American Hiroshima: yes to if, no to when
POSTED BY: HKCavalier
UPDATED: Friday, July 25, 2025 19:29
VIEWED: 11080
PAGE 1 of 10
Hey, everybody, how's everybody doing today? I haven't posted this week because the RWED has suddenly erupted in my personal life and I've been so down hearted about the whole mess.
A close friend of mine has been so frightened by this "American Hiroshima" nonsense that he's started advocating some bizarre brinkmanship shenanigans. See, he's gay and HIV positive and (heretofore) a very liberal artsy-fartsy intellectual type of guy. But the other day he was saying that if George W. Bush had any balls he would make a public statement to the world that if any terrorist sets off a nuclear device on American soil, that the United States would then go right ahead and vaporize Mecca and Medina.
He wanted to know my opinion on this matter. I told him it was an appalling idea. He said that he was in no way advocating going through with it, but that as a sabre rattling ploy, he felt it would make any Islamic fundies think twice about dropping the bomb. I very politely told him he had to be out of his fricken gourd to think that terrorists could be controlled in this way, to say nothing of the fact that it would be the single most infamous thing an American president has ever said.
Anyway, if you've followed certain threads on this board--you know the ones--the ones where two stalwart champions tilt at each other's windmills for pages and pages, you know how he and I passed the next couple hours or so. Just having this kind of discussion with one of my oldest friends makes me nauseous.
Anyway, anyway, getting back to the board and the topic at hand: this whole "American Hiroshima" thing hinges on the eminently questionable assertion of "not if, but when." Ladies and gentlemen, if you will permit me, I am here today to call bull
on that. That's right folks, please, lets all take a deep breath and realize that a nuclear strike against this country is no more inevitable today than ever. Don't you know that this kind of "not if, but when" fearmongering nonsense was the order of the day back in the 50's? Didn't the Ruskies have a world-dominating ideology designed with the sole purpose of destroying "our way of life?" The USSR had the means, the motive, the opportunity...and what did they do? Yeah.
"American Hiroshima" scares the bejeebers out of folk. Not to get too terribly psyche 101 on y'all, but I think it's charge is due in no small part to the fact that we are the ONLY nation on Earth to have ever dropped a nuclear bomb on an enemy and deep down we fear that we just might deserve payback. Well, I'm here to tell you that we don't. We really don't.
And another thing, if a nuclear bomb were to go off in this country, it would simply not be the end of the world. I'm gonna say that again: if a nuclear bomb were to go off in this country, it would simply not be the end of the world. (Remember to breath.) It would not be the "end of American innocence" either. It would be terrible, many lives would be lost, for a lot of years to come, but America would go on.
We'd go on, like Japan did, like Germany after Dresden. The world is getting too small for us to go on exporting our violence. We will never stop terrorism through murderous means. "American Hiroshima" can be avoided if we truly want to avoid it. We can find other solutions to the world's problems than violence and retribution. That is, if we have the balls.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, say that there is a nuclear strike, some sort of dirty bomb maybe. It kills tens of thousands. Now what does the President do? If he does nothing, he is held to be weak and terrorists are encouraged. If he destroys the two most sacred places for Muslims, he makes America the enemy of all Islam in perpetuity. Not just for twenty, thirty, forty years. Forever.
Don't forget, you're dealing with terrorists who are prepared to blow themselves to pieces. They'll give their lives to demonstrate their commitment to the cause. There's no threat that will stop them.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by SimonWho:
Well, say that there is a nuclear strike, some sort of dirty bomb maybe. It kills tens of thousands. Now what does the President do? If he does nothing, he is held to be weak and terrorists are encouraged. If he destroys the two most sacred places for Muslims, he makes America the enemy of all Islam in perpetuity. Not just for twenty, thirty, forty years. Forever.
Don't forget, you're dealing with terrorists who are prepared to blow themselves to pieces. They'll give their lives to demonstrate their commitment to the cause. There's no threat that will stop them.
