Their religion seems to be their motivation - and their reason for their willingness to die. It is their strength, and cause. They’re dedicated, to the point of suicide.
So why don’t we use that against them?
We can round up their family members, stuff them full of pork (and whatever else muslims fear/avoid), and shoot them in the head.
That might have a deterring effect.
I think KALT’s post about MAD could be applied here, and thats that you would piss off all muslims if you did that, not just the fanatical ones.
That would be a BAD thing.
…um, yeah. Real good plan. Totally retains that moral superiority that we’re trying to demonstrate :rolleyes:
It’s wrong. It’s punishing innocent people for the crimes that someone else committed. Maybe we have different moral systems, but I find that to be evil. Maybe not as evil as killing thousands of people, but evil nonetheless, and by no means justified.
::has this feeling that this’ll end up in the Pit::
I cannot in good conscience advocate the systematic murder of anyone who, so far as we know, are simply guilty of being related to a terrorist. It is one thing to recognize that civilians die in the course of any war. It is quite another thing to target them specifically.
Marc
i’m going to give you the benefit of the doubt SenorBeef and assume this is a joke (not a funny one, in my opinion)
The Muslim clerics would simply offer absolution to the families. The pork thing is no help.
Still, you’re close. Back when the USSR was having it’s own terrorist problem, the solved it rather quickly, I’ve been told, once they decided to get mean.
What did they do? When a terrorist hijacked a plane, they kidnapped his family. If the terrorist killed innocent people, his family was killed.
This story is easy to believe, if you know anything about how Spetznatz is reputed to operate. They make our Green Berets look like the Girl Scouts.
Guess what?
I know someone who had a child kidnapped and held by the KGB.
For people, who denounced the USSR for years, to resort to THEIR methods is inhuman.
Wildest Bill had a similar idea in this thread.
Some interesting points were raised there. I said there, and I’ll say again here, we have Muslim allies. If we start trying to send Muslims to Hell, our allies are going to get upset. Pakistan is going through an incredible backlash from its people already, I doubt they could afford to support us if the Great Satan started stuffing innocent people full of pork and killing them in the hopes that they would lose their immortal soul. It’s not a good idea to be making more enemies at the moment.
I am not an expert on Islam or the situation in the Middle East, so if there are erroneous facts in my statement, please post a correction so I can learn more about this topic.
Wildest Bill had a similar idea in this thread.
Some interesting points were raised there. I said there, and I’ll say again here, we have Muslim allies. If we start trying to send Muslims to Hell, our allies are going to get upset. Pakistan is going through an incredible backlash from its people already, I doubt they could afford to support us if the Great Satan started stuffing innocent people full of pork and killing them in the hopes that they would lose their immortal soul. It’s not a good idea to be making more enemies at the moment.
I am not an expert on Islam or the situation in the Middle East, so if there are erroneous facts in my statement, please post a correction so I can learn more about this topic.
Aside from the complete immorality of this “solution”, there’s two other big problems: the families of the terrorists attacking the U.S. aren’t in our borders which would make them kinda difficult to kidnap (and no, there’s now way Saudi Arabia or anybody else would go along with this idea. They’d have a revolt on their hands). The other problem is we don’t usually know who the terrorists carrying out the attack are until it’s all over, which would kinda make it difficult to know which families to kidnap.
I know someone who had a child kidnapped and held by the KGB.
For people, who denounced the USSR for years, to resort to THEIR methods is inhuman.----------------------------------
Sorry about your friend’s child.
A question–
Is it still inhuman IF it saves thousands of lives?
Now, for the record, I don’t propose that we do this.
But I may change my mind if I see lots of innocent people slaughtered, or someone close to me is killed.
Unfortunately, the immorality of war is self-escalating.
I know someone who had a child kidnapped and held by the KGB.
For people, who denounced the USSR for years, to resort to THEIR methods is inhuman.----------------------------------
Sorry about your friend’s child.
A question–
Is it still inhuman IF it saves thousands of lives?
Now, for the record, I don’t propose that we do this.
But I may change my mind if I see lots of innocent people slaughtered, or someone close to me is killed.
Unfortunately, the immorality of war is self-escalating.
Morality, as always, is relative. If we start seeing bio and chemical attacks, we might change our mind on the whole “can’t kill a few innocents to save lots of other innocents” things.
But the allies thing is a valid concern, I can see where that might be detrimental.
Also: I did a bit of research. Back when we occupied the phillipines in the late 1800, we saw some terrorist actions because local muslims declared a Jihad.
We captured some, smeared bullets in pig’s blood, shot them all - and then smothered the corpses in more pigs blood.
The terror attacks stopped quite quickly.
Anyway, the idea here is the deterrent effect. Not that we’ll go around killing family all the time, but the threat that we will will stop many attacks. I can see the immorality in this - but, there are 2 obvious issues:
The family PROBABLY knows, based on precedent, that their brother/son/whatever is involved in terrorist type groups. I would imagine most silently approve.
