PDA

View Full Version : If you were president, what would you do if one or more of our Cities gets Nuked?


Calcountry
07-20-2007, 06:14 PM
It is a question, that every damned one of our presidential candidates ought to be asked bluntly.

HolmeZz
07-20-2007, 06:24 PM
Invade Iraq.

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 06:30 PM
Invade Iraq.What a smart ass you are. What the fug would you do? Bend over and ask for another? Probably.

HolmeZz
07-20-2007, 06:32 PM
Bend over? You seem to be the one with something up your ass.

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 06:50 PM
Bend over? You seem to be the one with something up your ass.You posted in my thread, so WTF was your purpose other than being a trite little punk ass B**.?

Bring something to the discussion Mr. Helper, otherwise, just stay the fug away. It was a serious question, one that I would like a serious answer to. Especially all you high minded liberals who know so goddam much about human history, and humanity, and barbarism.

Perhaps we should have a focus group after a million of our citizens are wiped out, pray that we are the lucky ones left over to engage in such intellectualism.

Certainly you all would not like to see our way of life here in America destroyed by such an event? Perhaps you see us as invincible, and mine the rantings of a deranged lunatic. I really hope that you are right, and that I go to my grave some day having been proven wrong, and an alarmist. But what if I am right? Then what?

Do any of you have a contingency plan? I should hope that the next president ought to have one, whomever it may be.

Logical
07-20-2007, 06:57 PM
I think more information is needed?

Is a country responsible?
Can a particular terrorist be identified?
Can anyone responsible be identified?

HolmeZz
07-20-2007, 07:03 PM
What kind of deep intellectual discussion were you planning on having with such a broad question? Are you talking about how we'd go after whoever hit us? Are you talking about what we'd do to protect the rest of the homeland? You aren't going to be able to get anything specific from that kind of question. You'd probably have to set up a detailed hypothetical. "Bring the evil-doers to justice" probably isn't the answer you're looking for.

Logical
07-20-2007, 07:04 PM
What kind of deep intellectual discussion were you planning on having with such a broad question? Are you talking about how we'd go after whoever hit us? Are you talking about what we'd do to protect the rest of the homeland? You aren't going to be able to get anything specific from that kind of question. You'd probably have to set up a detailed hypothetical.Exactly

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 07:05 PM
I think more information is needed?

Is a country responsible?
Can a particular terrorist be identified?
Can anyone responsible be identified?Great. Good to see the greatest shit stirrer of them all took the bait and wants to discuss some shitty business.

Well, lets assume that China covertly contracted some nukes through an Al Qaeda operative, but we were only able to pin it on Al Qaeda, and oh, no country in the world would dare claim responsibility, only there deepest condolences to our poor and now beleaguered country.

Assume more than a half million of your citizens have been wiped out, and that your infrastructure, and economy are now in a shambles. What would your course of action be? Do you have a 10 point plan for this one?

Take some time on it. It would be very intriguing to know whether or not, you have enough piss and vinegar in your intellect to actually grab the knife and start sharpening it.

I am sorry to point this out to you all, but this remains a very real and credible possibility. One, that I feel Bush hasn't done nearly all that is within his immediate power to prevent by cealing up the damned borders. DAY ONE, Mr. Bush. Un freaking believable.

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 07:08 PM
What kind of deep intellectual discussion were you planning on having with such a broad question? Are you talking about how we'd go after whoever hit us? Are you talking about what we'd do to protect the rest of the homeland? You aren't going to be able to get anything specific from that kind of question. You'd probably have to set up a detailed hypothetical. "Bring the evil-doers to justice" probably isn't the answer you're looking for.Oh, but I purposely left the question broad, so as to stir up shit, just like all the hypotheticals that Mr. Vlad is so infamous for.

I want to see a gut reaction, something visceral and barbaric enought to eradicate these cock roaches, or make them think about converting.

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 07:17 PM
ExactlyActually, it really is rather simple. You break the ice, knowing that someone way more smart than me will come along and attempt to display their intelligence, by belittling me, then all of a sudden, we get into a discussion, that can put the marrow on the bones of the said discussion. Unlike a lot of you, I don't always have the time to sit and pontificate at my typewriter, but, I come up with ideas. And every now and again, I am even bold enought to throw an ice breaker out there for you all to chew upon.


Please do chew, but I really would like to see what you would do given the hypothetical. Would you be pissed, or would you just piss in your cup, go have a drink, and ponder the lillies of the field and how even Soloman in all of his splender wasn't clothed as good as these.

Logical
07-20-2007, 07:19 PM
Great. Good to see the greatest shit stirrer of them all took the bait and wants to discuss some shitty business.

Well, lets assume that China covertly contracted some nukes through an Al Qaeda operative, but we were only able to pin it on Al Qaeda, and oh, no country in the world would dare claim responsibility, only there deepest condolences to our poor and now beleaguered country.

Assume more than a half million of your citizens have been wiped out, and that your infrastructure, and economy are now in a shambles. What would your course of action be? Do you have a 10 point plan for this one?

Take some time on it. It would be very intriguing to know whether or not, you have enough piss and vinegar in your intellect to actually grab the knife and start sharpening it.

I am sorry to point this out to you all, but this remains a very real and credible possibility. One, that I feel Bush hasn't done nearly all that is within his immediate power to prevent by cealing up the damned borders. DAY ONE, Mr. Bush. Un freaking believable.
I am sure the first thing I would do is declare a National Emergency and Martial Law.

Do we have credible intelligence that China was ultimately responsible? If so we send a Nuke their way as a message, targeting a reasonably similar target.

