Should Usa have dropped nuclear bombs after 9/11- one for afghanistan, another for iraq and iran?

Question

nope I go t church- but please stoping doing what politics do- confusing religion with politics. Two diferent things.

Answer 1

Why not just nuke the whole planet to be on the safe side?

Answer 2

Okay this is exactly why I wish the general public wasn't told about the nuclear bomb. Every time theres a conflict that your common person on the street couldnt see their way out of they say to nuke the entire area. Believe that there are many conflicts around the war that the United States is actively engaged in and most of them are complex in nature. Our nuclear arsenal is what is known as a "deterrent force". That means the only circumstances where they would be used would be a situation where there was a soveriegn recognized nation who is prepared (already has developed nuclear weapons) and who intends to use them against the United States.

Answer 3

Dropping the bomb has nothing to do with religion. It has to do with humanity. The US will not drop a bomb first. Count on it. The situation during WW2 with Japan was different and I am certain that you understand why. Nuclear confrontations will kill not only people in the area bombed but also around the world.
This is why we are so concerned with Iran's having the bomb. They are not to be trusted and would use the bomb.

Answer 4

we are not at warfare with Iraq, we are at warfare with terrorists. the U. S. (after the Manhatten mission, which wasn't purely the U.S. with information from the way as human beings fail to renowned) will purely use Nuclear guns as a very last motel. we've nuclear guns for conceal, not offense. we are not stupid adequate to nuke Iraq. a million. all of us understand how undesirable the fallout might want to be and the international might want to be lots worse off. 2. we are attempting to get stability in Iraq and make it so Iraq can initiate helping itself and rebuild, why might want to we nuke it? 3. Nuking it would not be certain the mission. Terrorists are everywhere, not basically in Iraq. 4. we've too a lot of our troops there which will be killed. besides the actual incontrovertible fact that lots have died, there are many better left and to nuke Iraq and kill all of them might want to be between the stupidest issues we've ever carried out. Annnd to those who save saying "Pull out of Iraq, the warfare is undesirable, blah blah blah." we are able to not pullout till we end what we all started. Iraq has their new authorities in position, yet they are infrequently waiting to be an outstanding u . s . a . and initiate to rebuild themselves. If we left, the Iraqi authorities might want to be overthrown with information from Al-Qaeda and we may be decrease back the position we all started. through the years with each and each and every of the human beings telling us to purely up and go away Iraq today because our human beings are demise, we've been given clarification why not. the most important of that's if we go away, it proves to the terrorists that their techniques of intimidation, scare-methods, murderings, beheadings, bombings, and bigger are operating and they're going to attempt to do what they did with Spain and bomb something or do yet another element alongside those strains so the country will placed a a lot less anti-terrorist authorities in skill.

Answer 5

Well that would have been instant justice ha ha And it also would have been what they would have done if we did that to them eh?
But we don't do that we have to organize first and make a plan?
But we took too long to address this situation anyway. This all started in the early seventies and we should have gone in then and cleaned up but Russia was the threat so they say. Russia has always been there supplying them arms and weaponry just like the Nazis did before. So here we are in a Catch 22 and now we are in deep do do again, inside and out.

Answer 6

as we have seen with the widespread contamination of the chernobyl accident nuclear bombs are not the answer at this time. however, i do believe if we are going to fight a war then let's get to it. toss aside the rules of engagement which put us at a disadvantage because the other side does not follow them. those we are fighting would like to and do decapitate us while we are made to feel guilty about making them put under ware on their heads. we need more guns and bigger bombs and soldiers allowed to do their jobs. the ideal situation would be to leave these countries to their own destruction but i don't think that will happen.

Answer 7

Another deluded one with megalomaniac affairs going out of the system. I figure you harness all the atoms yourself to account for the instability and accountability on atomic explossions. Do you understand the basic stuff about nuclear bombs? they do not explode, it is only ozone and carbon dioxide getting fast to their own place, like in programming or driving a big bus. Bet you did not know gas is never hot but their motion. Be bonkers not, young ones, I know other things as well, we third world countries like the philosophy and astrophisics, yet because we do not compete in your modern contours we are seen as shallow and ignorant, pity me alright. Bye baby, I love you. No complains here.

Answer 8

Of course not. Are you insane? Pick up a history book and see what a nuclear weapon actually does and you'll understand why.

P.S. Pick up a math textbook while you're at it. Afganistan, Iraq and Iran are three countries. Hence you can't use two bombs, "one for afghanistan, another for iraq and iran"

Answer 9

No, that would be irrisponsible and simply unamerican. Would we use the bomb? Yes, I think we would, but only as a last measure to insure safety of the majority of americans, not just because someone killed a couple thousand of us. If we did, we would be no better than Iran, North Korea, or any other terrorist supporting nation that wants it. Just because we have it, doesn't mean we should use it.

Answer 10

After that, the world would reach the conclusion that the US is not worthy of existing, and countries like France, UK, Pakistan, Russia, China, etc, would throw nuclear bombs in the US.

Answer 11

Are you kidding? Of course not!! The fallout from the radiation could have eventually come all the way over here and put millions of Americans at risk! Research radiology a bit, you dumb-f*ck!!