Secondly, if killing 5 or 6 people prevents a few chemical attacks, the knee-jerk morality of ‘we can’t kill innocent people!’ becomes a bit more blurred.
Anyway, we’ll all give words for the “that’s just wrong! immoral! think of the children!” type objections. And they raise a valid point. But if this becomes a long term jihad - where we start seeing major attacks regularly, we might change our minds.
Everywhere I turn, people are concerned about pissing off Muslims, but the Muslims are not in the least concerned about pissing off any other religion and are real quick to take offense if any infidel military might is within a few miles of their holiest places. It doesn’t take much to get the to call a holy war and they do not exactly seem all that tolerant of any other religion, seem to jump into fanaticism readily – about as quickly as the kids jumped into anti-Vietnam stuff in the 60s, and have no problem with slaughtering anyone anywhere by any means who does not agree with them.
I have no problem with sending in troops to slaughter them in droves if that is what it takes and virtually wiping out their sick religion of hate and oppression.
So far, I’ve been given two examples of this ‘designed’ religion, where in they are peaceful, loving, intelligent, pious folks and where they are fanatical, belligerent, oppressive killers of anyone who does not believe like they do. They do not even have any problem in this advanced day and age of slaughtering members of their own who do not believe exactly like they want.
We are heading into space and they are heading for the stone age and quite willing to take anyone with them who doesn’t believe.
As far as I am concerned, drop bombs full of explosives and pig fat. Make it known that our bullets are greased with pork, dump thousands of gallons of pork blood on them and shower any starving masses with dressed pork. The Jews have this thing about pork, but I’ve heard of Jews happily eating pork and not being all that concerned about it.
I’m tired of everyone coddling these people. They run wild and everyone does everything they can to pacify them and they are used to getting their way without giving into the traditions or religious taboos of other nations. Everyone seems to have to obey their taboos when dealing with them while they ignore everyone else’s.
Well, screw them. If they cannot play nice, then it is time to shove them off of the global playing field. They have been a pain in the butt ever since the advanced nations made the mistake of giving them advanced technology, which they promptly used to whip each other in line with and then to threaten the rest of the world, which seemed to have been getting along quite nicely without their influence.
Now we have to serve Muslim meals in schools, respect Muslim beliefs and Holy days and turn away when they murder their wives or kids over traditional holy violations or walk around benefiting from all of our technology and wealth and bitch about what shits we all are.
No more, buddy. No more. Our lesson has to be strong, powerful and far reaching or else we will have problems from the other maniacal Muslim nations.
Funny, most of the world gets along with everyone else, except those nations predominately Muslim. None of the other major religions causes as much of a fuss as the Muslim one does. We need to stop this now or else there will be another, bigger fight with them later on.
Coppertop? Two things to say about that…
:rollseyes:
I think you are overgeneralizing a bit. First of all, it really is just a small minority of people committing violence. A real small minority. Unless you have a cite to contest that.
Your entire post was laced with bigotry. You have a problem with us giving Muslims the option of not eating pork in school? You have a problem with us respecting their Holy Days? Whatever.
And since when do we turn away from Muslim murders whether they are caused by holy violations or whatever in this country? We don’t. Stop making things up.
Either post factually true statements while you are in GD or go to the Pit and rant there.
Coppertop, nice piece of bigoted idiocy. Instead of addressing your silly points, I point you to the following thread: Muslim Solidarity and its implications
The thread contains similar nonsense as your OP, and many of the refutations offered therein are perfectly applicable in this case as well.
And please, work on becoming informed.
Looks like I managed to screw up the link. Here it is:
Setting aside that it’s about as wrong as can be:
It might not be an effective deterrent. For one thing, you’re assuming that Islam theology will condemn people to Hell for involuntary actions. I’m not an expert on that, but if you want me to believe that, you’d better produce a cite.
As far as I can see, it’ll be child’s play to give the families martyr status as well - or to convince would-be terrorists that this is the case. Do you think people who’ll give up their own lives will have any qualms about taking their families with them to Paradise ? Yeah, right.
Enraging the muslim world: You’ll sure as hell do that. And honestly, I believe (actually, I hope) that you’d lose a lot of European support as well.
Oh, and it’s a crime according to just about any international law there is. The people who ordered and executed a plan like that would be lucky to get a nice cell next to that of Milosevich if they were ever caught outside the US.
Back to the drawing board.
S. Norman
Piffle.
Nonsense.
Utter fabrication. (Not by SenorBeef, but by his sources.)
It never happened. Had the rebellion been so easy to suppress, we’d have never had that great movie starring Gary Cooper, The Real Glory.
It would, of course, be interesting to see the citation of who has actually made this claim and see whether they invented it or borrowed it from some other author of fiction.
Our gov’t would NEVER ever go for it. In fact, it’s so far from the realm of possibilities, that it’s worthless to hypothesize about.