Can we isolate who in AQ did it and where they are located? If we can we send a nuke their way and tough luck to the country that is harboring them.

What part of the country was nuked, it makes a huge difference you know in terms or internal response to the disaster?

What infrastructure was damaged?

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 07:28 PM
I am sure the first thing I would do is declare a National Emergency and Martial Law.

Do we have credible intelligence that China was ultimately responsible? If so we send a Nuke their way as a message, targeting a reasonably similar target.

Can we isolate who in AQ did it and where they are located? If we can we send a nuke their way and tough luck to the country that is harboring them.

What part of the country was nuked, it makes a huge difference you know in terms or internal response to the disaster?

What infrastructure was damaged?What if we have a CIA agent, that says it is a freaking SLAM DUNK that China was involved, the clock is ticking......


Oh, and let us assume that it is a huge city, I don't want to sound as if I am purposely targeting somewhere near and dear to you Jim, but, how about Long Beach/ L.A. vicinity. Totally wiping out all of our significant harbor infrastructure with a bomb loaded on a container. The container originated from Yemen, but was a Chinese freighter.

How about that one. The Chinese say, oh no miter preidant, we no have nothing to do with that.

Yemen does the old, :shrug:

Now what.

That would totally suck for all of southern Calfornia, and most of the West.

That is enough of a hypothetical. Of course, Al Q. has been practicing doing a lot of simultaneous detonations with smaller bombs on trains, so worst case, we have multiple cities destroyed within minutes of each other in real time. We already have a good clue that, given Katrina, the response from the government will be slow to reestablish infrastructure, so just lay that aside.

Your gut is good though.

orange
07-20-2007, 07:30 PM
bunnytrdr

Do you have any concept of history at all? This kind of scenario ACTUALLY HAPPENED and the DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT - the MOST LIBERAL man to ever sit in the White House - led this nation to war against the perps within weeks - a real war, pursued with passion and sacrifice until the total destruction of our enemies - against our real enemies, Imperial Japan, not some third-world dungheap that happened to have a couple Japanese restaurants.

I'm sure it's on You-Tube. You could look it up.

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 07:33 PM
bunnytrdr

Do you have any concept of history at all? This kind of scenario ACTUALLY HAPPENED and the DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT - the MOST LIBERAL man to ever sit in the White House - led this nation to war against the perps within weeks - a real war, pursued with passion and sacrifice until the total destruction of our enemies.

I'm sure it's on You-Tube. You could look it up.And please, tell me if the opposition party carped and bitched and moaned at every turn trying to undermine him?

orange
07-20-2007, 07:38 PM
And please, tell me if the opposition party carped and bitched and moaned at every turn trying to undermine him?

You really ARE historically ignorant, aren't you? The opposition party REPUBLICANS DID carp and bitch and moan and obstruct FDR at EVERY turn for over 4 years in his efforts against the Axis - right up until the bombs fell on Hawaii.

ChiefaRoo
07-20-2007, 07:45 PM
All Nuclear weapons have a specific signature and can be tracked back to the plant that mfg'd them. The response would have to be proportional and against a military target(s) with the threat of retaliation against a city if there were a response from the mfg'er country to our response. The non-state entity? I would pursue them to the ends of the Earth for years and all bets would be off. If they are hiding in a political sensitive area too bad. I'd go in and I would order our guys to fight the old fashioned way. We'd carpet bomb Waziristan for example and would move troops in any way we wanted to and I would tell the Pakis to STFU if they made any noise while moving boomer subs very close to every bad guy haven on the planet. If the Pakis made a move against us or if their Govt. fell to radicals thus risking the security of their nukes I'd Nuke/bomb their Nuke sites pre-emptively. I hope it never comes to something like this as it would be a bad time for the human species.

orange
07-20-2007, 07:48 PM
All Nuclear weapons have a specific signature and can be tracked back to the plant that mfg'd them. The response should be proportional and a military target with the threat of retaliation against a city if there is a response from the mfg'er country. The non-state entity? I would pursue them to the ends of the Earth for years and all bets would be off. If they are hiding in a political sensitive area too bad. I'd go in and I would order our guys to fight the old fashioned way. We'd carpet bomb Waziristan for example and would move troops in any way we wanted to and I would tell the Pakis to STFU if they made any noise while moving boomer subs very close to every bad guy haven on the planet. If the Pakis made a move against us or is their Govt. fell risking their nukes I'd Nuke their Nuke sites pre-emptively.

I'd go into Waziristan right now. We have all the casus belli necessary. I'd show the Pakistani ambassador close-up satellite pictures of Pakistan's nuclear plants, military bases, and other facilities and warn him to stand clear.

ChiefaRoo
07-20-2007, 07:49 PM
It is a question, that every damned one of our presidential candidates ought to be asked bluntly.

I agree they should all be asked but no Presidential candidate is going to give a specific answer to a hypothetical, nor should they. The right answer should be something to the effect of "all options would be on the table and those who provided the weapons and those who used the weapons would be help responsible".

ChiefaRoo
07-20-2007, 07:55 PM
I'd go into Waziristan right now. We have all the casus belli necessary. I'd show the Pakistani ambassador close-up satellite pictures of Pakistan's nuclear plants, military bases, and other facilities and warn him to stand clear.

The stakes aren't that high. If we just went in hard it could cause Musharaff to get overthrown and if radicals came to power it would threaten their nukes which would make India, China, Russia and the US very nervous. It's better to attack them covertly or by backing up Pakistani troops while claiming we have not been involved.

orange
07-20-2007, 07:58 PM
I respectfully disagree. Musharaf's position vs. the Islamists in Pakistan is not getting any stronger. His fall and a radical replacement government is by far the most likely opportunity for nukes to get in the hands of terrorists. We need to head that off by crushing the terrorists now - best case, in concert with an offensive by Musharaf in Pakistan proper which we would support.

