[andyt]

No, we really won't. It's only in your frothy mind. Exterminating 1.6 billion, mixed in with other populations, won't happen. And to suggest that it should, is not what we did to the Germans or Japanese, most of whom survived the war, it's what the Germans tried to do to the Jews. Disgusting that you can't see that. What countries are you going to conquer and hold to put down Islamic terror? Or even, what countries are you going to rase, kill everybody, to do the same?

Who is this we, anyway, white man? There aren't enough Western people to methodically wipe out all or even most Muslims. This is not like the Turks invading Europe - army against army. These are small groups of fanatical Muslims, spread around the world.

It is absolutely sickening that you represent the US armed forces. Didn't know they were filled with such scum.

[2Cdo]

andyt andyt:

Just more nonsense.

All ready to bow down and kiss the feet of the new caliphate.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

Exterminating 1.6 billion

And this exists only in your mind.

I said we'd do what we did to the Germans and the Japanese. Your syphilitic brain came up with the other stuff and now you've outraged yourself.

[wildrosegirl]

andyt andyt:

Who is this we, anyway, white man?

I believe, as usual, he's referring to the God fearing, gun toting, self righteous, self appointed superior, hypocrite Americans.

It amuses me how they don't see the parallels between their own nation and the "vermin" they're continually "fighting for justice" against. I suppose it's a difficult task when one's head is so far up one's anus. In all fairness, I'm sure the life-long brainwashing doesn't help. Nonetheless, it doesn't make the non-stop blathering any more palatable.

[BartSimpson]

wildrosegirl wildrosegirl:

I suppose it's a difficult task when one's head is so far up one's anus.

You would know.

[wildrosegirl]

Of course. I see it all the time.

Go spew your horseshit elsewhere.

[BartSimpson]

wildrosegirl wildrosegirl:

Of course. I see it all the time.

Go spew your horseshit elsewhere.

Perhaps you'd like to read what I posted instead of just getting outraged over what Andy wishes I'd posted?

[andyt]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

andyt andyt:

Exterminating 1.6 billion

And this exists only in your mind.

I said we'd do what we did to the Germans and the Japanese. Your syphilitic brain came up with the other stuff and now you've outraged yourself.

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

At this point I consider it an inevitability that the followers of the Madman of Medina will nuke a Western city. At that point we'll either surrender or do to them what we did to the Germans and the Japanese.

You're right. I didn't think it thru and I'm sorry.

Now. What will "we" do to whom, exactly, if the followers of the madman of medina nuke a western city? Who is it that has this capability? This is a country that does this? (I doubt it)? Then sure we can go to war with them and "pacify" them - except I doubt they will be as easy to win the peace with as with Germany and Japan. It it's not done by a country, but a terrorist group - applying what was done to Germany and Japan to that situation is idiotic, and you should know better.

Look at Astan. Harbored the terrorists that caused the largest terror attack on US soil. What did the schrubster do? Hire local mercenaries to go after Bin laden while he played silly bugger in Iraq. Outcome? No Bin Laden (since the locals just pocketed the money, then got more money from BL to not find him.) Many lives and much treasure spent in Astan - is it pacified? Then in Iraq, instead of a contained dictator who kept the people in line, the invasion created what ultimately became ISIS. Much more of a threat than Hussein ever was. Good plan. I"m sure your germany or Japan plan will have a similar outcome, except on a much more disastrous scale.

[2Cdo]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

wildrosegirl wildrosegirl:

Of course. I see it all the time.

Go spew your horseshit elsewhere.

Perhaps you'd like to read what I posted instead of just getting outraged over what Andy wishes I'd posted?

Exactly why I refer to him by his new handle "LyingSackofShit".

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

You're right. I didn't think it thru and I'm sorry.

Apology accepted.

andyt andyt:

Now. What will "we" do to whom, exactly, if the followers of the madman of medina nuke a western city? Who is it that has this capability? This is a country that does this? (I doubt it)? Then sure we can go to war with them and "pacify" them - except I doubt they will be as easy to win the peace with as with Germany and Japan. It it's not done by a country, but a terrorist group - applying what was done to Germany and Japan to that situation is idiotic, and you should know better.

Look at Astan. Harbored the terrorists that caused the largest terror attack on US soil. What did the schrubster do? Hire local mercenaries to go after Bin laden while he played silly bugger in Iraq. Outcome? No Bin Laden (sine the locals just pocketed the money, the got more money from BL to not find him.) Many lives and much treasure spent in Astan - is it pacified? Then in Iraq, instead of a contained dictator who kept the people in line, the invasion created what ultimately became ISIS. Much more of a threat than Hussein ever was. Good plan. I"m sure your germany or Japan plan will have a similar outcome, except on a much disastrous scale.

Well, I suppose the reaction to a Muslim nuke being deployed really depends on who they use it on.

If they use it on Sweden, for instance, the Swedes will probably purge the Muslims from their country since they're going that way already.

