Russia will strike terror bases anywhere in the world.

How about I just delete yours

Originally posted by GigaShadow
I disagree.  The war against terrorism in regards to US is mainly focused on Islamic fundamentalism.  They are a visible enemy and can be defeated over time.  Whether it is done by force or by a change in their philosophy is their choice.  If a more devastating attack occurs on US soil it will result in a more harsh response from us.  It won\'t be an invasion next time - especially if the attack involves anything biological or chemical.

How are they supposed to wipe out Islamic Fundamentalism? Do they have to kill every Moslem?

If there is another attack on US soil what response could be more harsh than bombing and shooting those responsible? Nukes?

Terrorism is a tactic. You can not have a war against a tactic. You can fight the perpetrators for ever but never wipe out terrorism. That is like having a war on Reconnaissance or Counter-Attacks

Nuclear weapons haven\'t been ruled out as a response to terrorists using a WMD on US soil.  Bush stated this after 9/11 and I agree.  Make Tehran or Damascus glow for all I care.  Maybe then they will get the message, if not they will eventually annihilate themselves by attacking us if we remain prepared.  

In title it may be a war on a tactic, but in reality (I have said this all along) it is a cultural war and yes I believe Islamic Fundamentalism can be eradicated to where it is no longer a major threat.  

Unfortunately, it will involve using tactics that the left in this country has no stomach for.  Racial profiling, deportations, deploying the military along our borders and pre emptive military strikes.  The cold hard truth is most of these terrorists are Muslim and from the Middle East.

You cant just blow up terrorism with a bomb. The Arab majority stick together like brothers in a clan if another race is involved in a conflict. If a terrorist organization sets a nuke off on American soil, and we retaliate with a nuke.... Im afraid something like the apocalypse would come. I can see them all binding together, blind to the fact that we were attacked first, and viewing US citizens as all of Satan\'s followers.

[clips]

excellent point viv...

Thanks... and thats Halberto

[clips]

sheeit..i like viv better!..where the hell did you get halberto  from anyway?..sounds hispanic..

So what if they all band together?  They did the same thing to Israel didn\'t they?  What was the result there?  We need to take a page out of Israel\'s book on how to deal with these people.  We lose a soldier - blow up ten of them.  They suicide bomb us, shell a city of our choosing.  Whatever they do to us - recipricate 10 fold.

Just a question that has been bugging me..

If, lets say Al-Q would set off a WMD in the US.. like a small nuke.. Where would the US drop its bomb? Al-Qs stronghold (Afghanistan) has already been invaded. Just bomb the hills and hope to hit someone?

[Titan]

Originally posted by Black Samurai
How are they supposed to wipe out Islamic Fundamentalism? Do they have to kill every Moslem?

If there is another attack on US soil what response could be more harsh than bombing and shooting those responsible? Nukes?

Terrorism is a tactic. You can not have a war against a tactic. You can fight the perpetrators for ever but never wipe out terrorism. That is like having a war on Reconnaissance or Counter-Attacks

The war against terrorism really is a play on words. Its not the word or tactic we are at war with but rather terror organizations. War on Terror might be a shorter way to say it (or perhaps catchy). You aren\'t thinking too much into what we are really at war against

Originally posted by GigaShadow
So what if they all band together?  They did the same thing to Israel didn\'t they?  What was the result there?  We need to take a page out of Israel\'s book on how to deal with these people.  We lose a soldier - blow up ten of them.  They suicide bomb us, shell a city of our choosing.  Whatever they do to us - recipricate 10 fold.

The thing is the world already saw a hostile action taken by the US in the middle east. While it might not seem that way to us, it does to the majority of the world. And back when they were at war with Israel the terrorist thought they didnt have to play very dirty because their enemy was not very powerful. They know even if they all united they still would have no chance against the US, but by nuking the US and taking no responsibility it leaves a big "?" on who to nuke in retaliation. And if we do retaliate we would be doing it blindly, as if we dont care who we kill anymore. Then people would get afraid if the next one comes their way and thats when the Arab nations rise up and send all their nukes our way not through missles, but through briefcases. Then all hell breaks lose, nukes flying everywhere.

Thats what I pictured.

Originally posted by fastson
Just a question that has been bugging me..

If, lets say Al-Q would set off a WMD in the US.. like a small nuke.. Where would the US drop its bomb? Al-Qs stronghold (Afghanistan) has already been invaded. Just bomb the hills and hope to hit someone?

Again.. How are you supposed to retaliate against a people who does not fight for a nation?

[clips]

Originally posted by fastson
Again.. How are you supposed to retaliate against a people who does not fight for a nation?

answer..you can\'t..remember that american that got beheaded in saudi arabia? well they\'ve shot & killed the person resposible,..but that person who was thought to be so ruthless was replaced immediately by someone just waiting in the wings..

i said this in another thread..just because you catch bin laden or any other high profile terrorist does not weaken them,..if anything it encourages them...

Answer:  You can.  This is a cultural war and there are certain states in the Middle East that are actively sponsoring terrorism.

Anyway we are talking extreme hypotheticals here.  Fight fire with fire.  Our current selective targeting is frustrating for our troops and doesn\'t gain us any moral upper hand in this fight with these people.  

One could argue we could start shelling cities in states that sponsor terrorism.  Syria and Iran come to mind pretty quickly.  After all if Syria and Iran are encouraging Arab fighters to come across their borders into Iraq - why not give them a sample of what will happen to them if they continue?

Appeasement and pacifism are not answers to terrorism which is what you two are suggesting.

Iran and Syria were responsible for 9/11??!?

Damn, I must have missed that memo.