ChiefaRoo
07-20-2007, 08:01 PM
I respectfully disagree. Musharaf's position vs. the Islamists in Pakistan is not getting any stronger. His fall and a radical replacement government is by far the most likely opportunity for nukes to get in the hands of terrorists. We need to head that off by crushing the terrorists now - best case, in concert with an offensive by Musharaf in Pakistan proper which we would support.

As long as we keep our direct involvement of it out of the news I've got no problem with that and I bet Musahraf would agree.

go bowe
07-20-2007, 08:06 PM
bombs have a way of doing that to you...

just ask the folks who have been getting bombed in the me by the Israelis or by our forces or by the collection of insurgent groups with their car bombs and sniping and assassinations and whatnot...

go bowe
07-20-2007, 08:41 PM
I respectfully disagree. Musharaf's position vs. the Islamists in Pakistan is not getting any stronger. His fall and a radical replacement government is by far the most likely opportunity for nukes to get in the hands of terrorists. We need to head that off by crushing the terrorists now - best case, in concert with an offensive by Musharaf in Pakistan proper which we would support.haven't we been trying to crush some insurgencies for like 5 or 6 years now?

how long did that take? oh, wait, they are still blowing up our boys and girls with vest bombs, car bombs, truck bombs, ied's and high-tech armor piercing ied's (that seem to be coming from iran)...

as far as musharaf is concerned, didn't he just conclude a peace deal with the tribesmen? and a deal that osama would not be arrested by pakistani authorities so long as he leads a peaceful life in pakistan...

i wouldn't expect any support from the pak government...

heck, they may even help defend aq if we enter the country in force...

orange
07-20-2007, 09:12 PM
haven't we been trying to crush some insurgencies for like 5 or 6 years now?

how long did that take? oh, wait, they are still blowing up our boys and girls with vest bombs, car bombs, truck bombs, ied's and high-tech armor piercing ied's (that seem to be coming from iran)...

U.S. intelligence agencies have completely revised their assessment of al Qaeda and reached an alarming conclusion: Bin Laden already has a safe haven-in Pakistan-and may be stronger than ever.
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/articles/070506/14alqaeda.htm

as far as musharaf is concerned, didn't he just conclude a peace deal with the tribesmen? and a deal that osama would not be arrested by pakistani authorities so long as he leads a peaceful life in pakistan...


Musharraf's "peace" with the Islamists:
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9D50D598-93EC-4B65-9D7B-75CE2B3B1532.htm

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2007-07/20/content_6402640.htm

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2007/07/19/2003370256



Try to keep up, will you? Bush's "War on Terrorism" has been a nearly complete bust.

Pitt Gorilla
07-20-2007, 09:18 PM
And please, tell me if the opposition party carped and bitched and moaned at every turn trying to undermine him?
Perhaps you should do a little research.

recxjake
07-20-2007, 09:24 PM
Dial 911.

Logical
07-20-2007, 09:32 PM
Dial 911.Now we know the official answer from Rudy G.

Logical
07-20-2007, 09:34 PM
I am sure the first thing I would do is declare a National Emergency and Martial Law.

Do we have credible intelligence that China was ultimately responsible? If so we send a Nuke their way as a message, targeting a reasonably similar target.

Can we isolate who in AQ did it and where they are located? If we can we send a nuke their way and tough luck to the country that is harboring them.

What part of the country was nuked, it makes a huge difference you know in terms or internal response to the disaster?

What infrastructure was damaged?

Bunnytrdr, clearly you did not read my answer.

alnorth
07-20-2007, 09:41 PM
I stopped taking this discussion seriously after China was named as the evil hypothetical mastermind behind the nuking of America.

ChiefaRoo
07-20-2007, 09:47 PM
I stopped taking this discussion seriously after China was named as the evil hypothetical mastermind behind the nuking of America.

True. China wants to make money, they don't want to do anything to damage the world economy or their largest trading partner.

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 10:06 PM
I agree they should all be asked but no Presidential candidate is going to give a specific answer to a hypothetical, nor should they. The right answer should be something to the effect of "all options would be on the table and those who provided the weapons and those who used the weapons would be help responsible".Their gut reaction to the question would speak volumes to me, volumes.

Really, sometimes that gut reaction is the lense through which all the information is sifted.

For instance, Michael Chertoffs gut has been bothering him lately.

But I agree. The liberals seem to think this is over when we leave Iraq, nothing could be further from the truth. It is my contention that Iran is the lynchpin, and we have positioned our assetts on all sides of Iran, they are officially in our shit lynch pin, waiting to be crushed, if only we had the will to do it. No invasion is necessary, just neutralize all of thier strategic millitary assets.

For that matter, we seriously need to start using the terrorists tactics. Top secret teams to go in and terrorize innocent civilians near and dear to the leaders of these terrorst organizations. As close to their hearts as we can. Blow them up, then claim we don't know nothin.

Calcountry
07-20-2007, 10:08 PM
I stopped taking this discussion seriously after China was named as the evil hypothetical mastermind behind the nuking of America.Fine, then pick your own sponser, or none at all. How about Saudi Arabia, or Russia. Does that part really matter?

