Just let them see who and what they are up against . At some time if you want to win you have to pull the dog out of the fight and kill the hog yourself to save the dog .
2006-12-28 08:54:22 · 11 answers · asked by -----JAFO---- 4 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Then tell them all to line up single file and get with the program or else .
2006-12-28 08:57:18 · update #1
Can we get our troops out first?
2006-12-28 09:00:56 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
For all those who think that this would kill anybody on the ground, your'e wrong...
There are 4 types of blast that nukes can be used for... ground blast, air blast, sub-surface blast and Exo-atmospheric blast... The first 3 are the deadly and destructive ones, the 4th is "harmless"...
150 miles up would be the exo-atmospheric blast. These are designed to knock out communications and electronic systems underneath the blast zone but not kill anything living or destroy any structures (the blast generates a massive pulse of energy that disrupts electronics)...
The theory works great if your enemy is high tech and would therefore lose it's ability to fight, but in Iraq, the insurgents are decidedly low tech... They don't have the complicated gadgets or machines to go wrong... So it wouldn't really make a lot of difference to them, but the US and coalition troops would be temporarily "blinded" due to thier massive use of high tech systems... Not a good situation to be in.
You might even take out some innocent civilian computer systems... it could bring down several passenger planes from neighbouring countries after all!
2006-12-28 17:11:40 · answer #2 · answered by supernicebloke2000 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Two things wrong with your statement.
1. 150 miles above Baghdad is just above satellite orbit elevation and would have no effect on the ground.
2. People would misconstrue it with a religious "star in the east" or some other BS like that.
2006-12-28 17:03:10 · answer #3 · answered by sprcpt 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
The better solution is to arrange things to the point that the different factions within Iraq see peace as most beneficial to all parties.... And then we can solve world hunger..
I don't think anything of this world will stop the violence in Iraq.
2006-12-28 17:02:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
Why fool around? Why not just drop on in the middle of Baghdad and turn it into a ******* ditch?
2006-12-28 17:13:16 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
oh man the cost of the EMP that would create would not bode well with tax payers.
2006-12-28 17:03:26 · answer #6 · answered by Josh 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't see why not. Iran wants nukes, and someone should give them nukes.
Obviously we would want to get our troops out first.
2006-12-28 17:00:18 · answer #7 · answered by ? 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
That hog in this case would be Bush, and that saving would be an impeachment.
2006-12-28 16:57:14 · answer #8 · answered by FOX NEWS WATCHER 1 · 2⤊ 4⤋
hmm..america is there only for oil..and they made up their own reasons that's not even there..and made war out of it and thats so unfair..
2006-12-28 17:10:49 · answer #9 · answered by someone 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
why do you want to kill so many americans?
2006-12-28 16:56:17 · answer #10 · answered by brainiac 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