I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However...

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by ruffitt, Feb 27, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. ruffitt

    ruffitt *TFF Admin Staff* In Heaven Now

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2003
    Messages:
    2,872
    Location:
    Sparta, MI / Now In Heaven Also
    NeoDebo
    (9/22/01 8:35:37 pm)
    I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However...
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    I know that I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However, I have something weighing on my mind that I believe should be considered.

    Given that we are about to engage in nothing less than a war to eradicate all terrorists and all states that give them aid and assistance, and have stated in advance the extent of our intentions and of our commitment to the same, consider these facts from the viewpoint of some of our enemies.

    What are they to do? They know as well as we that they are unlikely to ever again be as strong as they are today. The know that their power, whatever its extent, can only erode with each passing day, with each missile, with each attack by us. This being true, I am concerned that we may be forcing them into a "use it or lose it" situation.

    If we are intent on attacking Iraq again and as we seem to be, in addition to Afganistan, and perhaps Lybia, Syria, and God only knows who else, AND if any of these countries have any weapons of mass destruction, then it seems to me that they are very likely to use them immediately. Sooner rather than later.

    When I think about what I just wrote, I become even more concerned. If, for example, Saddam Hussein is convinced that we are going to overthrow him regardless of whatever he might do, then he has no incentive to hold back anything. Does Iraq have any sort of nuclear capability at all? Biological weapons? Chemical weapons? If so, then I believe that we may see these used within the next few weeks.

    If it were me in position that he seems to be in, then I would most certainly do so. I am very fearful that our enemies may think this same way also. What do they have to lose? We have already stated that it is our intention to root them all out and eradicate them regardless of what we have to do.

    Are we indeed on the very brink?

    Someone, please, point out to me the flaw(s) in my thinking...

    AGunguy
    (9/22/01 8:44:49 pm)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Are we on the brink?

    Could be, but we are not captain of our fates sometimes in war. What it seems to boil down to is, good against evil. Win or lose its how you play the game, Americans with a good leader at the helm and the people behind him will prevail against the evil.

    With a bad leader like wimp Albert Gorken or Slick Willey we would most assuredly lose and suffer humiluating loss of face as a nation.

    Just remember what Patton said, you don't win a war by dying for your country, you win it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his. Or something like that.


    the real fredneck
    (9/22/01 9:18:46 pm)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    supposedly Saddam dosen't have any nukes, chemical weapons yes but limited delivery systems, bio weapons are still unproven (unless you count the smallpox contaminated blankets we gave to native Americans during the westward expansion) the only flaw with your logic as I see it Debo would be that if one of those states want to take that "free shot" with a weapon of mass destruction they will likely go to the front of the line for a real ass-kicking

    BlackGun
    (9/22/01 9:19:08 pm)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Debo: We are "the most powerful force on earth" as "we know it"! Violence and destruction has come to our home land., . If we're not able or ready to protect and defend it, then it appears to me that we are less than what we purport to be. The world is looking at us. We have been challenged. Should we sit back and wait till our land looks like the country of the far east or should we try and end it, meaning terrorism, now ,before we are the oppressed, starving, homeless, living in a waste land. Do you want to take it to them, or have them bring it to us again. As I recall, we have fought foreign countries on their soil. Do you want to fight the next world war on ours? I don't like debates and try to stay out of them, because I'm opinionated. Have faith and trust in Jesus Christ, he will being us, the USA, through this time of of trial. Many have died, many more will before this has ended. This is the price of freedom. We are a free country, as you sit with your family, safe in your home tonight.


    NeoDebo
    (9/23/01 6:18:27 am)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Re: BlackGun

    I agree with almost all that you say.

    My great concern, and my purpose for my original post, is this:

    IF any of these terrorists and/or their sponsoring states have ANY weapons of mass destruction (NBC), then they are likely to use them very soon. Like, for example, within the next few weeks.

    In my opinion, a terrorist NBC attack on us or on some of our friends is much greater now than it will be a bit later. If any of the target terrorists have any capability similiar to this, then such an attack is likely to come very soon, indeed.

    A single scud armed with a Nuke and launched against Israel, would truly change the world as we know it. A single scud armed with a nuke and launched from a small boat against New York or Washington, would truly change the world as we know it. Either would make the attack against the WTC pale in comparison.


    the real fredneck
    (9/23/01 6:44:27 am)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    if they have any capability (NBC) the weapon will likely be hand delivered just like the last ones

    hammer4nc
    (9/23/01 11:19:51 am)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Debo,

    Your "use it or lose it" fear may very well apply to terror cells already deployed in this country, who are holding NBC devices, or perceive they're about to be arrested (lets hope the FBI can chalk up a few points, at last!)

    Two (smart) elements I'm noticing of the Bush strategy, relative to foreign governments:

    1) an invitation to "wipe the slate clean", in effect to put aside differences with other countries, if they cooperate with us on the terrorist hunt.

    2) playing down the idea of joining a "unified" allied military action (i.e., NATO), in favor of quiet (maybe partial) individual agreements with arab nations. This might help those countries calm internal muslim reaction, once the shooting starts.

    Pakistan is having sanctions lifted, and getting big IMF financial promises, in exchange for allowing US bases. Bear in mind, their citizens include strong suppporters of Osama.