Logical
07-20-2007, 10:33 PM
...
For that matter, we seriously need to start using the terrorists tactics. Top secret teams to go in and terrorize innocent civilians near and dear to the leaders of these terrorst organizations. As close to their hearts as we can. Blow them up, then claim we don't know nothin.Good lord, I am no liberal but I would have never suggested such a plan and frankly I hope you are not serious.

alnorth
07-20-2007, 11:04 PM
Fine, then pick your own sponser, or none at all. How about Saudi Arabia, or Russia. Does that part really matter?

*shrug* In that case, scorched earth. The majority of their country would be uninhabitable for several decades, and I really wouldnt be terribly concerned if anyone survived the response.

ChiefaRoo
07-20-2007, 11:06 PM
Their gut reaction to the question would speak volumes to me, volumes.

Really, sometimes that gut reaction is the lense through which all the information is sifted.

For instance, Michael Chertoffs gut has been bothering him lately.

But I agree. The liberals seem to think this is over when we leave Iraq, nothing could be further from the truth. It is my contention that Iran is the lynchpin, and we have positioned our assetts on all sides of Iran, they are officially in our shit lynch pin, waiting to be crushed, if only we had the will to do it. No invasion is necessary, just neutralize all of thier strategic millitary assets.

For that matter, we seriously need to start using the terrorists tactics. Top secret teams to go in and terrorize innocent civilians near and dear to the leaders of these terrorst organizations. As close to their hearts as we can. Blow them up, then claim we don't know nothin.

I have no problem with the CIA actively infiltrating Iran, Pakistan, Syria et al with agents from those countries so we know what is going on. It's a dirty business but it needs to be done. I also have no problem with the US destroying Irans nuclear potential, their Air Force and their Navy if they get out of line. However, killing/terrorizing innocent people doesn't interest me.

alnorth
07-20-2007, 11:14 PM
For that matter, we seriously need to start using the terrorists tactics. Top secret teams to go in and terrorize innocent civilians near and dear to the leaders of these terrorst organizations. As close to their hearts as we can. Blow them up, then claim we don't know nothin.

Cool. Their close family are now martyred and assured a glorious place beside the prophet Muhammed for all time, where they will wait until they can honorably sacrifice themselves for the struggle against the great Satan on earth. Now what?

The far-out whacko Islamic extremists that you are concerned about are basically a death cult. Rational, irrational, and completely disgusting/inhuman methods of dealing with them wouldnt work as well as most other people.

The way I see it, our options range from total isolationism and a locked-down security state on one extreme, to religious genocide on the other extreme. Neither is acceptable, and I'm not intelligent enough to know the answer.

Bill Parcells
07-21-2007, 06:33 AM
Good lord, I am no liberal but I would have never suggested such a plan and frankly I hope you are not serious.
That's what the Russians did, and it worked. Chechnya is very quiet now..all the muslim fanatical Chechyn leaders are either dead or in Pakistan plotting against us.

HolmeZz
07-21-2007, 09:54 AM
Good lord, I am no liberal but I would have never suggested such a plan and frankly I hope you are not serious.

Sounds like he just wants an excuse to do what the terrorists do.

gblowfish
07-21-2007, 10:54 AM
If they wanted to nuke Oakland...

I guess I'm OK with that.

Carry on.

Adept Havelock
07-21-2007, 10:54 AM
That's what the Russians did, and it worked. Chechnya is very quiet now..all the muslim fanatical Chechyn leaders are either dead or in Pakistan plotting against us.


What the Russians did? It's what the Russians have been doing since the late 15th century, and they are still having trouble with the Chechens.



The way I see it, our options range from total isolationism and a locked-down security state on one extreme, to religious genocide on the other extreme. Neither is acceptable, and I'm not intelligent enough to know the answer.

Agreed. Finding the middle ground is a real bugger on this one, but it's likely where the solution (if there is one) is to be found.

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 11:21 AM
That's what the Russians did, and it worked. Chechnya is very quiet now..all the muslim fanatical Chechyn leaders are either dead or in Pakistan plotting against us.Dead, now that is a good state for them to be in.



Dead people are really quite.

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 11:27 AM
If they wanted to nuke Oakland...

I guess I'm OK with that.

Carry on.That would really suck. The flow of irradiated refuges wandering over the hill into the valley would be tragic.

It would lend a whole new meaning to Delta Breezes.

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 11:45 AM
Cool. Their close family are now martyred and assured a glorious place beside the prophet Muhammed for all time, where they will wait until they can honorably sacrifice themselves for the struggle against the great Satan on earth. Now what?

The far-out whacko Islamic extremists that you are concerned about are basically a death cult. Rational, irrational, and completely disgusting/inhuman methods of dealing with them wouldnt work as well as most other people.

The way I see it, our options range from total isolationism and a locked-down security state on one extreme, to religious genocide on the other extreme. Neither is acceptable, and I'm not intelligent enough to know the answer.Unfortanately, we had better have an answer BEFORE these freaks drive the wedge between the two extremes deep enough to destroy our country.

Otherwise, Game over.

alnorth
07-21-2007, 11:52 AM
Unfortanately, we had better have an answer BEFORE these freaks drive the wedge between the two extremes deep enough to destroy our country.

Otherwise, Game over.

So, should I put you down as in favor of religious genocide, a state where we trade off massive amounts of freedom for security, or some other solution? Its easy to just pull a Perot here and scream about problems.

CHIEF4EVER
07-21-2007, 12:39 PM
If you were president, what would you do if one or more of our Cities gets Nuked?

I would find out who did it and notify Rich Scanlon that he is a 'go' to commence kicking ass.

Hog Farmer
07-21-2007, 12:50 PM
Here ya go bunnytrdr, I thought you might find this interesting. www.terroristwarning.com (http://www.terroristwarning.com) This keeps you updated on all the latest bullshit goin on.

