Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Posted: 9/7/2004 3:31:57 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 3:32:07 AM EST by olyarms]
Why do we only kill a few at a time. Like Iraq we go in kill a couple pull back.
It seems a bad idea. Like poking a behive. You kill a few but theres still 1,000s inside. Why don't we just finish it to the point where they don't exist. I am not saying nuke a country but cripple its terrorist to the point the only ones left can't function and go back into scoiety.

Because your never going to be able to kill them all but I would think yolu could do some serious damage to the point they are no longer a real threat.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 3:35:05 AM EST
Sometimes you have to wait til they stick their heads up so you can whack it off at the neck.

Of course I believe in making the middle east a glass factory
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 3:39:59 AM EST
I guess I just don't get the point of us running into these small town where the fighting is going on then running back out. It seems the only ones it helps are the terrorist.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:19:52 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 4:23:54 AM EST by 95thFoot]
My gut feeling is: wait till after the election. Then, when W is reelected, it will be hammer time.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 4:44:40 AM EST
[Last Edit: 9/7/2004 11:38:04 AM EST by Yojimbo]
I know a lot of people don't want to say it or hear it but...I truely believe it will take an act like Nagasaki and Hiroshima to win or make a big impact a war on terrorism. I seriously believe a good surgical helping of tactical nukes could make a big difference.

I'd also like to to add that the war on terrorism will probably be a forever war because as long are desperate evil men there will be terrorism.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 9:00:38 AM EST

Originally Posted By Yojimbo:
I know a lot of people don't want to say it or hear it but...I truely believe it will take an act like Nagasaki and Hiroshima to make to win or make a big impact a war on terrorism. I seriously believe a good surgical helping of tactical nukes could make a big difference.

I'd also like to to add that the war on terrorism will probably be a forever war because as long are desperate evil men there will be terrorism.


Have no problem with surgical but Hiroshima wasnt exactly surgical
It was drop, bang, hollyshit did you guys see that.
I feel if you kill 1 civ for every 1 terrorist your just creating another terrorist in doing so.
Now if we just came in grabbed ones we figured where up to no good and took them to prison. Treat them with some respect until we know dif. We would be a whole lot better.

And yeah if you know they are a TA kill them on the spot. But we can't have people making prisoners butt fucking each other. If I went to prison and they had my ass on a leash or any of that other shit, oh I would be looking for my sweet as revenge.
But if your found to be a terrorist to a certain degree your punished for it.
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 9:30:53 AM EST

Originally Posted By olyarms:
Why do we only kill a few at a time. Like Iraq we go in kill a couple pull back.
It seems a bad idea. Like poking a behive. You kill a few but theres still 1,000s inside. Why don't we just finish it to the point where they don't exist. I am not saying nuke a country but cripple its terrorist to the point the only ones left can't function and go back into scoiety.

Because your never going to be able to kill them all but I would think yolu could do some serious damage to the point they are no longer a real threat.



'Cause to do it without pissing off the often friendly-to-neutral surrounding population, we have to kill them face to face with small arms & precision fire support.

The advantage that terrorists and insurgents hold over conventional forces is that they can hide amongst the surrounding population, weather or not the population in question supports their cause, whereas a conventional army cannot.

In order to kill them we have to find them first, and that only happens in small numbers...

When we find them in larger numbers, you see things like the safe-house airstrikes in Fallujah...

Further, we cannot lose the support of the surrounding population, as this is critical to victory. You cannot win a war against a terror insurgency by out terrorizing the terrorists, you must support the local population and win them over to your side.

Once they become part of your campaign, then you can win. Untill they do you can only fight a holding action while trying to win them over, or lose.

We are doing the first, the Russians are doing the 2nd. It's all in the way you fight...

Link Posted: 9/7/2004 9:33:36 AM EST

Originally Posted By olyarms:
I guess I just don't get the point of us running into these small town where the fighting is going on then running back out. It seems the only ones it helps are the terrorist.



Well, if we go in, and lose less than 10 soldiers but kill 1,000 terrorists, that helps our cause...

We go in, we reduce their numbers, they give in, we pull back.

Eventually, they will be unable to start the war back up again, as they will run out of volunteers. But only if we can retain the favorable opinions of the local population. Once we lose that, their recruit pool becomes infinate, and we end up like the Russians have...
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 9:37:05 AM EST
Link Posted: 9/7/2004 9:39:04 AM EST

Originally Posted By Yojimbo:
I know a lot of people don't want to say it or hear it but...I truely believe it will take an act like Nagasaki and Hiroshima to make to win or make a big impact a war on terrorism. I seriously believe a good surgical helping of tactical nukes could make a big difference.

I'd also like to to add that the war on terrorism will probably be a forever war because as long are desperate evil men there will be terrorism.



Yeah, for the other side...

Remember, the only kind of war you can win with firepower is a conventional war against another sovreign nation.

We've allready done that in A-stan and Iraq, and none of our prospective nation-state opponents in the WOT have militaries anywhere near strong enough to merit nukes....

When dealing with any insurgency, including terrorisim, you MUST have the support of the local population.

EVERY SINGLE WAR in history that was a major power vs insurgents WAS DECIDED ON THAT SINGULAR POINT.

NO COUNTRY has beaten a terrorist/guerilla/insurgent force with firepower. It is ALLWAYS done by the methods we are using now...

Vietnam taught the US a lesson about winning this sort of war...

Unfortunately, the Russians FAILED to learn such a lesson from their war in A-stan, and the consequences are playing out as we speak...
Top Top