but 1 billion innocent people had to die at the same time, would you still fire it? (this is of course assuming you have the power to do such)
2007-01-12 11:37:57 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
i wouldn't
2007-01-12 11:49:56 · update #1
i dont even know what to say to that. terrible idea
2007-01-12 12:06:52 · answer #1 · answered by Seamus K 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the ends don't justify the means.
If we nuked a billion innocents, that would guarantee a whole new and even more vicious wave of terrorism to befalll the world
Bush's reasoning behind the doctrine of the preemptive strike was that if we fought the enemy on their territory, we would not have to fight them on our land. While our invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq did not provke one, a nuke, creating any magnitude of civilian deaths would guarantee an invasion by Al-Qaeda allies, probably family and/or friends of the innocents; and pretty much every sleeper cell in the U.S. would awaken and fight. (Assuming the person firing the nuke came from the U.S.)
2007-01-12 19:54:50 · answer #2 · answered by Liberals love America! 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Definately not. Just get the 1 billion people to help get rid Al Qaeda
's existence instead.
2007-01-12 19:48:05 · answer #3 · answered by Alwyn C 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No because chances are Al-qaeda would never be able to kill 1 billion people if it were left alive
2007-01-12 19:49:48 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well.. a bomb big enough to kill a billion people would probably do some pretty nasty things to the rest of the planet. So Id have to say.. no.
2007-01-12 19:40:55 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Impossible since terrorists are in every country. You would have to drop several in each country including your own.
Would you mind killing most of your own population to add to the billion?
P.S. Would you mind the bomb landing on you to get the terrorists?
2007-01-12 19:46:45 · answer #6 · answered by robert m 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope. I'd much prefer the option of ferreting them out one at a time and sending them to their 40 virgins. 1 shot=1 kill.
2007-01-12 19:43:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
i would wait until a great Al Qaeda gathering then send a bomb strike not big nuclear ones but probaly about 50 bomber planes.
2007-01-12 19:42:57 · answer #8 · answered by The HyphyAsian.Crank that Asian 1 · 0⤊ 1⤋
This is a moral dilemma, I wouldn't push the button destroying al queda is not worth killing 1/6 of the worlds population. if anything it would boost their numbers giving them more sympathizers to their cause.
2007-01-12 19:42:52 · answer #9 · answered by IRunWithScissors 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Q&A here is a sad reflection but I have no doubt it's typical of the thinking of many in the US. I can think of other locations where it would be a lot more effective and deserving.
2007-01-12 19:45:23 · answer #10 · answered by robjoss 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As long as it was dropped right on Saudi Arabia i wouldnt mind. They were the ones behind 911 anyways. 16 hijackers from Saudi. Funding from Saudi. They did 911 and got away with it.
2007-01-12 19:41:00 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