60% of Americans Support Nuking Iraq

[SlowwHand]

You mean, don't let Iraq happen all over again, Stinger.

[TheStinger]

I was actually talking about what should happen if Iraq uesd WMD's.

It won't be like last time anyway as if there is a war it will be specifiacly to get Saddam.

Of course we wouldn't have this problem if we had got him last time

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber


How true, what were the other 40% thinking.....

As for responding with chemical weapons, we don't have any (or at least we CLAIM that we do not) since we signed the treaty with the USSR in 1972. Same for biological weapons, so our ONLY alternative is a nuke. Admittedly these would most likely be WD-80 warheads from cruise missles (a 'tactical" warhead) not an ICBM. While less destructive than an ICBM, they are far more powerful than the Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombs dropped in 1945.

So the question is if our troops are attacked by WMD's we will

a) nuke them
b) do nothing

Hell of a decision ain't it?

Well who do you nuke?

The ground troops or the city if it is war in the city for example?
b) do noting - that means defeat them using conventional means - shouldn't be to hard for you, or is 1000 of your soldiers worth 100 000 Iraqi civilians, sounds like Nazi tactics to me.

[SlowwHand]

You guys.
I'll kiss your collective asses if the U.S. nukes Iraq.
Get a grip.

[TheStinger]

I don't think they will either, I was just responding to the thread.

[SlowwHand]

I didn't mean you, Stinger.
You're not prone to wild-eyed panic.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

I hope that you are right Sloww... but I mean how can people defend those tactics? And isn't it at least disturbing that majority of US population is ready to support it?

Now there is something to think about...

[SlowwHand]

Nuking Iraq is the epitome of a "dollar chasing a dime".

[Guynemer]

Folks, I (gasp) agree with Sloww here. No way in hell are we going to nuke Iraq, whether or not they use bio/chem weapons.

However, I think Sloww missed the bigger point on the thread, one I also agree with--it is disturbing and abhorrent that 60% of the public would favor using nukes in such a situation. It does not paint a pretty picture of Americans.

[TheStinger]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I didn't mean you, Stinger.
You're not prone to wild-eyed panic.

You should watch an old UK sitcom called Dads Army, it had a character called coroproal Jones who shouted Don't Panic at evreything. He also had the very un PC phrase abiyt the fuxxy wuzzies not liking it up em(he is talking about bayonets)

[SlowwHand]

I'm not a big believer in statistics, is why.
Statistics can be made to reflect any point you want them to make.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
I'm not a big believer in statistics, is why.
Statistics can be made to reflect any point you want them to make.

And I agree with you, however this is not scientific to believe

this at least tries to show the "american" opinion.... now if Saddam has made the poll the results would be understandable. Ok... he would probaly have 100% of Americans want to nuke Baghdad.

[TheStinger]

100% of Iraqi dictators with mustaches would say they didn't think the US should nuke Iraq(at least not whilst he is there)

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

I find this poll dubious as well. If WMD were used on American soil against American cities and civilians this poll may be valid, but I seriously doubt the stastics implied here as well.

[aahz_capone]

Why should we care that the public think nuking cities is a good strategic move if they gas (prepared) troops? The average American has little or no grasp of militray or diplomatic affairs.

"Nor should we listen to those who say "The voice of the poeple is the voice of God," for the turbulance of the mob is always close to insanity" - Alcuin