War on Terrorism

The place where serious discussions can take place.

Moderators: MrVulcan, thunderchero

Post Reply

Please read post then vote

A
1
9%
B
10
91%
C
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 11

Harrie
Commander
Commander
Posts: 1382
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 2:00 am
Location: Defending Antioch from the Sassanid Empire
Contact:

War on Terrorism

Post by Harrie » Thu Jan 12, 2006 2:04 am

I was recently given an assignment in my History class to write a 15 page report about the "War on terrorism". So i have a question for everyone who reads this, I esspecially want the oppinoins of people out side the United States.

The questions is of a hypothetical attack:
How do you think the people of United States would react to a Nuclear attack, not just a dirty bomb an actual Thermonuclear Weapon of Mass Destruction, on American soil in New York City, Chicago, Huston, or San Fransico?

A) Fall to their knees in surrender giving up all hope for their way of life, all the luxuries, freedoms, ect that come with being an American.

B) Take the hit and strike back with the fury of an avenging angel against any and all that support the attackers.

C) Sit there, pout, and whine like a child because someone hit them in the gut.

Now before you go up there and vote I want you to give this some serious thought. If you want you can vote and not say anything or you can leave your oppinion.

Also I want to make it clear that I am NOT talking about only Islamic radical but any one that could be considered a terrorist.
The Roman Empire did not create prosperity and come to be feared by having meetings and doing paperwork; they did this by killing all who opposed them.

User avatar
cecilzero1
Past Administrator
Past Administrator
Posts: 2226
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2003 2:00 am
Location: from the Dark Side of the moon
Contact:

Post by cecilzero1 » Thu Jan 12, 2006 3:46 am

i chose b its what we always do when someone attacks us then we make sure it never happens agian....
Image

User avatar
Zered003
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 2:00 am
Location: Oklahoma
Contact:

Post by Zered003 » Thu Jan 12, 2006 6:16 am

I chose B. 3 good examples of sneak attacks that gained a response of total war.

1) War of 1812- was started after the US public thought the English bombed one of America's warships in Cuba.

2) Dec. 7 1941- Japan destroyed the Pacific fleet at Pearl Harbor. America enters WW2. Allies end up winning behind the industrial might of America.

3) Sept 11, 2001- Targets in Washington DC and New York City are hit. Since then 2 governments that were friendly to the terrorist have fallen and the terrorist are hiding in caves.

Now I am from America.
Now it must also be said that what started the war with England in 1812 was acually an accident but tensions were so high that anything would have sent the 2 countries into war. That was why the design of battleships changed after such a horrible engineering flaw of all military ships of the time.
I know that America by itself did not win WW2. But you have to admit that America either enabled victory or shortened the time to get there.
It has been proven through out history that every time that someone has either attacked America or been perceived to attack. America has returned the favor with its complete might.
The main problem most enemies of the US have is the fact they are morons. They would attack the most public site in the US but do nothing to acually slow the production of the America industrial machine. Which there is no other country on the face of the Earth that can rival the production capabilities of America.
Anybody who acually looks at the facts of history would have to say that I atleast have the overall facts correct. The sad thing is most people never learn the true facts of history. Most of these details I have learned either off the History Channel or American History in college. Now if I have forgotten any of the details that should be included or modified in this post then I welcome anybody to say so. Also, if anyone disagrees with me based purely on the fact that they hate America then I can atleast respect your opinion b/c that is what we are taught (atleast what I was taught was the meaning of being American). To respect the ideas of others even when they disagree with us. But this is how I see it.
To conclude. Every time in history that America has been attacked. It has always ended up making the public rise up and want to strike down those who attacked them. So, why would it change now? A republic which America is, can only have a 7 year war if there is a sneak attack to start it. Otherwise public opinion would go to nothing over time. Well, that is all for now. Hope this helps.
I enjoy the moments of peace and quite.
You know, when you dont think about anything.
I enjoy all 3 seconds of the day when that happens.

User avatar
Elrond
Past Administrator
Past Administrator
Posts: 2629
Joined: Mon May 03, 2004 2:00 am

Post by Elrond » Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:03 am

Yep, I'm with Cecil and Zered on this. Bring the fury of an avenging angry and pissed off angel against those who are and support the attackers.
Dead

Titan
Cadet 4th Year
Cadet 4th Year
Posts: 137
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2004 2:00 am
Contact:

Post by Titan » Thu Jan 12, 2006 9:04 am

I'd say B but I think it would be justified, i mean if anyone used a nuclear on any country it would start WW3 anyway. If america was attacked by a nuclear weapon of any sort it wouldn't just be the americans that strike back, i'd think most of the UN would become involved as use of nuclear weapons is such a significant event. When america is attacked in anyway they will strike back as that is what they do, of course they don't think of the aftermath of their actions first.

p.s. I'm from the UK.

