2007-02-07 05:14:18 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Military
I think we should. On the same subject I was watching this TV show on Spike about prisoners rioting and taking over the prison. In the U.K. it took officials 28 days to gain back control of a particular prison. During that time, the prisoners had total reign and they destroyed the place. So instead of sending in and endangering all these police forces, why not just tell all civilians to clear out and drop a bomb on the prison? Tell you what, that would be the last time any such problem occurred. But in reality, after this incident occurred, several copy-cat riots occurred in various British prisons.
2007-02-07 05:21:09 · answer #1 · answered by Scary Monster 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
1) Nuking Iraq would irradiate at least a quarter of the world's oil reserves. Even if we reduce dependence on petroleum for fuel, we might still want plastics, so that is a bad idea for reasons other than the sheer monumental immorality of it.
2) If you want a bloodbath, then pulling out the troops will get one going as the Sunni and Shia take off the gloves, something our presence, blood and treasure is only tempering and delaying.
2007-02-07 13:30:23 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Pull the troops out, yes. Nuke the place, no. If we did that we'd have to nuke Afghanistan, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria, and Yemen at the same time -- and right after that we'd have to be ready to nuke Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Turkey, and the rest of the Middle East (but somehow leave Israel alone). Good luck pulling any of that off...
2007-02-07 13:21:38 · answer #3 · answered by sarge927 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Now that is the most intelligent thing I have heard, if we are going to pull the troops out. That is the only way we can pull them out. But if we do it, we will have to get the entire middle east. There is a stand on Terrorism.
2007-02-07 13:23:19 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
What if they did the same ? Send a nuke to washington ? and do you think all other Nuke nations will stay quiet ?
2007-02-07 13:20:17 · answer #5 · answered by EggsarefromChicken 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Hey why dont we just nuke canada because i think Bush could come up with bad info about them to. Get real you MORON. well i guess you got some of my energy in writing you back to bad for me to even respond to you.
I think the problem is is that most people on here never put themselves in the shoes of the victoms who you want to nuke
2007-02-07 13:22:03 · answer #6 · answered by bone g 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Na, we don't need to nuke them. They're fighting a civil war anyways right now we just need to get out and let them kill each other for the next 10 years then when they have finally settled their differences we can help them rebuild (i.e. take their oil) and everyone will be happy once again.
2007-02-07 13:19:31 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
Nukes are not warranted in this case...I think the only time we should ever use them again is if we absolutel have to.
2007-02-07 15:04:24 · answer #8 · answered by whodeyflya 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm with you for the most part, but instead of nukes lets drop pork chops on 'em .
2007-02-07 14:15:44 · answer #9 · answered by Ray H 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
pull out yes...and then let them end their civil war. No need nuke.
2007-02-07 15:00:58 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