Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam
I once said ( in October 2015 ) that we should have used tactical nuclear weapons on the Islamic Terrorist State's capital city of Ar-Raqqah; it would have imploded the Islamic Terrorist State and its command and control ability. Up to 50K civilians would die but 2 million civilians in Ramadi and Mosul would regain control of their freedoms. That is a 2.5% collateral damage loss of non combatant life. If you are part of the 97.5% freed you would morn the loss of civilian life but acknowledge the 200K+ dead and 6 million persons displaced, Assad and the other rebel forces should get their credit due also.
|
why not drop a tactical nuke on washington then? it would have imploded the #1 terrorists on the planet, only 2.5% of your population would die, but the 97,5% of you would live in "freedoms"?
why go after lesser terrorists?
on a side note, FUCK am I glad that other countries have nukes, american klingons simply do not see anything wrong with nuking other countries...I hope all countries have nukes and nasty ass bacteria soon to protect themselves from americans, or at least bring the klingons down with them if the klingons decide to attack...
thank god for the russians and chineese as well...