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 01:04 PM
So, should I put you down as in favor of religious genocide, a state where we trade off massive amounts of freedom for security, or some other solution? Its easy to just pull a Perot here and scream about problems.Safely, and squarely put me in the kill them before they kill us camp.

Only with this proviso: Make it the public policy of the United states, that we will respond in kind to any act against our sovereignty.

For instance, make Saudi Arabia aware, that if one of their nationals attacked our cities, then their closest in kind population center would be vaporized.

Responsiblity would lie in the family member, mosque, etc. for each act of terrorism that is acted out.

They want to hide anonymous from state sponsorhip, then, we need to have a new doctrine of retaliation. Starts with family, mosque, city, and country that the person is from.

The severity of the act would determine the level of response. There can be no flinching, or going back, or making it easy. Simply give the world our word, that specific consequenses will happen in the event of terrorism, and then do it.

Perhaps that would give them the incentive to reign their own fatwas in.

Adept Havelock
07-21-2007, 01:06 PM
[/b]

I would find out who did it and notify Rich Scanlon that he is a 'go' to commence kicking ass.


Are you sure he's enough? Shouldn't we send our secret weapon code-named "Bigfoot" as backup?

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 01:08 PM
Safely, and squarely put me in the kill them before they kill us camp.

Only with this proviso: Make it the public policy of the United states, that we will respond in kind to any act against our sovereignty.

For instance, make Saudi Arabia aware, that if one of their nationals attacked our cities, then their closest in kind population center would be vaporized.

Responsiblity would lie in the family member, mosque, etc. for each act of terrorism that is acted out.

They want to hide anonymous from state sponsorhip, then, we need to have a new doctrine of retaliation. Starts with family, mosque, city, and country that the person is from.

The severity of the act would determine the level of response. There can be no flinching, or going back, or making it easy. Simply give the world our word, that specific consequenses will happen in the event of terrorism, and then do it.

Perhaps that would give them the incentive to reign their own fatwas in.After further review, I can see a lot of holes in this suggestion that I attempted. Does anyone else have any good ideas on what to do?

Adept Havelock
07-21-2007, 01:09 PM
Safely, and squarely put me in the kill them before they kill us camp.

Only with this proviso: Make it the public policy of the United states, that we will respond in kind to any act against our sovereignty.

For instance, make Saudi Arabia aware, that if one of their nationals attacked our cities, then their closest in kind population center would be vaporized.

Responsiblity would lie in the family member, mosque, etc. for each act of terrorism that is acted out.

They want to hide anonymous from state sponsorhip, then, we need to have a new doctrine of retaliation. Starts with family, mosque, city, and country that the person is from.

The severity of the act would determine the level of response. There can be no flinching, or going back, or making it easy. Simply give the world our word, that specific consequenses will happen in the event of terrorism, and then do it.

Perhaps that would give them the incentive to reign their own fatwas in.

Ah yes, hostage taking and killing in retaliation for terrorist attacks.

Worked out well for the Germans in France and Belgium in WW1, the Germans in Russia in WW2, and the Russians in Afghanistan didn't it. Nothing like a proven track record of success like that.

After further review, I can see a lot of holes in this suggestion that I attempted. Does anyone else have any good ideas on what to do?

Good realization, and only a few.

1) A policy stating that if a nuclear weapon is used against the US, we will identify from the radiological signature of the weapon the origin of the radioactive material. Then all options are on the table. A blanket policy is a bad idea, if for example, the material was somehow stolen from a US reactor.

2) If a nation-state is involved, then our classic cold-war policy seems to cover things.

3) If a foreign nation-state is giving protection to a group that did it, we have Afghanistan as a decent model of how to respond.

I'll agree with alnorth in that there are two extremes on how to deal with this, and stand by my previous statement that the solution (if one exists) quite likely lies between them. I'm just not smart enough to figure it out by myself.

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 01:11 PM
Here ya go bunnytrdr, I thought you might find this interesting. www.terroristwarning.com (http://www.terroristwarning.com) This keeps you updated on all the latest bullshit goin on. Wow, that is just mind numbing.

CHIEF4EVER
07-21-2007, 02:07 PM
Are you sure he's enough? Shouldn't we send our secret weapon code-named "Bigfoot" as backup?

Nah. Rich Scanlon is so bad that if he jumps into a swimming pool, he don't get wet. Water gets Rich Scanlon.

Bowser
07-21-2007, 02:50 PM
IS this another bunny "Democrats are a bunch of pussies" thread?

ClevelandBronco
07-21-2007, 04:41 PM
I stopped taking this discussion seriously after China was named as the evil hypothetical mastermind behind the nuking of America.

I stopped taking this discussion seriously when I remembered that I don't want to be president.

Sully
07-21-2007, 05:05 PM
Reading this thread just makes me realize that there are tons inside this country that America needs to be protected from.

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 05:38 PM
Reading this thread just makes me realize that there are tons inside this country that America needs to be protected from. You know what, fug you man.

Why do you even have to taint the thread with your condescending shit. Like you are so, so, so fugging high above this thread that it is beneath you to condescend to its level to even bother to think up some form of intelligent discussion. Color you into the high browed liberal camp. Well good for you. I hope you go to your closet, grab a hat and put a nice shiney new feather in it.

unlurking
07-21-2007, 06:03 PM
You know what, fug you man.

Why do you even have to taint the thread with your condescending shit. Like you are so, so, so fugging high above this thread that it is beneath you to condescend to its level to even bother to think up some form of intelligent discussion. Color you into the high browed liberal camp. Well good for you. I hope you go to your closet, grab a hat and put a nice shiney new feather in it.
I don't think he was saying he was above this thread, he is above YOU.

