Cool. So when you invading China? Before, or after North Korea? Please advise.

Probably China first then N. Korea, since they get thier stuff from China.

Since China has had their program for so many years I don't think they are as prone to allowing, giving or selling their weapons to middle eastern Muslim terrorist. Now N. Korea is in the mix, but I have to research that more before commenting on it.

How about adding this to the mix -
Jul 8, 11:18 AM (ET)By KATHERINE PFLEGER SHRADER WASHINGTON (AP) - Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said Thursday that there is "credible" information indicating that al-Qaida is moving ahead with plans for a "large-scale attack" in the U.S. aimed at disrupting the November elections.Ridge said it's clear that al-Qaida has the capability to carry out such an attack. He said U.S. authorities don't have information on the time, place or method, but that they're "actively working" to gain that knoweldge.He also said al-Qaida is working under the "mistaken belief" that such an attack would affect the nation's resolve.


OK so now they are saying the attacks are supposed to occur. I guess you want to wait and see where they happen and as long as its not in your backyard, you will say oh gee thats terrible but lets give peace a chance"?

It may not be pretty, it may not be safe, it may result in death of people, but I say take the fight to them, before they bring it to us. As Gen. George Patton says "Don't be a fool and die for your country. Let the other sonofabitch die for his."

I don't doubt the gist of the article you just mentioned but I don't see the word Iran there anywhere. Invading a country because you think it might do something bad violates generally accepted tenets of just war doctrine.

My opinion is that the War on Terror is metaphorically at least, like a heavyweight boxing champ getting in the ring with a swarm of a thousand mosquitos that breed faster than you can squash 'em. Of course the boxer is bigger and stronger, but his instruments are too blunt to defeat the enemy completely.

ShadowWar:
Isn't this old news? The free world (including Europe and Canada) have enemies and those enemies are trying to find a way to end our domination of the globe in terms of culture and resources. Sooner or later (hopefully later) someone from one of those will have so little to lose that they will try to "take us out." If your answer is: We must do more of what we are doing now, isn't that the impetus for the attack in the first place?
Of course, I don't think you are advocating cultural respect, peace and goodwill for all mankind, and an end to American imperialism wherever it is in our "national interest" are you?

Of course, I don't think you are advocating cultural respect, peace and goodwill for all mankind, and an end to American imperialism wherever it is in our "national interest" are you?

-

Cultural respect - Your joking. They are beheading non-muslim - non-arabs and your worried about cultural respect?? Tell that to the families of the beheaded.

peace - OK I'll tell you what you get them (the terrorist and muslim extremeist) to "give peace a chance" and I would consider it.

goodwill for all mankind - You live in a unrealist, non-exsistant world, this will never happen.

American Imperialism - no I am not. I believe in proactive not reactive approaches.

Does that answer your question?

Take a look at a map. Notice how North Korea, Iran, and Afghanistan surround China. What happens when the USA invades Iran, China says "Ummm, we'd prefer you didn't invade another country so close to us; your ability to build air bases and missle silos there threatens our national security and is really starting to piss us off?" (See Cuban Missle Crisis). Sorry if this seems hypothetical, I'm just trying to avoid WWIII scenarios and stuff. Just talking out the various consequences.

A unilateral, do what you please foreign policy is only viable if you are the biggest kid on the block. In light of how badly the US Air Force got it's collective ass kicked by the Indian Airforce in recent war game exercises, however, the USA's perceived ability to impose it's will on the rest of the world is perhaps incongruent with reality.

Link AirforceTimes.com -
Link Pravda.ru

ShadowWar:
Sure, I understand your position. I don't live in a world of peace or brotherhood. Man refuses to accept that living together in peace and mutual respect is the natural order. Instead, the natural order is "you hit us, we hit you until someone can't hit back anymore." The problem is that the scenario you suggest of someone hitting us is brought about by the approach you advocate. It is too late to make a preemptive strike. As David St. Hubbins notes: China is a player, has the weapons, is not on our side. So....if you think we can "pacify" the world by showing the weapons (bright and shiny) it says: Been there, done that. Only got them more angry than they were before...
See the point?