But say it's Berlin, Paris, or London? The initial NATO response will probably be along the lines of the Iraq or Afg. wars.

If it's the USA? Anymore I'm not sure. Maybe it'll take three or more nukes to get the American people to pay attention.

But what if it's China or Russia that get hit? I doubt that either country would have any moral compunctions against carrying out the eradication of Islam and I don't see the West getting involved. To the contrary, we'd probably take in refugees and then instantly regret doing so. We may even make ourselves targets to a vindictive China or Russia.

If they nuke Israel then Israel already has a policy to use nukes against some 200+ targets across the Islamic world. I do not doubt for one second that they'll implement this response exactly as promised even if it means the complete destruction of Israel. They call it the "Masada Protocol" for a good reason.

What I would do is systematically invade and deal with the radical clerics and jihadis the same as we did the Nazis and the Japanese militarists.

And just as we proscribed pro-Nazi and pro-militarist materials we'd have to proscribe the Koran and the teaching of it. Occupy their countries for a generation or two to make sure the philosophy is contained and then welcome them into the community of nations.

More likely the actual reaction will be one extreme or the other. We'll surrender (in some way or another) or we'll nuke them all when the magnitude of a ground war is realized.

Of course, this is all speculation.

But I consider the idea of the Muslims using a nuke an inevitability.

[andyt]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

andyt andyt:

Now. What will "we" do to whom, exactly, if the followers of the madman of medina nuke a western city? Who is it that has this capability? This is a country that does this? (I doubt it)? Then sure we can go to war with them and "pacify" them - except I doubt they will be as easy to win the peace with as with Germany and Japan. It it's not done by a country, but a terrorist group - applying what was done to Germany and Japan to that situation is idiotic, and you should know better.

Look at Astan. Harbored the terrorists that caused the largest terror attack on US soil. What did the schrubster do? Hire local mercenaries to go after Bin laden while he played silly bugger in Iraq. Outcome? No Bin Laden (sine the locals just pocketed the money, the got more money from BL to not find him.) Many lives and much treasure spent in Astan - is it pacified? Then in Iraq, instead of a contained dictator who kept the people in line, the invasion created what ultimately became ISIS. Much more of a threat than Hussein ever was. Good plan. I"m sure your germany or Japan plan will have a similar outcome, except on a much disastrous scale.

Well, I suppose the reaction to a Muslim nuke being deployed really depends on who they use it on.

If they use it on Sweden, for instance, the Swedes will probably purge the Muslims from their country since they're going that way already.

But say it's Berlin, Paris, or London? The initial NATO response will probably be along the lines of the Iraq or Afg. wars.

If it's the USA? Anymore I'm not sure. Maybe it'll take three or more nukes to get the American people to pay attention.

But what if it's China or Russia that get hit? I doubt that either country would have any moral compunctions against carrying out the eradication of Islam and I don't see the West getting involved. To the contrary, we'd probably take in refugees and then instantly regret doing so. We may even make ourselves targets to a vindictive China or Russia.

If they nuke Israel then Israel already has a policy to use nukes against some 200+ targets across the Islamic world. I do not doubt for one second that they'll implement this response exactly as promised even if it means the complete destruction of Israel. They call it the "Masada Protocol" for a good reason.

What I would do is systematically invade and deal with the radical clerics and jihadis the same as we did the Nazis and the Japanese militarists.

And just as we proscribed pro-Nazi and pro-militarist materials we'd have to proscribe the Koran and the teaching of it. Occupy their countries for a generation or two to make sure the philosophy is contained and then welcome them into the community of nations.

More likely the actual reaction will be one extreme or the other. We'll surrender (in some way or another) or we'll nuke them all when the magnitude of a ground war is realized.

Of course, this is all speculation.

But I consider the idea of the Muslims using a nuke an inevitability.

Who are the Muslims that will do this? This the the problem - you focus on the religion, instead of the group who will actually do it. That's why I thought you were talking about all Muslims. Who will do this?

A country? Which one? REad the difficulties I pointed out about pacifying a Muslim country - much harder than Germany or Japan.

But more likely (not likely at all, IMO) it will be a terror group. Trying to deal with them has proven much harder.

As for Sweden, of course they couldn't do much, unless NAto were to step in. Probably they would do what you desire tho, and go after the local Muslims - what a mess that would be. Unless of course they do it right - as you say, go after the radicals, not all Muslims. Their civil liberties would take a hit, but with an event like that, who could blame them.

But I think you're way overstating the likelihood of this happening.

[andyt]

You know, you would do a lot better if you were more clear who you are talking about, than just saying "the muslims."

Or when you say "The followers of the Madman of Medina" that includes all Muslims. They're not all going to explode that nuke, or be responsible for it. So say some of "The followers of the Madman of Medina" and you'd be much clearer. But I'm not sure you really want to be clear at all.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

Who are the Muslims that will do this? This the the problem - you focus on the religion, instead of the group who will actually do it. That's why I thought you were talking about all Muslims. Who will do this?

