|
|
COMMENTS:
I haven't turned conservative here. It just seems ludicrous, if this is really what Al Queda hopes to provoke.
they'd massacre more infidels than all those incidents combined if they had their way
Why can people just leave eachother alone and live in peace? They want to kill us because we don't share the same values and religion? That's pathetic.
That's right Tjalfe, yet they crawl by the millions from the desert to live with amongst us infidels in Europe and America...kinda doesn't add up huh? Can you say CRACK-POT EXTREMISM? They're assholes and unless slaughtered will live to commit another cowardly act another day!
I think that they had some significant recent successes, that proves to them that the bar isn't that high. The Madrid bombing, for example, has shown that an attack claiming 200 lives can cause a nation to replace a popular government and withdraw from any military involvement designed to assure that the terrorists won't take over in Iraq. And though the willingness to fight the terrorists of Iraq hasn't been broken yet in the leadership level, the mounting casualities caused the American public to flip the majority's support, against the war in Iraq. I don't know how will it end, but it's a pretty safe bet, that had there been 10 times more casualities in Iraq by now, the US would have already pulled out, and probably Bush wouldn't have reelected... So you've got 20,000 casualities to let go of Iraq, and if we don't want to lie to ourselves, after such loss, when terrorism and radical Islam will go out for the fight against the rest of the moderate muslim world, no western power will send military aid, after the 20,000 killed. Now, after they have the entire muslim world, they'll next attack the western world, I assume that 20,000 casualities won't be enough for any nation to raise white flags all over, but ultimately it may break too. The global terrorism can be inspired by the Palestinian terror recent achievement, causing Israel to withdraw and evacuate its citizens from Gaza strip and parts of the West Bank, after 5 years campaign with 1000 casualities to the Israeli side (including 800 civilian casualities - equivalent to more than 10 9/11's for the US population). You may claim that other factors were involved, but fact is that unlike withdrawal from Iraq or any other foreign country, the majority of Israelis view Gaza strip and WB as "rightfully ours" though willing to withdraw for peace, which we don't get after this withdrawal. Now, again, the bar may be raised a lot higher, and ultimately they'll be able to execute terror attacks that will claim the lives of millions, especially if given free hand with WMD.
by Yosi on Fri Jul 29, 05 10:39am
[+]
The Middle East will be a parking lot LONG before that dream gets close to a BCH of coming true!
Interesting comment, Yosi. However, neither Bush nor Blair lost in their elections. I would suspect that if the attacks grow in number or if massive casualties result (ie, something like a radiological nuke or biological attack) that this will certainly not result in a pull back, but rather will bring out the passion, anger, and willingness to fight that was seen in WW2. Especially so in countries like the US, UK, Russia, and China.
If I were a muslim reading your posts, I'll get myself a dynamite belt pronto! and first thing tomorrow morning would be to find a nice place to blow myself up. Allllaaaaaaah akbar! or something like this...
Johann, if a WMD was detonated in a US city, do you think the US would give up? I doubt it. I think carpet bombing with nukes is what most people would call for.
when a WMD will be detonated in any city (either in west or Middle East) we'll be all screwed!
I really seriously believe that if, one day, non-muslim worlds finally popped and said, "okay, that's IT!", Al Quaeda would be running the other way with their tails between their legs. It's like a kid poking at a bee hive with a stick; he doesn't know how potentially fucked he is.
I agree somewhat with Yosi. We have, and have had throughout the entire war on terror, the ability to end it in a matter of hours if we went all out. It's the little nitpicking and such that is hampering us. Should we nuke them? No, not yet anyways. However, hit them, NO MATTER WHERE THEY HIDE. Any of you who think they will stop, or even slow-down their attacks if the US/UK/etc pulls out, then I really don't know what world you are living in.
One can only hope we decide to unleash our arsenal before we take mass casualties.
You might say, who should we bomb? Syria, Iran, and the portion of Pakistan that borders Afghanistan would be a lovely start.
I agree cletus. I just think that if they keep pushing the limit, there is a limit to the patience and tolerance the non-muslim world will accept. People will stay rational for only so long. I made this ballot thinking if there was an attack far worse than 9/11, then what would be the response. Historically, the response seems fairly obvious. Also, when you realize that China, Russia, UK and USA have problems with "muslim" extremists and that these countries in the recent past history have been willing to inflict and suffer massive casualties, it would seem to be senseless for Al-Queda to keep attacking. You can only keep poking a sleeping pitbull with a stick for so long before it bites your head off.
who knows
I think they would love to take control of Pakistan and their nukes, and the instability of the Pakistan goverment I don't think that is such a long shot
and I know we all bitch on how Iran should have the right to have nukes, but would you really want that, or is it just the pc thing to allow?
As johan pointed out, once they have serious nuclear arsenal, it's game over for all of us, so the survivors willingness to fight, won't matter much. But even before the global destruction ability phase, nobody will go out to stop them, if they have several nukes, or even proven large scale other non conventional weapons. Do you think that other NATO countries will come to the aid of Spain, if the extremists start the "Andalus reconquest" threatning retaliation if foreigners intervene? It'll be everyone to his own, in that phase. Waiting and holding back, allowing the extremists gain power, can cause "inflation" in the death toll, just like in WWII. If the world acted much earlier against Hitler, while Germany and its allies weren't as strong, I don't think that we would refer to it as WWII, but rather more modest "War on Fascism", or something like that, with much lower casualities rate.
by Yosi on Fri Jul 29, 05 12:12pm
[+]
No one ever accused the islamic world of being too bright, or having too much foresight.
And the same applies to grandpa herzog.
Aw, my troll is a little rambuncious today, he'll tire himself out soon.
|
|
