Democracy means voting for your friendly neighborhood dictator

[rvg]

So... By demonstrating that you're incapable of hurting anyone who's hurting you, you think that people are going to be afraid of hurting you...?

Logic fails.

Logic succeeds. You host terrorists --> you get nuked.

[LittleGrizzly]

The war on terror, a battle for hearts and minds largely... will not be won by nuclear weaponary, you may scare one or two or the more moderate national leaders but they are the kind of people that could be swayed without insanity... but you will be handing the terrorists thier dream...

Don't you think Al-Qaeda would like nothing more than a mushroom cloud or two in the middle east... if they could get a decent number of recruits out of the regular crap we cause in the middle east imagine after we supply them that propaganda!

[A Very Super Market]

So countries get nuked for being located in the Middle East? The 9/11 bombings were done by Saudis, and there hasn't been much reaction to them. Hell, weren't the bombings in the London and Madrid done by nationals of both countries? Nuke 'em too, they've got terrorists.

[HoreTore]

Logic succeeds. You host terrorists --> you get nuked.

So.... Just what are you proposing to do if the nation in question are unable to defeat said terrorists? Bomb 'em just for show?

[Beskar]

There are terrorists in America...

Let's give him the red button while he thinks it over.

[rvg]

So.... Just what are you proposing to do if the nation in question are unable to defeat said terrorists? Bomb 'em just for show?

Not just for show. Utterly obliterate them so that they serve as an example to everyone else.

[HoreTore]

Not just for show. Utterly obliterate them so that they serve as an example to everyone else.

And again, that will accomplish....what? The nation you're proposing to bomb is AGAINST terrorism already...

[rvg]

And again, that will accomplish....what? The nation you're proposing to bomb is AGAINST terrorism already...

It will show very vividly, that "being against terrorism" while hosting terrorists is not a good idea.

[rory_20_uk]

Not just for show. Utterly obliterate them so that they serve as an example to everyone else.

Oh, where to start:

• It will anger far more than it will cow into submission
• There's not the infrastructure to supply the number of bombers required. Surrounding countries might question hundreds of heavy bombers (does America have them these days?)
• In ideal terrain, killing everyone is difficult. In mountainous terrain it's almost impossible.
• Any country that undertakes it would be viewed as a pariah by the world. The long term damage is going to be worse than the problem.

[rvg]

Oh, where to start:

• It will anger far more than it will cow into submission
• There's not the infrastructure to supply the number of bombers required. Surrounding countries might question hundreds of heavy bombers (does America have them these days?)
• In ideal terrain, killing everyone is difficult. In mountainous terrain it's almost impossible.
• Any country that undertakes it would be viewed as a pariah by the world. The long term damage is going to be worse than the problem.

Let's see.

* It will anger far more than it will cow into submission
Then we'll bomb some more. The dead can be as angry as they wanna be.

* There's not the infrastructure to supply the number of bombers required. Surrounding countries might question hundreds of heavy bombers (does America have them these days?)
A few tactical nukes or one strategic depending on the situation.

* In ideal terrain, killing everyone is difficult. In mountainous terrain it's almost impossible.
Radiation ignores terrain.

* Any country that undertakes it would be viewed as a pariah by the world. The long term damage is going to be worse than the problem.
Pariah? If self-defense is wrong then I don't wanna be right.

[A Very Super Market]

rvg doesn't appear to be acknowledging anyone on this thread, so I think it's safe to assume that ignoring him would be a good idea. Retorting to hear the exact same phrase doesn't seem to be a good use of time.

[Azathoth]

* It will anger far more than it will cow into submission
Then we'll bomb some more. The dead can be as angry as they wanna be.

* There's not the infrastructure to supply the number of bombers required. Surrounding countries might question hundreds of heavy bombers (does America have them these days?)
A few tactical nukes or one strategic depending on the situation.

* In ideal terrain, killing everyone is difficult. In mountainous terrain it's almost impossible.
Radiation ignores terrain.

* Any country that undertakes it would be viewed as a pariah by the world. The long term damage is going to be worse than the problem.
Pariah? If self-defense is wrong then I don't wanna be right.

Maybe the rest of the world should think about nuking America, for self defense?

[Evil_Maniac From Mars]

I wouldn't have objected to a well-placed nuclear weapon or two blowing up over the mountains where we knew that Osama was hiding with fellow al-Qaeda insurgents, but I think the Russians and Chinese might have.