Author Topic: US to use nuclear weapons against Iran? (Read 3994 times)

RAIDER14 · « **Reply #15 on:** April 08, 2006, 02:02:40 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Schwein
Seems like you are fighting your new wars with the tactics of the losing pary of the "last war" you won (WWII). This far you don't seem to be any more successful either.

if your are refering only to the U.S. you are wrong there are multiple countries with the U.S. in the Middle East hence the name "Coalition Forces"

Schwein · « **Reply #16 on:** April 08, 2006, 02:06:11 PM »

I didn't specify one way or the other and I fail to see your point?

Gh0stFT · « **Reply #17 on:** April 08, 2006, 02:47:37 PM »

i wonder why nuclear weapons?
use it and others will follow your path...

dmf · « **Reply #18 on:** April 08, 2006, 02:55:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
this is not WW2, you do not fight a new war by the tactics of the last war.

I know this isn't WW2, but some things never change in life, like the fact that if you don't have enough butter, then it won't cover the bread. Same in a war, if you don't have enough troops, you can't cover the world, WW1, WW2, WW3, WW4 it wil still be the same fact.

dmf · « **Reply #19 on:** April 08, 2006, 02:58:11 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
this is not WW2, you do not fight a new war by the tactics of the last war.

Oh and as far a I know we ARE useing WW2 tactics. First we bomb them, then we send in the ground forces, gee, sounds like history class to me.

Yeager · « **Reply #20 on:** April 08, 2006, 03:42:00 PM »

This far you don't seem to be any more successful either.
====
You have so little faith scwhein, perhaps a visit from old uncle sam is in order. What are your GPS coordinates?

Schwein · « **Reply #21 on:** April 08, 2006, 05:06:12 PM »

See Rule #4, #5

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #22 on:** April 08, 2006, 05:09:29 PM »

It's funny most of the planning for 911 happened in the late 1990s, a period when the usa was very active in helping muslims and promting palestenian peace. For example in 1999 the usa used gps bombs to attack christian serbia because they were about to start a genocide of the very muslim albanians.

So maybe the al qaeda want to park planes i buldings for many reasons.

Schwein · « **Reply #23 on:** April 08, 2006, 05:13:45 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
It's funny most of the planning for 911 happened in the late 1990s, a period when the usa was very active in helping muslims and promting palestenian peace. For example in 1999 the usa used gps bombs to attack christian serbia because they were about to start a genocide of the very muslim albanians.

So maybe the al qaeda want to park planes i buldings for many reasons.

It only goes to show that dropping bombs on people does not please anyone. I don’t think “Look Arabs! We bombed the Serbs too! We bomb EVERYBODY!” will help you very much.

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #24 on:** April 08, 2006, 05:25:29 PM »

Quote

I'm not a military stargitist or anything, but I remember history class when my teacher told us that in WW2 Hitler fought too many fronts at one time, If I remember correctly Germany lost WW2, so I could be wrong, but it seems to me that if we fight too many fronts at one time won't we lose too?

That was for germany alone. Contrary to popular belief, Germany WAS NOT a super power. They couldn't project power far away. So fighting in too many places against too many strong foes was bad for them.

On the other hand, Japan was a super power in WW2.

Schwein · « **Reply #25 on:** April 08, 2006, 05:37:56 PM »

Fighting in too many places against too many strong foes is bad for anyone.

Jackal1 · « **Reply #26 on:** April 08, 2006, 06:02:46 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Schwein

Yes you are good at blowing things up with nothing more to go on than a set of GPS coordinates. And have you seen how much love that has generated for your people? Some people love you so much that they would gladly die to park a few planes in your buildings.

Is it getting cool in here? Maybe it`s just all the shade.

We ain`t in it for love hotshot.

weaselsan · « **Reply #27 on:** April 08, 2006, 06:42:12 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Captain Virgil Hilts
Wow, such incredible facts from the illustrious Seymour Hersh, published in The New Yorker, that paragon of journalism.

It's a contingency plan. They have them for EVERYTHING. There are entire departments who do nothing but dream up scenarios and formulate contingency plans to respond to them, regardless of how far fetched the scenario actually is.

REAL NEWS there, what a freaking scoop.

Did you know there was a contingency plan to invade Finland.

Yeager · « **Reply #28 on:** April 08, 2006, 06:58:16 PM »

scwhein...

what are your GPS coordinates?

bj229r · « **Reply #29 on:** April 08, 2006, 07:15:38 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Gh0stFT
i wonder why nuclear weapons?
use it and others will follow your path...

They have been working on bombs for some time which can hit these deeeeep bunkers where the nuke processing is going on...and thus far, the only way to get it done is deep penetration tactical nukes. Or, we can wait a few years, and Iran will undoubtedly have their own nukes. (sell any land you have near Tel Aviv)