:p

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 06:05 PM
I don't think he was saying he was above this thread, he is above YOU.

:pOh, well, now that you explain it that way, then o.k.

Sully
07-21-2007, 08:29 PM
You know what, fug you man.

Why do you even have to taint the thread with your condescending shit. Like you are so, so, so fugging high above this thread that it is beneath you to condescend to its level to even bother to think up some form of intelligent discussion. Color you into the high browed liberal camp. Well good for you. I hope you go to your closet, grab a hat and put a nice shiney new feather in it.
Seriously... I have no problem knowing that someone who wants to be a terrorist thinks I'm condescending. I don't believe this about very many people, at all, anywhere... but when it comes to you... I am a better person.

Grab your suicide vest, coward.

Logical
07-21-2007, 11:04 PM
Seriously... I have no problem knowing that someone who wants to be a terrorist thinks I'm condescending. I don't believe this about very many people, at all, anywhere... but when it comes to you... I am a better person.

Grab your suicide vest, coward.Sully, having seen Bunnytrdr's postings in the past I would say he was engaged in hyperbole to get reactions from posters.

Calcountry
07-21-2007, 11:43 PM
Seriously... I have no problem knowing that someone who wants to be a terrorist thinks I'm condescending. I don't believe this about very many people, at all, anywhere... but when it comes to you... I am a better person.

Grab your suicide vest, coward.ROFL Glad I could help you feel better about yourself.

Now, since you are once again, in the thread, how about a little discussion about a contingency plan, that I feel needs to be well established should the United States of America be attacked. I assume you are a patriotic citizen of this great country and therefore are my brother, like it or not. Just thought you might want to use that superior class and intellect to add to the discussion. Otherwise, go sully some other thread please.

Bill Parcells
07-22-2007, 03:59 AM
What the Russians did? It's what the Russians have been doing since the late 15th century, and they are still having trouble with the Chechens.


Still having trouble in Chechnya? definitely not as much trouble as before the Russians started going after their maniacal muslim fanatics covertly.

BucEyedPea
07-22-2007, 08:25 AM
Still having trouble in Chechnya? definitely not as much trouble as before the Russians started going after their maniacal muslim fanatics covertly.
Like when they had agent provocateurs commit terror against children to turn public opinion agains the real Chechnyians? I read not one of the dead terrorists in that school incident were actual Chechnyians. Good 'ole Putin...he's a upfront guy.

StcChief
07-22-2007, 08:41 AM
Nuke a US city. Hit 'em with all we got. It's on.

Bowser
07-22-2007, 08:57 AM
Nuke a US city. Hit 'em with all we got. It's on.

Agreed. However, the question would be - Who is "them"?

Dallas Chief
07-22-2007, 09:23 AM
Like when they had agent provocateurs commit terror against children to turn public opinion agains the real Chechnyians? I read not one of the dead terrorists in that school incident were actual Chechnyians. Good 'ole Putin...he's a upfront guy.
Do you have a source on that? It was brought up this past week on the Glenn Beck show and I have been digging around the web looking for some other takes on the incindent

BucEyedPea
07-22-2007, 09:24 AM
Do you have a source on that? It was brought up this past week on the Glenn Beck show and I have been digging around the web looking for some other takes on the incindent
I actually do, if I can remember which site I got it from...it was definitely one of my right libertarian ones.

StcChief
07-22-2007, 10:22 AM
Agreed. However, the question would be - Who is "them"?
They will likely claim "responsibility."

Felch83
07-22-2007, 10:31 AM
Nuke em right back. But then again I am not a spineless liberal so...

Bill Parcells
07-22-2007, 01:49 PM
Like when they had agent provocateurs commit terror against children to turn public opinion agains the real Chechnyians? I read not one of the dead terrorists in that school incident were actual Chechnyians. Good 'ole Putin...he's a upfront guy.
It's what you're not reading, BEP. ;)

banyon
07-22-2007, 06:31 PM
For that matter, we seriously need to start using the terrorists tactics. Top secret teams to go in and terrorize innocent civilians near and dear to the leaders of these terrorst organizations. As close to their hearts as we can. Blow them up, then claim we don't know nothin.

This is the saddest post I have read in a long time here. I did not believe there were Americans willing to hand away everything our country stands for at the first sign of difficulty. :shake:

Bowser
07-22-2007, 06:35 PM
Nuke em right back. But then again I am not a spineless liberal so...

Awesome. Tom has a lover.

banyon
07-22-2007, 06:38 PM
ROFL Glad I could help you feel better about yourself.

Now, since you are once again, in the thread, how about a little discussion about a contingency plan, that I feel needs to be well established should the United States of America be attacked. I assume you are a patriotic citizen of this great country and therefore are my brother, like it or not. Just thought you might want to use that superior class and intellect to add to the discussion. Otherwise, go sully some other thread please.

What do you think that they do in the Pentagon all day? If there is not a contingency plan for this, then we are wasting more money on those salaries than I thought.

Calcountry
07-23-2007, 11:36 AM
What do you think that they do in the Pentagon all day? If there is not a contingency plan for this, then we are wasting more money on those salaries than I thought.It comforts me to know, that if most of the people cannot be convinced of who is responsible, they would rather "preserve" the altruistic American ideals than to stoop to the barbarism that would be necessary to defeat this disgusting enemy to our way of life. We can sit around, and convince ourselves that Bush blew up the towers, than we can just get nuked, then bend over and take it because we don't know who did it.

