- SEAGOON
-
What do we use to threaten them after we've ran out of holy sites?
====
I think in the case of Islam, once you have destroyed Mecca, the religion itself is dead.
One good way to find out........
-
I can not believe this post is not locked yet....
-
have you ever owned any 100% egyptian cotton bed sheets? they would by themselves constitute good reason to not hurt egypt, not to mention other great things there in the land of the pharoahs.
-
where is Mecca anyway? Argentina?
:rolleyes:
-
mecca is in saudi arabia. argentina is the place evita doesn't want to cry for her.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Oh, come on guys, anyone in the media, purchasing a Mocha Chai at Starbucks or residing in Eurabia can tell you, Islam isn't dangerous.
It isn't dangerous just as Christianity or Hinduism isn't dangerous. It's the middle man that twists the ideals into hatred that are dangerous.
It's dangerous Christian fundamentalists like me you have to worry about, after all my wife can vote and I might grab a bible and start preaching at any moment.
Religious fanatics of any religion are a danger.
ack-ack
-
Hello Ack,
Originally posted by Ack-Ack
Religious fanatics of any religion are a danger.
Having bitten before, I should know better, but my obvious lack of smarts in that respect (as well as others) should be well established around here.
Ok then, I'm game, how am I a danger to you?
- SEAGOON
-
Never said you were a danger just saying that religious fanatics of any faith can be and have been dangerous.
An example of one would be the mullahs advocating the death of Infidels and another example would be some of the more fanatical Christian groups that have, for example, advocated and condoned the bombing of abortion clinics and shooting of doctors that practice abortions. People like this spew venom disguised as sermons.
ack-ack
-
Originally posted by lasersailor184
The muslim religion at one time was the most advanced in the world. Now they are centuries behind.
Do you honestly think that this is going to change?
Yeah. People don't change. Take GWB for instance. Once a mediocre alcoholic with no business sense and political aspirations always a mediocre alcoholic with no business sense and political aspirations. ;)
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hello Ack,
Having bitten before, I should know better, but my obvious lack of smarts in that respect (as well as others) should be well established around here.
Ok then, I'm game, how am I a danger to you?
- SEAGOON
The same way my Muslim grocer is, I bet. :D
-
moslem grocers are pretty decent people and make a living in pretty dicey parts of towns. the guy up the road from us will credit people who can't pay and must get stiffed quite a bit. occassionally I clean up the tab for the wino that lives in a derelict trailer at the end of my property down by the marsh. I wouldn't want him nuked.
-
You're a good man IRL, Storch. I don't care what anyone says about ya. :D
-
well the wino is real protective of my stuff and he has less fleas than a pitbull living in the same environment would. hell sometimes he won't even let me in.
-
Ok. I'm gonna look for the local "adopt-a-wino" program. Granted, I'm a bit of a wino myself. ;)
-
the derelict trailer has no leaks, two rooms and the head works, but no A/C. Israel (the wino) is a funny guy and fahami the grocer let's you take stuff until you can pay (or until I do). :D
-
Originally posted by lazs2
We simply have to hold them off until their religion catches up to basic human rights.
Once their religion makes it past the 12th century and into say the 19th or 20th... the problem will go away.
The more computers and TV's they get and levis and ipods.... the less beheading people on tv we will have.
lazs
Laz,
Posted my writings on a couple of forums I am active and I believe yours was the most simple yet astute I believe. WTG!
There's a lot of depth in your posting. The first time I saw it, thought it was a unworthy remark.
Well off to Peru tomorrow for 10 days of serious work.
Take care!
-
After readin the original post and taking everything into consideration I only have one thing to say.
Kill em all:D
-
Originally posted by lazs2
We simply have to hold them off until their religion catches up to basic human rights.
Once their religion makes it past the 12th century and into say the 19th or 20th... the problem will go away.
The more computers and TV's they get and levis and ipods.... the less beheading people on tv we will have.
lazs
:rofl
-
yea, I dont have time to read who this is about ... but I'm definately for killing all of them.:D twice if need be!:t
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hello Ack,
Having bitten before, I should know better, but my obvious lack of smarts in that respect (as well as others) should be well established around here.
Ok then, I'm game, how am I a danger to you?
- SEAGOON
I'm betting what Ack really meant was extremist, not fanatic.
;)