Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Saw this on Facebook... 9/11
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="L8APEX" data-source="post: 16286976" data-attributes="member: 51947"><p>Over the past 18 years I keep hearing Afganistan is fertile for terrorists so we need to keep people there to prevent another massive 9-11 attack. Even thought it's the "graveyard of empires."</p><p>A good portion of the people in Afganistan don't even know they are a country, much less why all the Americans showed up.</p><p>The dark part of me wants to see us drop a ridiculous amount of "cobalt" Nuclear weapons to essentially salt the entire region in radioactive fallout with a half life of roughly 5.27 years. During that time a lethal dose of radiation would take just an hour.</p><p>After 20 half lifes, or 105 years people could live there again but they'd still be prone to cancer for another 25years. Deny the territory to the enemy for a century. This brings me to MacArthur vs Truman in the Korean war.</p><p>MacArthur wanted to drop atom bombs along the Korean Chinese border in order to create a barrier (denial of access) for Chinese to prevent them from supporting the Communists (north) with tens of thousands of troops flooding in from China.</p><p>Truman fired MacArthur, which in hindsight was the right call. It would have made the use of nukes in a limited tactical fashion acceptable to the world.</p><p></p><p>I just have reservations because the women and children. But the second we pull out, any of them that helped us will be slaughtered by the Taliban.</p><p>Also just like the moral dilemma MacArthur and Truman faced, using nuclear weapons invites other countries to see them as fair to use in limited/tactical situations. I'd imagine India and Pakistan would go to town.</p><p></p><p>But at this point we are essentially playing chess against pigeons. We've tried to teach them how to play and surprise they never follow the rules. So while we try to follow the rules of war, and be decent human beings they just strut around, knock the pieces over, crap on the board, and fly back to thier flock to claim victory.</p><p></p><p>I frankly do not see an option that is effective and morally palpable in Afghanistan.</p><p></p><p>Sent from my Note9</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="L8APEX, post: 16286976, member: 51947"] Over the past 18 years I keep hearing Afganistan is fertile for terrorists so we need to keep people there to prevent another massive 9-11 attack. Even thought it's the "graveyard of empires." A good portion of the people in Afganistan don't even know they are a country, much less why all the Americans showed up. The dark part of me wants to see us drop a ridiculous amount of "cobalt" Nuclear weapons to essentially salt the entire region in radioactive fallout with a half life of roughly 5.27 years. During that time a lethal dose of radiation would take just an hour. After 20 half lifes, or 105 years people could live there again but they'd still be prone to cancer for another 25years. Deny the territory to the enemy for a century. This brings me to MacArthur vs Truman in the Korean war. MacArthur wanted to drop atom bombs along the Korean Chinese border in order to create a barrier (denial of access) for Chinese to prevent them from supporting the Communists (north) with tens of thousands of troops flooding in from China. Truman fired MacArthur, which in hindsight was the right call. It would have made the use of nukes in a limited tactical fashion acceptable to the world. I just have reservations because the women and children. But the second we pull out, any of them that helped us will be slaughtered by the Taliban. Also just like the moral dilemma MacArthur and Truman faced, using nuclear weapons invites other countries to see them as fair to use in limited/tactical situations. I'd imagine India and Pakistan would go to town. But at this point we are essentially playing chess against pigeons. We've tried to teach them how to play and surprise they never follow the rules. So while we try to follow the rules of war, and be decent human beings they just strut around, knock the pieces over, crap on the board, and fly back to thier flock to claim victory. I frankly do not see an option that is effective and morally palpable in Afghanistan. Sent from my Note9 [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Road Side Pub
Saw this on Facebook... 9/11
Top