A country? Which one? REad the difficulties I pointed out about pacifying a Muslim country - much harder than Germany or Japan.

But more likely (not likely at all, IMO) it will be a terror group. Trying to deal with them has proven much harder.

This is where it gets complicated. As we are seeing with ISIS the lines between terror groups and countries tends to blur. ISIS is principally being bankrolled by the Saudis and by some members of the House of Saud. In this case it is a government sponsoring terror. On the other side right now we have Iran sponsoring the Houthis, Hamas, and some of the Iraqi militias.

Trying to discern the Arabs and even the Persians along Western lines is foolish. Ultimately, and at the end of the day there is just Islam as a common thread to unify these people. There won't be a perfect answer to the problem when it arises but if it boils down to preventing another city from being nuked then (hopefully) Western nations will elect to take even an imperfect action to preserve their countries and their people.

andyt andyt:

As for Sweden, of course they couldn't do much, unless NAto were to step in. Probably they would do what you desire tho, and go after the local Muslims - what a mess that would be. Unless of course they do it right - as you say, go after the radicals, not all Muslims. Their civil liberties would take a hit, but with an event like that, who could blame them.

But I think you're way overstating the likelihood of this happening.

Not really. The nationalists in Sweden are on the upswing and in the next round of elections are expected to take over several cities along with seats in Parliament. Anti-immigrant sentiment is growing by leaps and bounds in Sweden as young people are rejecting the liberalism of their parents.

What's on tap for Sweden even without a nuke is the tightening of immigration followed by the deportation of immigrants convicted of crimes and that will eventually be followed by the deportation of immigrants deemed 'unfit'. <-- All of which are topics of discussion in Sweden right now.

$1:

You know, you would do a lot better if you were more clear who you are talking about, than just saying "the muslims."

Or when you say "The followers of the Madman of Medina" that includes all Muslims. They're not all going to explode that nuke, or be responsible for it. So say some of "The followers of the Madman of Medina" and you'd be much clearer. But I'm not sure you really want to be clear at all.

Given a choice I truly believe that a fair number of Muslims will renounce Islam in order to live a secular life. Part of the reason the religion commands the death of people who leave it is much the same as why the communists in Russia and China used to kill people who wanted to leave. The mere act of leaving is a condemnation of the system.

I know a Somali family that moved away from Minneapolis and embraced Christianity. They wanted out of Islam in the worst way and when they had the opportunity to put it behind them they did. I can't imagine they're alone.

So some will choose to leave Islam of their own free will. They can be made examples to the others and more will be convinced to leave it, too. Some will be killed by other Muslims for doing so and it'll be incumbent upon us to hunt those killers down and deal with them ruthlessly.

At the end of it all there will be a different cultural view of Islam or perhaps there will not be Islam at all.

The British put an end to the barbaric practices of the Hindus over the course of a century and the fruit of their efforts is an India that is taking its place among world leaders. The Brits were ruthless but the fruit of their effort speaks to the wisdom of what they sought to accomplish.

Freed of the chains of Islam I believe the Arab and Persian countries will likewise eventually become world leaders who will recapture the rich heritage of art, science, and learning that they were known for prior to the advent of Islam.

[andyt]

What is really complicated is that Saudi Arabia is an "ally" of the US. Which makes all of this so much bullshit - fight ISIS on the one hand, support the supporter of ISIS on the other. It's why the West is not just a victim here.

Muslims aren't going to renounce Islam en masse. The best way to have them become more moderate is having their reformation. Unfortunately it all plays out on the world stage now, instead of being confined to one region and one religion. We should be supporting much more those that do want to reform Islam. The type of language you and others use doesn't help there, just drives them toward the other side. Thankfully, CSIS and the RCMP seem to be aware of this too.

[BartSimpson]

andyt andyt:

What is really complicated is that Saudi Arabia is an "ally" of the US. Which makes all of this so much bullshit - fight ISIS on the one hand, support the supporter of ISIS on the other. It's why the West is not just a victim here.

I agree. And the best way to defund the Saudis is energy independence on our part.

andyt andyt:

Muslims aren't going to renounce Islam en masse.

The Japanese addiction to militant Bushido was analogous to militant Islam and if the Japanese can be disabused of their ways then so can the Muslims. But nothing will happen until and unless we insist that they change.

andyt andyt:

The best way to have them become more moderate is having their reformation.

Agreed. And either they can reform or we may end up having to reform them. Given the way they structure things I doubt it will be an internal movement that brings about change in Islam.

andyt andyt:

Unfortunately it all plays out on the world stage now, instead of being confined to one region and one religion. We should be supporting much more those that do want to reform Islam. The type of language you and others use doesn't help there, just drives them toward the other side. Thankfully, CSIS and the RCMP seem to be aware of this too.

I'm sorry my impolitic words offend you. The cold, dead bodies of 150+ Kenyan college students are what offend me.