What are the best arguments for not nuking much of the Islamic world?

Question

ASSUMPTIONS: Lets assume you want to protect and preserve your community and dont support any violence other than what is necessary to protect your interests.

Furthermore, lets assume your not religious and dont use the pacifict morality of Christianty. Thus, you dont "love your enemies" although you may find that "doing onto others" does serve your interests.

So its not against your ancient religious moral code to bomb a savage culture out of existance, should it be necessary to your longterm survival.

Ok, now given those assumptions, whats the best argument for not bombing Islamic countries into oblivion.

Answer 1

There is none!!!!

Answer 2

Umm, because there will be long term consequences to pay when the highly radioactive particles reach the U.S in mass. You really think those particles are going to stay at the boundries of those mid-east countries you blow up? The other thing is, just because there are a few crazies in the mid-east that are terrorists, doesn't mean the entire Islamic world are terrorists. By nuking them, you're punishing billions of people for the evil of a very few. That's like punishing liberals for the crimes of GWB. It' immoral.

Answer 3

Moral considerations aside . the Islamic world is huge. Most of Indonesia is Islamic The rest of the Worlds population would hate us . and mistrust us and could decide to do us great economic harm in punishment . Why am I even answering this ludicrous question?

Answer 4

There is no honor is killing your enemy from afar. Honor is found only on the battlefield, when men meet face to face. Even the fallen enemy is honored on the battlefield.
Nuking your enemy out of existence is no different than the low down skunk that reports abuses to Yahoo. It's chicken chit. Warriors meet face to face.

Answer 5

Because calling them a "savage culture" and coming to the conclusion that obliterating innocent people is arrogant, ethnocentric and ignorant.

McVeigh was part of an American Militia. According to your logic, we should have bombed most of middle and rural America.

And really, while we're at it, I suppose we should just bomb all of America. We did after all, invade a sovereign nation, kill tens of thousands of innocents, torture and humiliate their people, grossly misunderstand a culture...

Talk about savage.

Answer 6

my great grandparents on both sides wouldnt have been born if people thought like u back then
stop basing your ideas off of a couple hundred extremists that belong to a religion of tens of millions.
everyone knows theres bad in every good.
this country only wants us to see the bad of muslims.
cant really blame u for ur ignorance.

Answer 7

Given that your unrealistic assumptions are true, your reasons are economic and self preservation. Wiping out the Islamic countries also wipes out their oil production.

Answer 8

These are the reasons why you should NOT nuke much of the Islamic world:

1. Islam teaches peaceful co-existence.
2. Islam has contributed much to human civilization, notably to the Renaissance.
3. That would amount to killing tens of millions of innocent people, who just want to raise their families and live their lives in peace.
4. There would be no positive result. It wouldn't help anyone or defend anyone.

Answer 9

There's no money in it and Liberals would not have a war to ***** Gripe and Complain about. Had I been President on 9/12/01 you would have seen four Nukes. Bahgdad, Kabul, Tripoli and Tehran. Four planes four nukes do really want to screw with the US?

Answer 10

The same argument they presented against Iraq about genocide via weapons of mass destruction.

Answer 11

OK lets assume i am an archaeologist. and my interest would be to study past cultures and to find artifacts to support my theories. don't nuke these old cultural and artefactual rich countries