To nuke or not to nuke? (ISIS)

I am in complete agreement with you MAJ Robert Petrarca. If one thinks about it the A-Bomb would resolve this entire mess. We need to kill each and every last one of them and the A-Bomb is just what we need to get the job done with a quickness. We bombed innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, here there is nothing but evil that all the world wants to get rid of.

The Japanese are some of our best allies!

I know that the environmentalists will point to the long term damage that would be done if we "nuked" NW Iraq/ NE Syria. I will tell you that there isn't much to ruin out there. Very desolate. Little to no vegetation anywhere. So, I would say... go for it.

Well, we are the only country that has ever used them in war so there is that. Couple that with the fact that we would not only not be eliminating ISIS but we would be killing thousands of innocent people. Finally, those that we had on the fence or the radicals that we did not get would have a radioactive (literally and figuratively) sign to point at to galvanize the hatred towards the USA.

why don't we nuke all the commies and socialist in Russia and China along with a few others......we can always handle ISIS in a few years once we get some descent leadership in a couple years.....I don't mean the C word either ;)

"That is the question" (Angry Hamlet)

It's time

The biggest threat ISIS poses in my opinion is the psychological one. It's a little scary to watch someone saw a guy's head off with a steak knife while he obviously screams and gurgles once his lungs start to fill with blood - at least till his spinal cord is severed and he goes limp.

I was told that in WWII, we dropped a lot of 2-3ft long condoms all over Tokyo, labeled "Size: medium" on them. I'd say it made a statement. We should do the same to ISIS - their religion forbids any contact with anything made from a pig. Well, we in the South do have a big problem with an overpopulation of non-native wild hogs. I say we trap them, feed them the local roadkill, and ship them to known ISIS regions and let them loose.

Could you imagine how bad that would mess with someone? After he sees his cohort get trampled and eaten by a wild hog?

To start with ,the use of a nuke no matter how small the yield might be would open the lid on a host of negative things such as,!:Using it on such a target as ISIS would likely be a green light to any despots like N.Korea or Iran when they finally have one,to feel free to use theirs. 2:Using a nuke on such an unworthy target would very likely send the Russians,Chinese and everyone else (rightly so)to consider us the biggest threat.ISIS will have to be dealt with conventionally,it is not nukes that are needed to defeat them,it is moral courage and the absolute will to act and do what needs to be done by our leaders.Unfortunately in the west at this time in history,that is sorely lacking.
What is however not in short supply is hand wringing,cowardice and fecklessness.

If they would have done it back in 1980, I feel we wouldn't have this problem now.

New forum... The " BIG " message Is ludicrous. The " BIGGER " Message would be STAND the F*** America. This Liberal Idealism, Politically Correct, Pumpkin Headed Bangey Eyed Cambodian Relief Fund Poster Child Rhetoric is RIDICULOUS!!........

A nuclear strike affects more than just the country targeted due to the radioactive fallout. If it cannot be done conventionally we must be ready to consider the alternative. On a more direct approach, I believe we need to more closely screen our supposed allies and send no aid to any place where it may end up in the hands of radical idiots wanting to use it against us. Also, I think we need to change our rules of engagement to ensure our fighting men and women have the highest chance of returning home alive. Lastly, we need to drop to good guy policeman of the world image. If we have to go in a kick a country in the teeth, then we own that country until they have paid for our war expenses and we owe them not a dang thing. Last (but not least) we need to get the UN off of US soil as they have been working for years to take away our American way of life from us! When I run for President, things will change (until someone with $$$$$ hires some sniper to take me out - then hopefully my VP will take up the torch and America will get good and mad....) and people will be held accountable for violating their oaths of offices. I swore before God to support and defend the Constitution of the United States of America against all enemies foreign or domestic, and right now we have a lot of both to deal with! May God Bless America, and may Americans pull their heads out of the sand and fight for the rights they so casually use and sometimes abuse!

I also thought of using MOAB's, Daisy Cutter's, Fuel Air explosives and Carpet bombing on the larger ISIS groups. Mixed in with the Drones and the A-10 and Apache units to surgically hit leaders, logistics and smaller intelligence command and control. Then like in the "Art of War" hit ISIS weaker units with corporation's like the old "Black Water" Gun's for hire, that are not tied to the "Law's of War" like the Geneva or Hague Convention. These types of professionals can truly deliver the same fear and pain ISIS is delivering, without cutting off heads, but maybe some Hog Wash as I call it could be just as painful and change their methods? BTW - No Nukes - until one is known for us against America, Europe, Israel or any of our precious allies. I am very sure that the Israeli's would love to share a few "USED" ones in Syria or any other location if warranted!

Nuking does nothing to destroy an ideology. We nuked Japan in order to convince their government that their continued resistance was impossible. Governments tend to include the survival of their people/nation in their calculus of how to react to destructive force (Hitler was an exception, ordering the complete destruction of Germany - but even people within his own government worked to thwart his final orders).

Terrorist ideologues, on the other hand, almost welcome the overkill of massive bombing, artillery, or the (as yet theoretical) use of nuclear weapons on them. Although a nuclear strike on Mosul would kill many of the DAESHi thugs, it would also produce massive casualties among the population that is likely trapped there. Those casualties would make great propaganda for those continuing the campaign - "See, the US is really trying to murder as many Muslims as possible! We must defend the Faith!"

No we shouldn't, but we will eventually need ground troops to totally remove ISIS.