Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Nucleur Weapons On Muslim Countries!
Unexplained Mysteries Discussion Forums > News, Media & World Events > Conspiracies & Secret Societies
HurtingSpirit
I found myself thinking earlier, Yes I know thats a scary thought in itself, and I was curious to what the answer would be to a question I had.

Say we were to drop Nucleur weapons on the populace of Iraq, or Iran. Other then the obvious destruction it would have, Do you think that it could change the views of those people?? As an example of change, would be like the change by the japaneese after Hiroshima, where they dropped their old Bushido traditions, and started to respect their lives more after that.

I know a nucleur weapon would probably have retaliation, as well as other problems, but Im just curious, What would the mindset of the muslim world be after such an attack?? Would they throw away their bushido beliefs, and adopt a more civil manner of handling issues, such as the japaneese have?
Rosencruez
No.
turbonium
Outside of this idea being quite outlandish as it proposes the murder of countless innocents to achieve "peace", the analogy of Japan to Iran/Iraq does not work...

Bushido was the Samurai code of suicide before surrender. The Emperor was viewed as a God, basically the direct descendant of God, omnipotent and unbeatable. That changed with the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, because these weapons caused unheard of destruction. Japanese people then knew they and their Emperor, who agreed to Japan's surrender, were no longer "invincilbe".

In contrast, the Muslim nations of today are of course well aware they do not possess the advanced weapons of the Western nations', such as nukes. They also know the sheer size and scope of US arms is unmatched anywhere.

You can't "nuke" a nation, or a religion, into peace. All you would accomplish with an unprovoked nuclear attack is mass death of innocent people, and an extremely shocked, anguished, amd enraged group of survivors (if there even are any).
gothikchile13
QUOTE(turbonium @ Feb 10 2006, 02:19 AM) [snapback]1056429[/snapback]

You can't "nuke" a nation, or a religion, into peace. All you would accomplish with an unprovoked nuclear attack is mass death of innocent people, and an extremely shocked, anguished, amd enraged group of survivors (if there even are any).


Simple: don't let there be any survivors.

--Jon
Unlimited
QUOTE(gothikchile13 @ Feb 10 2006, 02:31 PM) [snapback]1056613[/snapback]

Simple: don't let there be any survivors.


eerie thread...I think the world vowed that these weapons would never be used again. mellow.gif
HurtingSpirit
QUOTE(gothikchile13 @ Feb 10 2006, 02:31 PM) [snapback]1056613[/snapback]

Simple: don't let there be any survivors.

--Jon


Well then that goes against the thread topic.. The point of it would be, so that the survivors see that they sacrifice the well being of their entire families by doing the stupid sh** that they do.
Rykster
What I think is being overlooked here is the fact that the entire world, or at least the vast majority, would undoubtedly condem and quite possibly attack America after such an action.

In my opinion, the best way to deal with the Middle East would be to harness fusion et al for energy and end our dependence on the ME for petroleum products. Then the world could isolate them and let 'em fight it out amongst themselves as they have done for thousands of years.

Let's work together to acheive the technologies that will allow us to range far and wide from Earth so that all of humanities eggs are no longer in the same basket.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.