    Effectiveness of this strategy remains to be seen, but some very big carrots are being dangled behind the scenes, IMO. If established governments have been giving support to terrorists, they won't have a better time to pull back, and allow arrest of the BG's, so they can get the promised carrots. Likewise, if govts. are tied to attacks "from this day forward", they've got to know they're in for a world of hurt.

    I've only heard Iraq and Afghanistan come out hard against the US position, and it looks like the other Arab countries are holding their cards close, at this point (some internal disputes in Saudi?). Russia seems to be helping, or at least laying low.

    The big question mark, in my mind, is CHINA! One country with global designs, and the strength to act on them...

    Although they're not an arab country per se, they may perceive this as a golden opportunity to advance their own agenda (Taiwan, or who knows what else?) Have you heard ANYTHING from their corner?



    LIKTOSHOOT
    (9/23/01 11:55:22 am)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    HEY!!!! DEBO!!!!! I always like your minds workings, it allows for some deep and forward thinking......so here`s my limited, take.

    "Use them or loose them", though the limited terrorist might try.....might. They too are limited to aging technology and so are many of the one`s (countries) that may have them too. Their strike would be close to their own soil and no further, with that said......I would raise several......pose several questions to consider.

    Would this be a logical(?) decission to make, it might look good for a while and make them powerful, but think of the effect on them.....The first one`s to use these types of devices.....WHOA!!! Lets just say ole SADUM pops one on his closest neighbor.....nuke or bio. There is a lot of firepower over there, ours and others. Just how long do you think it would be for a direct and full out attack....we would not even have to use a nuke, even though I believe we have carried a few over there. The B-52`s that are there....AND THERE ARE A BUNCH, could lay waste to those country(s) in less that an hour. I like to think of those place`s over there as VERY LARGE, they are NOT.....most smaller than Texas....those would be the larger ones. The math, just using the B-52`s load could carpet those country(s) in a matter of just a few days and lay waste to all and never pop a nuke........mor e later, I love this stuff........SEE YA......LTS

    NeoDebo
    (9/23/01 11:57:16 am)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Re: hammer...

    This morning (Sun, 9/23/01) on the Beltway Boys: Chinese newsmen cheered when they heard of the attack on WTC...

    Great post, hammer, great post! Very insightful.

    Wife and I are now laying in extra grub and fresh gasoline. If we do get a major NBC attack soon (anywhere), the disruption to the infrastructure of our country may very well be catastrophic.

    ’T is the sunset of life gives me mystical lore,
    And coming events cast their shadows before...

    --Thomas Campbell (1777–1844)



    NeoDebo
    (9/23/01 12:21:18 pm)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Re: LTS

    As usual, another great post! Yes, I think that you have it nailed. However, I fail to see this as a deterrent to the terrorists. Consider:

    When the passengers in the jet that crashed in Penn. became aware the tragic events that just occurred and of coming tragedy that they would be a part of, they then chose to rush the terrorists, knowing that they would die as a result of their efforts. Had you been on that plane, would you not have been at the front of the charge?

    Reverse this and look at the situation from the viewpoint of the terrorists: They know that they are now finished regardless of what they do. Why not go out by striking mightly at your enemy? If they are going to die and go down like rats anyway, then what do they have to lose?

    Further, consider the terrible disruption to the world, to food supplies, gasoline, etc., if the U.S. did nuke someone. How many nukes would go? How much fallout? Would Russia stand still if we nuked Iran or Iraq? Would "WildCard" China do so? How about Pakistan if deadly fallout covers their country?

    The very best hope that I see now is to hope and pray that the terrorists do NOT have NBC capability now, and if they do have such, then we find and stop them before these NBC's can be used.

    I am very fearful that if NBC's are available to the terrorists in any quantity or quality, then we will see these used much sooner than we may now expect.

    There is indeed a great deal here that could become extremely nasty in a hurry.




    LIKTOSHOOT
    9/23/01 12:49:23 pm)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Limited thought #2. Use them or loose them.

    Debo, you have missed the middle part. "The terrorist", lets say they do the above and the other ones do decide to use them or loose them.

    The country harboring them ( The Mass populas) would have just seen what happens to you when you do this. I believe that they would then intern (country) invert on their own. This would be the start of the end of the terrorist movement and I believe this is the real mission and it will work.

    Remember this, until now....terrorism has been elsewhere and sort of had a romatic aire to it. It doesn`t any longer. Would you risk your entire country for a few radicals......I think not. What`cha think???, now to take it one more step, what will happen when a revolution happens in a country.....trying to overthrow their government.......will they be considered terrorist, like we were in the begining......scarey thought..................


    the real fredneck
    (9/23/01 1:42:12 pm)
    Re: I know I am not the sharpest tack in the box. However..
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    This morning Sect. of Defense Rumsfeld stated that the use of nukes hadn't been ruled out. Wonder if Carter really axed the nutron bomb? Would be perfect in this situation, limited fallout of any consequence, dosen't foul up the infrastructure, works great on those large crowds playing to the cameras with chants of "Death to America", penetrates caves and hardened targets, probably easier to hide the evidence than the Soviets use of sarin
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.