What I think is that 1. We should rebuild the Twin Towers and with a third one slightly taller than the two making it look like NYC is giving the world the finger. 2. We send an entire shipment of Windex to every country with a note saying "You will need this after we bomb your desert into glass." 3. Cut off all Oil saying "We will call you to resume transportation of Oil to this country, however only if you bring us all 25,000 terrorists, all of them."

This will give the Middle East something to think about. Rebuilding the Twin Towers will say "whatever you do you will not break this nation". Sending Windex is a threat meant to demoralize the 25,000 terrorists to the point that a good portion could leave. Cutting off oil will make the countries living off the money from us buying oil will make them desperate to go get those terrorists and give them to us.

quote:

---

We send an entire shipment of Windex to every country with a note saying "You will need this after we bomb your desert into glass."

---

WTF?!

Are you stupid enough to think that bombing the entire Middle East is the answer? Yeah, don't answer that, you .sig speaks volumes for your intelligence level.

The acceptable military response (IMHO), assuming a country is found to have harbored the terrorist groups:

-Bomb all military targets (training facilities, storage depots, barracks, bases, air strips)

-Bomb government sites when the occupance will be low to limit casualties.

-Surgical strikes against residences of key government leaders and terrorist cell leaders. Either use missiles, or special forces.

[ September 12, 2001: Message edited by: MeGotBeer ]

quote:

---

25,000 terrorists

---

First of all, responding to something I read in the Officer's Lounge thread, religious fanaticism and killing people because of it is not unheard of in the US, and specifically in Christianity.

2. Why does terrorism happen? Because some people hate us. Why do they hate us? Bombings, commercial exploitation, and probably some stuff I haven't heard of or don't remember.

3. What does a bombing produce? Are they gonna say, "oops, sorry, we won't hate you anymore"? Of course not, just the opposite. When did revenge stop anything? It'll only come back to us sooner or later.

4. It's the leaders of Afghanistan who's harboring this Ben-whatever guy. From what I've heard, these leaders do not have popular support, so the general public probably wants him OUT of their country. Now are we going to bomb civilians who are against our possible enemy?

5. What if there's no country behind this operation? Who are we bombing then?

6. Right now, lots of countries are on our side, countries that fight against terrorism themselves. We can either take this unity and work to minimize reasons for terrorism, or we can start bombing people and lose respect and support from other countries. Give the people who want retribution a figurehead, maybe this Ben-whatever guy, then throw him in a silly trial and do whatever follows.

7. Don't give me the if-we-don't-kill-em-all-every-other-group-is-gonna-give-their-shot argument. It's been used since WWII, and it got us the Cold War, Korean War, and Vietnam War. After all, we couldn't let them commies get away with it.

8. For all you people who claim to possess logic, USE IT.

As for 25,000, that number I came out of my ass. I made that number up to exagerate how deseperate those iddle East countries will have to get to get their oil back. Agian calm down people.

Last but not least, I am not as bad as DarkStar nor will I ever be. Ok IGotBeer, he made up numbers and stuck by them. I don't.

quote:

---

I never said about sending in bombs with Windex. All I said was that after WE BOMB them they will need Windex to clean their new glass desert. Jesus Christ, you all should calm down it was stupid joke!

---

The comments about oil strike me as odd for three reasons:

1)As anyone with the IQ of a Dr. Scholl's insole could tell you, the Middle East has the oil and we need it. Therefore, in matters of oil, it is the Middle East that holds the cards. Or are you suggesting we stop importing Middle East oil to make some sort of statement? Now there's a brilliant idea.

2)OPEC has already taken the step of promising to not price-gouge. Why are we suddenly pointing at the oil issue as a potential battlefield, when the mainly Arab states in OPEC have already taken a commendable step?

I think nukes are unlikely to be used. Yes, they are nicely destructive, but fallout is a bitch. I'm not sure what the wind is like in Afghanistan, but you can bet it would carry fallout to somewhere you didn't want it.

The Russians, of course, have already demonstrated the "clean nuke." It's called the thermobaric (lit. heat-pressure) bomb, also known as the fuel-air explosive. When it goes off, the surrounding air is sucked in with such force that it rips eyes out of sockets. The following blast wave and fireball rival a tactical (slight oxymoron if you ask me) nuclear yield.

On preventing future attacks:

Well, means, motive and opportunity.

I think we can agree that means and opportunity are so easy to come by in a free, industrial nation that nothing can be done.

Motive is a different matter entirely.

Presumably, the US govt. would hope that any counterstrike would serve to deter future attacks by its sheer power. Well, maybe. Personally, I think there's a huge risk of martyring those killed in the revenge strike.

There's also the matter of jealousy of America's status. That won't change.

Although it would be simplistic to say that this attack is entirely due to Arab-Israeli tensions, there's a lot to that angle. See the Palestinians dancing in the streets? Not surprising considering that the Palestinians have been consistently fucked over by five decades of US policy in the Middle East. Americans of all people should understand that one can oppress a people so far, but they will eventually snap.

Also we have been spoiled in getting what we want casually. We as Americans scream about gas going up 10 cents from 1.30 to a 1.40 while other countries pay 5.00 sometimes 7.00 for gas. Their solution? Don't drive as much. drive only when you need to.

About the Windex joke, no I don't think in any ugly way. The only person I can think of that is thinking of anything stupid would be the person who thought I was thinking stupid. My stupid joke was a joke thats all. It was meant to lighten up the mood.

I am for one not ashamed that I feel almost nothing right now about the attack. For one I got used to the idea that the US is vulnerable, and the lives that were lost will be paid for in time. Bush is the one person you don't want to give a reason to bomb a country. Also being edgy and angry is exactly what the terrorists want, what they don't want is a country full of people dead set in getting every single terrorist in the world. A cold, icy, non-emotional country.

quote:

---

A cold, icy, non-emotional country.

---

I get so pissed off every time i see someone from the rich east side of my city get into an SUV to go to CVS to buy themselves a pack of smokes and some foot cream. 90% percent of te world doesnt have this option and i think more people would realize this.

And as a population was are easy to sway, so we should be careful about following our gut when our media is controlled the way it is.
Example: last year, the price of gas here (In R.I.) was $1.00 to $1.10.. then it went up to $1.70-$1.80.. we were outraged, but continued to waste it. Then the price came down to $1.40-$1.50 after we made a point of getting all our politicians on the isssue. We are all enthused gas is so cheap.

If prices were $1, then raised to $1.80, then dropped to $1.40, everyone with half a brain can see that the prices dropped by forty-cents, not increased by forty-cents. If it had increased an additional forty-cents, it would be $2.20.