Thank you sir, may I have another.

It's little wonder, most people, meat eaters, shriek at the thought of actually killing a chicken, how in the world could they ever man up enough to slaughter the enemy?

I am sure that the pentagon had more than one contingency for doing Iraq, and yet they chose the one we are on? I am so glad you have full faith in them.

Adept Havelock
07-23-2007, 11:41 AM
It comforts me to know, that if most of the people cannot be convinced of who is responsible, they would rather "preserve" the altruistic American ideals than to stoop to the barbarism that would be necessary to defeat this disgusting enemy to our way of life.

:rolleyes:

Sure, it's not like those ideals are the very basis of our nation. Just toss them out when it's inconvienient.

Tell you what bunny, I'll help pay for your vest if you wear it. I'm pretty sure we could get others to chip in for airfare to Abinanutjob's place in Iran. Then you can go show the rest of us how a real 'Merican should act.

Saulbadguy
07-23-2007, 11:47 AM
1. Blame it on the easiest scape goat I can find. Illegal immigrants would probably work good.

2. Over the next year, release propaganda over the mainstream media and news to keep the blame on them, and away from the establishment.

3. Round them (scape goats) all up in internment camps for necessary "re-education".

4. Plead the people for supreme executive power that is needed for an all out invasion of our friends to the south, which we would need to do to further the progress of the "final solution".

5. After I have gained supreme executive power, dissolve Congress and name myself the first Emperor (probably change the name on that, like excecutive commander or something stupid like that to fool the morons) of the American Empire (again, change the name).

6. World conquest, until i'm eventually defeated, overthrown, assisinated, poisoned, etc.

jAZ
07-23-2007, 12:20 PM
Great. Good to see the greatest shit stirrer of them all took the bait and wants to discuss some shitty business.

Well, lets assume that China covertly contracted some nukes through an Al Qaeda operative, but we were only able to pin it on Al Qaeda, and oh, no country in the world would dare claim responsibility, only there deepest condolences to our poor and now beleaguered country.

Assume more than a half million of your citizens have been wiped out, and that your infrastructure, and economy are now in a shambles. What would your course of action be? Do you have a 10 point plan for this one?

Take some time on it. It would be very intriguing to know whether or not, you have enough piss and vinegar in your intellect to actually grab the knife and start sharpening it.

I am sorry to point this out to you all, but this remains a very real and credible possibility. One, that I feel Bush hasn't done nearly all that is within his immediate power to prevent by cealing up the damned borders. DAY ONE, Mr. Bush. Un freaking believable.
Oh... well, in that case, HolmeZz is right, we'd definately have to invade Iraq.

Calcountry
07-23-2007, 12:45 PM
1. Blame it on the easiest scape goat I can find. Illegal immigrants would probably work good.

2. Over the next year, release propaganda over the mainstream media and news to keep the blame on them, and away from the establishment.

3. Round them (scape goats) all up in internment camps for necessary "re-education".

4. Plead the people for supreme executive power that is needed for an all out invasion of our friends to the south, which we would need to do to further the progress of the "final solution".

5. After I have gained supreme executive power, dissolve Congress and name myself the first Emperor (probably change the name on that, like excecutive commander or something stupid like that to fool the morons) of the American Empire (again, change the name).

6. World conquest, until i'm eventually defeated, overthrown, assisinated, poisoned, etc.What's that show on the Weather Channel, "It could happen tomorrow." lol

Cochise
07-23-2007, 01:29 PM
It would depend. If this were a state action of a nuclear-capable nation we would respond in kind. If it were a terrorist action, obviously, we wouldn't have any country to nuke. We'd just need to survive as a nation and renew our resolve to the fact that the war on terrorism is not just a "bumper sticker", as some would have you believe.

And I bet the conspiracy junkies would be up with a thread in 48 hours that it was BushCo that had nuked the city and blah blah... it's on youtube, so it's got to be true.

Calcountry
07-23-2007, 01:36 PM
It would depend. If this were a state action of a nuclear-capable nation we would respond in kind. If it were a terrorist action, obviously, we wouldn't have any country to nuke. We'd just need to survive as a nation and renew our resolve to the fact that the war on terrorism is not just a "bumper sticker", as some would have you believe.

And I bet the conspiracy junkies would be up with a thread in 48 hours that it was BushCo that had nuked the city and blah blah... it's on youtube, so it's got to be true.I'd be comfortable with myself though, just like Taco.

Fat Elvis
07-23-2007, 01:37 PM
I must say I would be required to cast myself prostrate before Darth Cheney and await my well-deserved facial peppering of buckshot. I would then resign immediately and let Jeb Bush assume control of the presidency (the power must remain in the Imperial Family). Everyone knows if a Democrat is elected president, America will be overrun by terrorists, most likely using dirty bombs or even suitcase nukes.

They want to kill your family and only Rebulicans can save you from them.

This, I believe (if I understand Fox News correctly), is the only true, rational, and measured responce for a Democratic president.

banyon
07-23-2007, 01:54 PM
It comforts me to know, that if most of the people cannot be convinced of who is responsible, they would rather "preserve" the altruistic American ideals than to stoop to the barbarism that would be necessary to defeat this disgusting enemy to our way of life. We can sit around, and convince ourselves that Bush blew up the towers, than we can just get nuked, then bend over and take it because we don't know who did it.

Thank you sir, may I have another.

It's little wonder, most people, meat eaters, shriek at the thought of actually killing a chicken, how in the world could they ever man up enough to slaughter the enemy?

I am sure that the pentagon had more than one contingency for doing Iraq, and yet they chose the one we are on? I am so glad you have full faith in them.

