Not long til the war with Iran. Should we use nukes this time? Shock and Awe was so boring in Iraq.?

Answer 1

yes we have to be more aggressive

Answer 2

I saw more shock and awe at my local fireworks display.They
wont use nukes in Iran,cause that will be the USAs excuse
for going in and helping themselves to more oil,change the
administration, reverse the oil currency back from euros to
dollars(just like Iraq)and you have control of the last two
oil producing countries on earth(Iraq will run out of oil in
around 116 years time.Iran a few years before.)

Answer 3

My friend, I have right wing views (not too extreme) - and I'm not afraid to say and stand up for what I believe in, as I have numerous times and stated on this site.
However, much as i appreciate that there is a threat and everyone dosen't live happily ever after as in Hollywood, I am shocked by your comments. War and death is not a good thing, but sometimes it is necessary. If its us or them, then us everytime - BUT it is not something to be revelled in. It is a horrible state of affairs. And if you think shock and awe are boring - I'm assuming that the closest you have come to a war zone is watching on TV.
As for nukes - A detonation by either the U.K/U.S or one against them would trigger an almost certain anarchic and lawless world.

Answer 4

The chances of an attack on Iran are low - the USA and its allies have learned, through their disastrous experiences in Iraq, that invasions are not very wise. And Pop D and Neil M (above) are so right.... the amount of fallout and subsequent nuclear pollution of neighbouring countries would be a war crime of the highest magnitude.... Cast your mind back to Chernobyl when a small yield nuclear accident spread pollution throughout Europe. Even today, traces of fallout from Chernobyl can be detected in parts of northern England and Scotland. So imagine what large, high yield nuclear explosions could do... And as already been said, such fallout would eventually reach the USA. Are you willing to risk that? In any case, why kill thousands of innocent Iranians who are as fed up with their leaders as most of us in the West but who, because of the structure of their theocratic system of government, are more-or-less helpless to change things? And since the average educational and professional qualifications of the typical Iranian is superior to the average levels existing in the West, it would be a shame to destroy such people. (I'm not an Iranian, by the way, but I know quite a few - all highly educated science professionals who speak at least 3 languages fluently), and they are as fed up with the people running Iran as you. So let's hope Bush uses what little commonsense remains in his Administration and adopts a diplomatic, 'jaw jaw' rather than 'war war' approach for all our sakes.

Answer 5

we've been there for approximately 4 years, it extremely is how long it took us to win international conflict 2(upon usa's get entry to, technically 7 in any different case). the rustic is already displaying signs and indicators of progression, which took YEARS for Germany and Japan to journey, and we can be there continually, because of the fact Iraq will grow to be an best pal, and is in a stable strategic region. Al Quaeda in Iraq has already been heavily weakened in accordance to US protection stress commanders, and the Iraqi protection stress is doing rather properly on it extremely is very own 500 Billion funds, going returned quite often to the U. S., and the accumulation of a quickly-to-be stabilized usa. we've gained no oil from this conflict to the human beings asserting this, that argument died out some months as quickly as we invaded.

Answer 6

Have any of the conservative right wingers that advocate using nukes ever even thought about the consequenses. The radiation in due time will float over to the United States and affect each and every one of us. You are really ignorant to think you're only going to damage Iran.

Answer 7

I read omewhere recently that Pakistan isn't doing enough to curb terrorism. So that's Pakistan, Iraq, Syria, Iran, Afghanistan. You won't be bored for long when the whole planet goes up!

Answer 8

Forget the Nukes. Let's send in Bush and Blair and a few of their cronies to personally conduct a small war of attrition in Tehran!

Answer 9

Since you are the only humans that are characterised with such mass murder and genocide, you can use nukes. You can nuke them as you nuke Hiroshima and Nagazaki in 1945 where you killed over three hundred thousand people with little boy and fat man. The situation in Iraq is of your best advantage

Answer 10

I would bet that if it came to Iran going nuclear, Israel would beat the USA to it. (Again... see link below) Of one thing I am sure... if it develops into a conventional war, the USA would be facing pretty awesome resistance (Iran has a well developed indigenous arms industry), not to mention tanker war 2... and you think prices are up now

Answer 11

No we should not use nukes in Iran, because it would badly damage America's image on the world stage.

And affect many innocent Iranians not just the intended targets.

And would spread radiation over a wide area.