EAS_Intrepid
Ensign
Ensign
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 am
Location: On the front lines - fighting for liberty!
Contact:

Post by EAS_Intrepid » Thu Jan 12, 2006 10:35 am

Regarding the US foreign policy in the 20th century, I say "B".
I actually need to write an essay about the consequences of the nuclear weapon for the US foreign and defence policy just from 1945 to 1962 and I asked myself that question, too.

The US will respond with deadly force, as soon as the CIA determined the current geographic positions.
The armed forces might even go to Defcon-2 and prepare for a quick strike against a target chosen by the (hopefully alive) president. First and Second Fleet of the US Navy will be ordered to patrol the US sea borders and to prevent any strikes of certain nations like Iran, that may want to use the short window of vulnerability to cause further damage to the USA.
Then the LA-688 and Virginia class attack subs of the USN will carry out missile strikes against training camps, not just to compromise terrorist trainig, also to intimidate others. ("If you attack us, we strike back!")
When the CIA found out where the leaders and background men of the nuclear attack are, air- and further missile strikes agains their positions will be taken out.
If there is a country that directly (or even indirectly) supported the attack then it will have the most modern and lethal armed forces of the world upon it - it won't survive.
A full ground offensive will be launched, starting with an Invasion supported by the Amphibious attack ships (USS Tarawa and others) and the USMC, 101st Airborne and 1. USMC Division, Green Berets and US Delta Forces.

The UN, EU and CIS (former Soviet Block) will stand behind the USA. It is very likely that Russia joins forces in major and minor engagement, since Moscow is an attractive target for terrorist cells of Middle-Asia and the Far East and these cells may try to acquire nuclear weapons tech.

I would also say, that it depends on the President and his advisors, as well as on the country that supported the attack. (A few Qaidas in their holes can't build a nuke, NEVER!)

My personal opinion about that: IF there are some terrorists attacking ANY country with a nuclear weapon, we should strike 'em and bring to them the hell on Earth!

But it is actually more likely, that India and Pakistan strike each other.
The US are not a good target, since its President has a loose finger on the trigger.
Western Europe, like London, Paris, Berlin, LeHague, Bruxelles could be a target, as it is a center of commerce for East-Europe, Western-Asia, the Middle and Near East and Africa.
Then there is Russia. With its harsh "intervention" in Chechnya it was a rather regular target for terrorist attacks, like on the Moscow Musical "North-East" hall in 2000, It think..., and strikes against Moscow's s subway.

P.S: I am European from Berlin.
Fighting member of the Four Star Alliance!
It has begun...

Neil
Cadet 4th Year
Cadet 4th Year
Posts: 181
Joined: Sun Oct 30, 2005 2:00 am
Location: USS Britannia (England)

Post by Neil » Thu Jan 12, 2006 12:17 pm

I said B. If America was nuked then they wouldn't respond with Conventional Forces and Weapons, they'd respond with a full salvo of ICBMs! I'm English by the way.
"Don't try to be a great man, just be a man. Let history make it's own judgements." - Zefram Cochrane

EAS_Intrepid
Ensign
Ensign
Posts: 394
Joined: Sun Jan 23, 2005 3:00 am
Location: On the front lines - fighting for liberty!
Contact:

Post by EAS_Intrepid » Fri Jan 13, 2006 8:55 am

A nuclear response is possible, when you have a trigger happy president like George W. Bush (Iraq War) or a someone spending vast amounts of money to overwhelm the enemy by the sheer military budget like Ronal Reagan (Strategic Defence Initiative SDI).
However, any General or Admiral, Military Advisor or Defense Minister having just a little expierence with foreign politics would not agree with a nuclear strike and the President willbe second-guessed and questioned by the Congress, the Senate, the NATO, UN and others, even if NATO and UN and EU stand behind the USA.

However, you cannot defeat terrorists by nuking hole areas. You would just show, that you would use ANY method to enforce your nations interests.
Fighting member of the Four Star Alliance!
It has begun...

User avatar
Zered003
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Lieutenant-Junior Grade
Posts: 659
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2003 2:00 am
Location: Oklahoma
Contact:

Post by Zered003 » Sat Jan 14, 2006 5:18 am

If America was attacked by a nuclear attack. They would only respond with what force was needed.

Also a small edit. In my first post I meant to put the Spanish-American war instead of the War of 1812. I learned of about 100 years of historical events in 2 days in that college course. It has been a few years since that class as well. :oops: :oops: :oops:
Except for the name of the war I got everything else.
I enjoy the moments of peace and quite.
You know, when you dont think about anything.
I enjoy all 3 seconds of the day when that happens.

Twitch
Commander
Commander
Posts: 1321
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 2:00 am
Location: L.A. CA USA

Post by Twitch » Thu Jan 19, 2006 3:19 pm

Just get real, Bush or nobody else is going to nuke anyone. If a terrorist nuke is set off in the US there ain't nobody to nuke inretailition. It was way different in the Cold War days when point of launch of ICBMs could easily be traced.
http://intergate.cccoe.k12.ca.us/abomb/ ... climax.jpg
The Borg will rock your world!

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests