If A Suitcase Nuke Went Off In NY

[red states rule]

If the suitecase nuke has a 1 kiloton yield, tens of thousands would die immediately, and thousands more in the days after

If such an event were to occur, would libs finally decide to help fight the war on terror or continue their war on Bush?

Would they continue to put party above their country no matter how many Americans died and continue their efforts to undermine the President's efforts to win the war on terror?

 

[red states rule]

This small item will kill tens of thousands in one second. It would make the Oklahoma City bomb look like a fire cracker

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Well it all depends... First they would probably claim it was a nefarious plot by Bush/Cheney to become dictators for life. Then they would insist as soon as they regained the White House they would have all the proof they needed that Bush masterminded the event.

The loyal democrats on this board would all be busy explaining how it was JUST like us nuking Japan in world War two and it was all our fault for "interfering" in Islamic matters around the world.

Then of course there would be the crys of " hey how do you know an Muslim did it, who ever it was was incinerated by the blast" Followed by " Reagan and Bush Senior gave them the material to make the bomb"

And of course the chorus of " give them what they want" would begin in earnest with claims that they did not really mean that.

 

[red states rule]

Well it all depends... First they would probably claim it was a nefarious plot by Bush/Cheney to become dictators for life. Then they would insist as soon as they regained the White House they would have all the proof they needed that Bush masterminded the event.

The loyal democrats on this board would all be busy explaining how it was JUST like us nuking Japan in world War two and it was all our fault for "interfering" in Islamic matters around the world.

Then of course there would be the crys of " hey how do you know an Muslim did it, who ever it was was incinerated by the blast" Followed by " Reagan and Bush Senior gave them the material to make the bomb"

And of course the chorus of " give them what they want" would begin in earnest with claims that they did not really mean that.

Not to mention the "investagations" - why didn't the government warn the people about the possible attack?

And how can the US reason with the terrorists so no further attacks will occur

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If the suitecase nuke has a 1 kiloton yield, tens of thousands would die immediately, and thousands more in the days after

If such an event were to occur, would libs finally decide to help fight the war on terror or continue their war on Bush?

Would they continue to put party above their country no matter how many Americans died and continue their efforts to undermine the President's efforts to win the war on terror?

Careful now, no links will ruin your reputation and of course will result in someone demanding one for some reason.

 

[red states rule]

Careful now, no links will ruin your reputation and of course will result in someone demanding one for some reason.

Like I care what libs think?

Of course, after the attack, the left will be making sure FEMA hands out $2000 ATM cards (for strip clubs, plasma TV's, stereos, and other necessary items for the survivors)

Jesse Jackson and Rev Al will be bellowing how more poor blacks were killed then rich white boys

 

[Larkinn]

You two enjoying your little circle jerk?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You two enjoying your little circle jerk?

What? No reminders that we are no better then terrorists?

 

[Larkinn]

What? No reminders that we are no better then terrorists?

Please quote where I've ever said that.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Please quote where I've ever said that.

Thats right, comparing our military and our President to Nazi's, telling us that our military is the same as terrorists because of collateral damage those are just patriotic rumblings from a true man of this country.

 

[Larkinn]

Thats right, comparing our military and our President to Nazi's, telling us that our military is the same as terrorists because of collateral damage those are just patriotic rumblings from a true man of this country.

You told a lie about me. I asked for a quote asking where I said it. In reply you tell more lies about me.

But yet on the other thread you are bitching about how "leftbots" insult posters all the times. Perhaps you should clean up your own backyard before bitching about other peoples actions.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

You told a lie about me. I asked for a quote asking where I said it. In reply you tell more lies about me.

But yet on the other thread you are bitching about how "leftbots" insult posters all the times. Perhaps you should clean up your own backyard before bitching about other peoples actions.

Sure thing, don't like it when someone points out your a liar and a liberal that compares his country to terrorists do ya? I have an idea, stop doing it.

 

[Larkinn]

Sure thing, don't like it when someone points out your a liar and a liberal that compares his country to terrorists do ya? I have an idea, stop doing it.

I have no problem with anyone who points out my inaccuracies, fallacies, or stupid statements. As a human I am sure I have made many. However, I do have a problem when people lie about me. Which is why I challenged you here.

I honestly don't get you RGS. You've posted intelligent stuff in the past. And then sometimes you post just complete and utter shit like you've posted here. Whats the difference? Why no middle ground?

 

[ReillyT]

If the suitecase nuke has a 1 kiloton yield, tens of thousands would die immediately, and thousands more in the days after

If such an event were to occur, would libs finally decide to help fight the war on terror or continue their war on Bush?

Would they continue to put party above their country no matter how many Americans died and continue their efforts to undermine the President's efforts to win the war on terror?