See there? Right to the heart of the issue. If we do nothing, they're emboldened and attack us. If we retaliate, they're enraged and attack us. Either way, we're gonna get it. Have dealt up close and personal with their ilk, I can tell you: in my experience, they just don't respond to reason. They hate us not for some specific thing we've done (at least, not originally for some specific thing), but because our way of life is an affront to Islam. They around thinking about places like Las Vegas and spring-break-Daytona-Beach and people like Paris Hilton and just get madder and madder. And because we're infidels, they not only believe they're justified, but they believe they're obligated to kill us man, woman and child.
To my way of thinking, ain't no way to reason with that. All you can do is hunt them down and kill them all before they get you first.
_____________________________
Edited to add:
Before anyone freaks out and accuses me of wanting to kill all Arabs or all Muslims, let me just say that I'm not referring to all of either group. I'm referring to terrorists.
_______________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by InevitableBetrayal:
All you can do is hunt them down and kill them all before they get you first.
Simply not possible. Got any other ideas?
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
We all get mad thinking of people like Paris Hilton....
"I have never understood why it should be necessary to become irrational in order to prove that you care. Or indeed, why it should be necessary to prove it at all." -Kerr Avon
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:Quote:
Originally posted by InevitableBetrayal:
All you can do is hunt them down and kill them all before they get you first.
Simply not possible.
True, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't give the old college try. "I prefer a straight fight to all this sitting around." (Yes, I know I mangled that one all to hell and gone).
_______________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by spikeandjezebel:
We all get mad thinking of people like Paris Hilton....
Point. But I don't usually pick up an AK and go out spray down the local market place in my anger against Paris. I usually just rant at the TV for a spell, until my blood pressure resembles something like normal.
_______________________________________________
I wish I had a magical wish-granting plank.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by InevitableBetrayal:Quote:
Originally posted by HKCavalier:Quote:
Originally posted by InevitableBetrayal:
All you can do is hunt them down and kill them all before they get you first.
Simply not possible.
True, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't give the old college try. "I prefer a straight fight to all this sitting around."
IB, IB, no, that's exactly what it does mean. Your "old college try" only exasorbates the problem you're trying to fix. Killing terrorist will never stop terrorism. Ever. Terrorism feeds on what you advocate. Much as you may prefer a straight fight, a straight fight is not possible. You gotta wrap your head around this, we all do. There's an old Chinese saying: if we do not change direction, we will end up where we're headed.
HKCavalier
Hey, hey, hey, don't be mean. We don't have to be mean, because, remember, no matter where you go, there you are.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Would it make a differance were the terrorists strike. For example. Destroying Washington or New York would be worth a strike at Mecca. But destrouying Orangeburg, South Carolina (while a tragedy for the fine folk there-bouts) just isnt the same thing.
Perhaps a compromise is to destroy Damascus or Tehran before we destroy Mecca.
Also, destruction of Mecca given the right conditions and precedants could deliver a great psychological blow to Islam. Say Blair (since London seems to be the popular target these days and there's no reason that Bush and the US need be the nuclear vengance seekers) got on TV gave them warning and weeks to evacuate and publically dared Allah, if he exists, to stop the destruction. If Allah does, well then we all convert to Islam and live happily ever after, if not, then maybe they need to reevaluate their belief system. Either way we'd all have a lot better understanding of the way the world works.
I wonder if a British nuclear bomb is really more cultured then an American bomb or if it just has a snooty accent and attitude.
H
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, as one of our great thinkers once said, "Britain invented the nuclear bomb, we did. Only we made the Americans test it in their backyard first. Can you imagine testing a nuclear bomb in Peckham? Yeah, not a good idea. Particularly as there would be no way to tell if the test was successful."
The idea of a like for like attack is dubious at best. They attack like terrorists and we attack like a sovereign nation. They kill 3,000 people and destroy two major buildings. We invade two of their countries and complete replace the governments (killing tens of thousands along the way, obviously). It doesn't necessarily follow that their nuclear strike should be followed by us matching them in that particular manner. Why not, say, take over Iran, Saudi Arabia, UAE and Kuwait?
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME