What military action should we take now?

[NeoV]

The Mrs here thinks we should basically wipe out all of the middle-eastern countries, and start over....

I tend to think a bit more practically about things, and a little less emotionally, but as we sat at our favorite bar & grill place talking about this, I got to thinking...

What is our best course of Military action?

I keep seeing in my head photographs that the US Military intelligence surely has of all the possible terrorist camp sites in Afghanistan, Sudan, Libya, and Syria, pictures from Satellites and X25 (or whatever they are called) spy-planes.....

My guess is that every single one of these terrorist camp sites will be destroyed, with warnings given to any governments that have been/continue to hide these people. As for Bin Laden, I would be very surprised if he is anywhere right now that we will ever find him....with his money, he could literally be anywhere right now.

Should we do more than that? Afghanistan's ruling party, the Taliban, is a very small percentage of the population, isn't it? Would bombing civilians who don't even agree with many of their rulers policies be of any value?

I would also go ahead and destroy every single one of Saddam's palaces, all 20 of them, but I am guessing he is hiding somewhere as well.

What else would you guys do? Lets stay away from the "nuke em all" responses and try to have a practical discussion....and if anyone posts that friggin Canadian letter again!?!!?

 

[Karaethon1]

Well, keep in mind that all terrorist cells are not necessarily abroad. There's a lot of cleanup in the US itself as well. However, a total annihilation of the Middle East isn't the answer. Because of America's morals and scruples, it will try extremely hard not to kill innocent civilians. Or else we could just go about killing the friends and families of the terrorists to set an example...

 

[Aceman]

NeoV,
My gut feeling is that we will bomb multiple sites and Afganistan until someone hands over bin Ladin. I also suspent that after the bombing is intially completed that we will send ground troops in to finish the business at hand. Retaliation against terrorism will no longer be a simple airstrike. Ground troops will now become involved. I think we're tired of striking and not really knowing what damage was actually done.

 

[TripleJ]

<<Afghanistan's ruling party, the Taliban, is a very small percentage of the population, isn't it?>>

That is correct. The vast majority despise the Taliban.


I think it should be a more infantry/army operation. I see that as the most effective attack.

 

[Semper Fi]

"You cannot qualify war in harsher terms than I will. War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out." - Gen Sherman

 

[Looney]

No, i don't think we'll be bombing the civilians, at least i hope not... even the majority of the Afghanistan population doens't like the Taliban.

But civilians will be killed, but it'll be to topple the Taliban... get the Northern Alliance to rule the country, and have them help hunt down Bin Laden.

I'm almost positive we'll attack other nations involve as well though... most likely Iran and Iraq if it's discovered they did aid Bin Laden, and we'll need to topple those governments as well.

The retribution HAS to be harsh... it has to be so harsh that no government will ever want to support another terrorist group again. And the only thing harsher than toppling a government is genocide, and there's no way the US or the world would commit that.

 

[Mytv]

Don't send troops as the bad guys will just blown themselves up to upset us more.

We need to use those fancy missiles and warheads we spend so much money on and inflict the pain were necessary. Where's those one button triggers when we need them most.

 

[Semper Fi]

Right now intelligence and air strikes are the best bet.

Sending in troops is not a good idea right now. Remember how long it took us to build up forces before DS. Ground troops require support, no support=not good.

 

[Miramonti]

The Mrs here thinks we should basically wipe out all of the middle-eastern countries, and start over....

cool, genocide, just what we supposedly fought against in the old yugoslavia.

I don't even want to think about the possible reprisals if all of these other terrorist groups are involved that have been mentioned lately (but not confirmed of course - i.e. fatah, hezbollah etc. in addition to laden). This means some serious shlt that would mean bombing in egypt and lebanon also among maybe others, and this would get very nasty.

Hopefully its just Afghanastan but I don't see how we could be sure to get bin laden unless we bombed the crap out of his areas and then went in to get him to be sure.

 

[Aceman]

Semper Fi,
Remember Panama? I'm not talking about a huge military buildup. Just enough of the 82nd, and 101st to make sure the job gets done completely.

 

[yobarman]

gather intelligence first.

 

[Semper Fi]

Yes I remember Panama. Do you? I would hardly consider it a complete success.
Look at how close Panama is to the US compared to Afghanistan. We also have an existing military presence in Panama.
IF the 82nd and 101st did jump in, they would have maybe 1-2 days worth of supplies. IT would be SUICIDE.

 

[Aceman]

Semper Fi, I remember Panama quite well along with other deployments. And being a former member of the light infantry, it can be done. I'm not talking about occupation of a country, more of a "clean up" and tie the loose ends up operation. Nothing long term at all.

 

[RxL77]

hmm i am hungry