Your other dissheveled ramblings notwithstanding, there was no contingency plan (or "Plan B" as Colin Powell has referred to it) for Iraq. But nuclear contingency plans (viz. a plan for when something goes wrong) have been on the drawing board for a ton of different situations.

a1na2
07-23-2007, 07:36 PM
I am sure the first thing I would do is declare a National Emergency and Martial Law.

Do we have credible intelligence that China was ultimately responsible? If so we send a Nuke their way as a message, targeting a reasonably similar target.

Can we isolate who in AQ did it and where they are located? If we can we send a nuke their way and tough luck to the country that is harboring them.

What part of the country was nuked, it makes a huge difference you know in terms or internal response to the disaster?

What infrastructure was damaged?

Then after you have been sitting on the throne for another 3 years after the attack the opposing political party will start claiming that you lied about the information you used to launch the attacks. It was a lie that China was involved, AL Queda didn't actually have nukes and oh yes, it was an inside job, they bombed our own country to get us involved in a world wide nuclear conflict so you could look like the good president. It won't matter that none of the stories are true, the people on the internet will run with the story and build the things that build the urban legend. Many will believe the story without any facts whatsoever.

Sound familiar?

banyon
07-23-2007, 07:39 PM
Then after you have been sitting on the throne for another 3 years after the attack the opposing political party will start claiming that you lied about the information you used to launch the attacks. It was a lie that China was involved, AL Queda didn't actually have nukes and oh yes, it was an inside job, they bombed our own country to get us involved in a world wide nuclear conflict so you could look like the good president. It won't matter that none of the stories are true, the people on the internet will run with the story and build the things that build the urban legend. Many will believe the story without any facts whatsoever.

Sound familiar?

Pretty much, except with the important omission that there is ample evidence of the deceptions involved the "familiar" case.

Saulbadguy
07-23-2007, 08:27 PM
Then after you have been sitting on the throne for another 3 years after the attack the opposing political party will start claiming that you lied about the information you used to launch the attacks. It was a lie that China was involved, AL Queda didn't actually have nukes and oh yes, it was an inside job, they bombed our own country to get us involved in a world wide nuclear conflict so you could look like the good president. It won't matter that none of the stories are true, the people on the internet will run with the story and build the things that build the urban legend. Many will believe the story without any facts whatsoever.

Sound familiar?
TOM!!!

Logical
07-23-2007, 08:33 PM
Then after you have been sitting on the throne for another 3 years after the attack the opposing political party will start claiming that you lied about the information you used to launch the attacks. It was a lie that China was involved, AL Queda didn't actually have nukes and oh yes, it was an inside job, they bombed our own country to get us involved in a world wide nuclear conflict so you could look like the good president. It won't matter that none of the stories are true, the people on the internet will run with the story and build the things that build the urban legend. Many will believe the story without any facts whatsoever.

Sound familiar?U really R an Idiot

ChiefaRoo
07-23-2007, 11:49 PM
1. Blame it on the easiest scape goat I can find. Illegal immigrants would probably work good.

2. Over the next year, release propaganda over the mainstream media and news to keep the blame on them, and away from the establishment.

3. Round them (scape goats) all up in internment camps for necessary "re-education".

4. Plead the people for supreme executive power that is needed for an all out invasion of our friends to the south, which we would need to do to further the progress of the "final solution".

5. After I have gained supreme executive power, dissolve Congress and name myself the first Emperor (probably change the name on that, like excecutive commander or something stupid like that to fool the morons) of the American Empire (again, change the name).

6. World conquest, until i'm eventually defeated, overthrown, assisinated, poisoned, etc.

Silly K-State grad. Stick to cow insemination Saul.

Hog Farmer
07-25-2007, 02:22 PM
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/7/24/212905.shtml?s=al&promo_code=379B-1

noa
07-25-2007, 02:38 PM
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/7/24/212905.shtml?s=al&promo_code=379B-1

Thanks for the link.

From your article:

Al-Qaida's goal, they would say, is encapsulated simply into two phrases: One, lead them into bankruptcy and two, spread out their forces. Clearly they have accomplished both of those things.

As long as things are going to go their way, an attack would be superfluous, and it would also rally people to the government. That's one of the reasons why we haven't seen things like what has gone on in London.

That's why I think it is dangerous to elect Rudy, who said he wants to train our troops in nation building, so we can continue right down the path Al Qaeda wants us to take.
This guy seems like he's focused on solutions, not on partisan politics. Talking about how Ron Paul is the only one with the guts to suggest that our policies might actually be causing this, not their hatred for our freedom.

I also like his answer here about what he would do if he was in the oval office:

I would do two things. I would immediately inaugurate some kind of an energy program. If we weren't so dependent on oil, we wouldn't have to support police states...

The second thing I would do, if you really wanted to protect America, is to square with the American people about what the enemy is motivated by and inaugurate debate in this country about whether we want to continue to pursue these policies - because we are the agent of bin Laden's strength and of his unity. Our policies are the one indispensable ally he needs...

Calcountry
07-25-2007, 04:01 PM
I must say I would be required to cast myself prostrate before Darth Cheney and await my well-deserved facial peppering of buckshot. I would then resign immediately and let Jeb Bush assume control of the presidency (the power must remain in the Imperial Family). Everyone knows if a Democrat is elected president, America will be overrun by terrorists, most likely using dirty bombs or even suitcase nukes.

They want to kill your family and only Rebulicans can save you from them.

This, I believe (if I understand Fox News correctly), is the only true, rational, and measured responce for a Democratic president.But, at least we will not have died from global warming.