Nations go to war to win, not to lose. They develop the know-how to win, like we did when we developed the a - bomb to defeat Japan, which we did, saving 1 million yank lives. Billions were spent to develop the bomb and create a nuclear arsenal to protect ourselves and the free world. It worked. Those kamikaze-minded suiciders quit after two nukes showed them who’s who. Now islam is going after us the same way, killing, to date more than 4000 yanks as they perpetrate suicide bombings and sniper attacks.. We possess nuclear arms; our enemies do not, at least not yet. Yet they behead us, kill us, mutilate our dead bodies ,drag them thru the streets of their cities, threaten us if we bomb their so called "holy cities", and subject us to humiliation for “abusing†the terrorists we have captured as if we were supposed to coddle them instead. As this goes on we huddle in fear of what terrorists will do next. So what do we do? The unelected U.S. Supreme Court gives them “terrorists rights†to sue in our courts while “back home†they behead us. And we prosecute our own soldiers for not coddling them.’ That’s real intelligence, isn’t it? But this isn’t the start of this insanity - We could have won in Korea with nukes, but the liberals, panicking the administration, claimed Russia and China would nuke us if we nuked korea. The result: nukes sat idle, the war was a stalemate, 33,000 yanks died and now korea has come back with its own nukes, threatening us which wouldn’t have happened had we nuked them back then. Real good military strategy, isn’t it? We could have won in Vietnam, but the liberals claimed nukes weren’t nice because too many of our enemy should die. the result: we lost the war, and 59,000 yanks died, instead. Real smart. We went to war in Iraq in 1990, but pulled out when it was half over, leaving the regime in power. The result: another war had to be begun all over, which we thought we won. but yanks die daily while nukes sit idle. Some victory we “wonâ€. Real smart Now we are led blindly down the path to believe moslem nations such as Pakistan will assist us in rooting out alqueda. Al queda is paying everyone off to be on their side. Even if they weren’t, moslems wouldn’t act for us. Pakistan has nukes, supplied with red mercury and technology by the Russian mafia. And do you think al queda has no access to their nukes? Why do you think they operate out of the Pakistan-Afghan border? Because the weather is nice there or do they have a different reason for being in that location, in mind? When the Pakistani regime is overthrown by Islamic terrorists and fundamentalists, where do you think the Pakistani nukes will be aimed at? Monaco? Hw long will this “pearl harbor – 9/11 mentality†of sitting back, doing nothing decisive and procrastinating, persist? Must we wait until they blow us up, kill our children, brothers, sisters and parents one by one before we finally realize that we are justified in totally annihilating them and ending their threat for once and for all? In the meantime as al queda works incessantly to bring down the Pakistani government and get their nukes, other bandit and terrorist nations are clamoring to build their own nukes. Do you think these kamikaze minded maniacs will consider fallout or any similar considerations when they can and will nuke us, to make them hesitate to nuke? The liberals show photos of burnt Jap children to move us not to nuke. But what will our children look like if they nuke us? Do we have to await a third Pearl Harbor-9/11 before our sense of self-preservation and the preservation of our posterity is awakened and we excise the malignancy of islam from the face and body of mankind for once and for all? Must we sit idly by until al queda overthrows the Pakistani regime and seizes their nukes or gets the red mercury and know how from the Russian mafia to make their own? Must we apologize to them and coddle these terrorists and excuse ourselves for conducting war? And must they get rights to sue in our courts while they behead us? Did we spend those billions for marching down Main St. on the fourth of July, while yanks die daily and the arsenal sits idle or was there a more appropriate purpose to build the nuclear arsenal and protect ourselves? How long must we keep on huddling in fear and worry of what they will do to us next, while nukes sit idle? Must we wait until they nuke us before we come to our senses and wake up? What kind of fools are we? 0;9114: its fearmongering? Well, what is the USA doing to stop it? letting more and more yanks die every day? reply to snow web: You're doing your job? But are you succeeding? How long must you and your comrades keep dying before reason will prevail and victory is achieved?
Military - 6 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
that want happen because the free nation of the world will obliterate Pakistan if this happen . stop being such a fearmonger kid
2 :
Very well thought out and articulated monologue. First, as a former nuclear soldier, the last thing in the world that I and most of my fellow crewman ever wanted to see was our birds stand on their tails and fly. It was the Cold War then, and we knew that if we launched, we would certainly be dead within ten minutes of the rounds leaving the pad. The only question would be the manner of our deaths and by whom it would be accomplished. We were not afriad to die, we joined with the thought very much in the forefront of our minds. But, we also knew that our deaths would precede a million or more people who had done nothing to us and were little different than our own families. Nukes don't kill terrorists. Nukes don't kill facist regimes. Nukes don't destroy enemy governments. Of the tens of thousands of people (the lucky ones) who were vaporized in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the hundreds of thousands who died from exposure to radiation, the vast majority were innocent civilians, women, children, the elderly. And, regardless of the fact that Japan surrendered 6 days after the Nagasaki attack, the bombs were not the catalyst for surrender beyond the fact that they only hastened it. Surrender was coming, Fat Man and Little Boy only illustrated to the empire that the US was prepared to go further than Japan could. If there were a way to specifically target a nuclear device on those who are actually committing the evil, leaving NO collateral damage, I'd say go for it. But, there isn't. In the reality of war, we still need grunts to slug it out face to face with the enemy. Most who serve know that going in. It is the hallmark of their courage. Please don't cheapen the gift they offer by presuming a piece of technology can replace it with the push of a button. Cry for the soldiers we lose. Weep for the wounded. Cheer for those who return. Celebrate the sacrifice of every one of them. But, don't surrender to panic. And, unless you have stood watch on the wall yourself, don't even dare pretend to know the best course of action for those who have and do.
3 :
you should be a politician, here have a cookie, or better yet a star.
4 :
We are tax paying, hard-workin', gun-totin, bible-thumpin', a**kicking, better than anything else in history kind of fools. When push comes to shove, they know to send in Mother Green and her killing machine. Marines are here for one thing: "Our morale began to break when the dying Marines kept coming." -Japanese survivors captured at Tarawa. Marines don't quit until they are dead. And that commitment still holds. Just show us where they are and let us do our jobs. That's all we ask. Edit in response to poster: We, the military, don't make that decision. Our elected civilian leadership will turn us loose at the proper time when it comes to nukes......
5 :
It's Mutually Assured Destruction. No one, including the US, is going to launch a nuke, or everyone dies. And we apologize as long as we don't feel threatened. We haven't been in a serious war since WWII. Vietnam was terrible, but they weren't a real threat. We got rid of terrorists' rights when we were attacked, but now that we took the fight to a far away place, we feel free to apologize.
6 :
I might point out that the range, number, and proven effectiveness of Pakistan's nuclear arsenal is nothing compared to ours, or even to its neighbor India, at whom most of those nukes are aimed and were meant for. Also, Al Qaeda HATES Musharraf's government; they're not exactly in cahoots. We're providing quite a lot of support to help bolster his government against internal would-be saboteurs, and his military's effectiveness against them is actually reasonable. Al Qaeda's only really shown any kind of longevity or strength in the most remote, pro-Wahabbi enclaves, NOT the country as a whole. Our interest in Pakistan isn't only because of its proximity to Afghanistan, but because of its proximity to India, with whom we have pretty good relations... and generally it's a good idea to keep two friends from fighting, if at all possible, particularly when there are nukes involved. I don't think we should be coddling terrorists or villifying our own troops or any of those other things, of course; I just wanted to point out that Al Qaeda makes itself out to be much stronger than it is, and that our media is only too happy to oblige them.