I speak for no one else (just a single lib here), but I think of Islamic fundamentalism like a hydra. If you chop off one head, two more grow in its place. This is why I think it is necessary to be careful how we attempt to deal with this complex problem. There are hundreds of millions of Muslims in the world, and most of them have no desire to take hostile actions against the West, or the United States. However, if we don't show more subtlety in how we deal with this issue, I think we risk tipping more and more Muslim kids into the hands of terrorist groups that will use them for their own purposes. The truth is you can't kill them all. We have to find other more imaginative ways (besides force - which is sometimes necessary) to deal with the problem of Islamic fanaticism. It is as much a war of ideas as it is a physical confrontation.

 

[maineman]

In answer to the question: I would be even more committed to defeating Islamic extremism than I am today....

which is clearly MUCH more committed than the two morons who jacked each other off for the first part of this thread - who are clearly much more committed to babysitting sunnis and shiites in Iraq, suffering 29K casualties, flushing a trillion dollars down the shitter, and, by their gross misuse and misdirection of our forces, allowing our REAL enemies to remain as powerful as they were the day they flew planes into our buildings.... allowing them to hold televised graduation ceremonies for suicide bombers mere miles away from the spot where they were hanging out five years ago when we all but forgot about THEM to invade Iraq.

Oh yeah...and calling into question the patriotism and citizenship of those of us who ARE worried about our REAL enemies.

Does that answer the question?

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I speak for no one else (just a single lib here), but I think of Islamic fundamentalism like a hydra. If you chop off one head, two more grow in its place. This is why I think it is necessary to be careful how we attempt to deal with this complex problem. There are hundreds of millions of Muslims in the world, and most of them have no desire to take hostile actions against the West, or the United States. However, if we don't show more subtlety in how we deal with this issue, I think we risk tipping more and more Muslim kids into the hands of terrorist groups that will use them for their own purposes. The truth is you can't kill them all. We have to find other more imaginative ways (besides force - which is sometimes necessary) to deal with the problem of Islamic fanaticism. It is as much a war of ideas as it is a physical confrontation.

"Careful" as in sensitivity training or careful as in destroying their nukes before they destroy us?

Forget subtlety. Forget imagination. Forget sensitivity. We need to meet physical threat head on. Monitor existing mosques. No more muslim immigration. Deal quickly and decisively with muslim nations that pose a threat to our security. We do not have to put up with any "hydra heads"....simply destroy the body they come from. After we are safe and secure we can then work on the war of ideas if you want to.

 

[Larkinn]

"Careful" as in sensitivity training or careful as in destroying their nukes before they destroy us?

Forget subtlety. Forget imagination. Forget sensitivity. We need to meet physical threat head on. Monitor existing mosques. No more muslim immigration. Deal quickly and decisively with muslim nations that pose a threat to our security. We do not have to put up with any "hydra heads"....simply destroy the body they come from. After we are safe and secure we can then work on the war of ideas if you want to.

Exactly whose nukes do you wish to destroy?

 

[maineman]

"Careful" as in sensitivity training or careful as in destroying their nukes before they destroy us?

Forget subtlety. Forget imagination. Forget sensitivity. We need to meet physical threat head on. Monitor existing mosques. No more muslim immigration. Deal quickly and decisively with muslim nations that pose a threat to our security. We do not have to put up with any "hydra heads"....simply destroy the body they come from. After we are safe and secure we can then work on the war of ideas if you want to.

ah yes.... the old bushian strategy of trying to convince muslims not to want to kill us by killing muslims. I am sure that will work, as long as you are prepared to kill every muslim on the planet.

And if that is our strategy, shouldnt we just cut to the chase and herd up and slaughter all American muslims right now simply as a wise defensive maneuver?

How about just nuking the entire middle east.... oh wait...there IS that little problem of oil. darn.

 

[jillian]

The header is more idiocy by Tweddle Dum. What I'd like to know is, if a suitcase nuke went off in NY would the idiots who say "we're fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here" finally admit that they don't know what they're talking about.

But thanks so much for your elated contemplation of my home being nuked.

 

[DeadCanDance]

If the suitecase nuke has a 1 kiloton yield, tens of thousands would die immediately, and thousands more in the days after

If such an event were to occur, would libs finally decide to help fight the war on terror or continue their war on Bush?

Would they continue to put party above their country no matter how many Americans died and continue their efforts to undermine the President's efforts to win the war on terror?

Its too bad that your President is spending most of our resources on baby sitting a civil war between sectarian factions, in a country that doesn't have any enriched uranium, let alone nuclear weapons.

And its too bad he didn't focus on Al Qaeda in afghanistan and pakistan, nor did he focus sufficiently on nuclear proliferation: loose nukes in the former soviet union, north korea, pakistan, india. That's what anti war people told your president to focus on. He decided instead, to start a civil war in iraq, and baby sit it.