All I know is that if Iran were to bomb the U.S. with a nuclear weapon, we'd remove the nation from the world, which I think would be a fitting solution, and if China were to object to us retaliating in kind, then they could either offer another solution to the mater (besides waiting to be destroyed), or we could prepare for WW3, which I'd prefer to allowing rogue countries to destroy us without consequence.
Of course, I think Iran is smart enough to know that bombing the U.S. would be suicidal.

OK somehow this topic has gotten way off, The original post was about a nuclear attack against the US. Wonder how that happened..

Take a look at a map. Notice how North Korea, Iran, and Afghanistan surround China. What happens when the USA invades Iran, China says "Ummm, we'd prefer you didn't invade another country so close to us; your ability to build air bases and missle silos there threatens our national security and is really starting to piss us off?"

How would airbases in Afghanistan represent a significantly greater threat than air and missle bases in Japan, The Phillipines, or South Korea?

In light of how badly the US Air Force got it's collective ass kicked by the Indian Airforce in recent war game exercises, however, the USA's perceived ability to impose it's will on the rest of the world is perhaps incongruent with reality.

Nice try but........First - nothing in that article suggests that the US "got it's collective asses kicked, only that we did not totally dominate LIKE WE ALMOST ALWAYS DO in military exercises. Second - As the article states, F-15's are 1970s technology and is not even close to the cutting edge. Third - Exactly how are we (the USA) imposing our will on the entire world? We have made it very clear that the days of turning a blind eye to terrorism are over. Simply waiting for another 9/11 (or worse) is just not an alternative anymore so we have instituted a more aggressive policy to reduce that risk. Most Americans are no longer satisfied watching year after year as the UN passes resolutions that never get enforced. It appears that many of the countries that strongly oppose this policy do so not on moral grounds but rather financial losses -- specifically a loss in military sales to Saddam's Iraq (France, Russia, Germany are good examples). Somehow, I just can't sympathize with their positions the way the left does.

As for the nuclear threat against the US........If we do not continue to strengthen our stand against the ever growing global terrorist networks, I fear it will only be a matter of time. As I have stated before, Iran is fooling nobody with it's expansion and development of nuclear facilities. If it is only for electricity, as the Iranian government suggests, why would they feel the need to bury most of it underground. Could it be that if the truth were to be exposed, someone like Israel might halt their quest for the bomb like they did against Saddam. France wasn't too happy about that loss.

Headline News: US Declares War on World, Before they Declare War on us First!

In a pre-emptive strike against the Nations of the world, the US has organized the Third World War in an effort to reduce terror and fight those that hate us for our freedoms.

George Bush had this to say: "This is a world. This is a world, that hates us for our Freedoms. This is a world that tried to kill my daddy. This is a world that needs to be helped to understand the freedoms that America has, and needs to learn it's place. This is a world that needs guidance to appreciate freedom and not terror."

Later, after all other nations have been subjugated or become mute witnesses, the US Declared Pax Americana. The Empire that will last forever and keep freedom and non-terror alive for every person on the planet. Especially Americans.

Headline News: US Declares War on World, Before they Declare War on us First! In a pre-emptive strike against the Nations of the world, the US has organized the Third World War in an effort to reduce terror and fight those that hate us for our freedoms. George Bush had this to say: "This is a world. This is a world, that hates us for our Freedoms. This is a world that tried to kill my daddy. This is a world that needs to be helped to understand the freedoms that America has, and needs to learn it's place. This is a world that needs guidance to appreciate freedom and not terror." Later, after all other nations have been subjugated or become mute witnesses, the US Declared Pax Americana. The Empire that will last forever and keep freedom and non-terror alive for every person on the planet. Especially Americans.

If this wasn't so rediculous, I might not be laughing as hard as I am right now. Get this to Michael Moore ASAP. It's great material for the sequel to his current leftist propaganda film.