U.S. Military Taught Officers ‘Hiroshima’ Tactics for ‘Total War’ on Islam

[gambit]

Translation: when moderate Muslims fail to control the militants, we will nuke Mecca.
Analogy: when moderate black Africans fail to control Somali piracy, we will nuke Kinshasa.
Analogy: when moderate latinos fail to control drug trafficking, we will nuke Sao Paolo.

When any of these failures allowed a 'regime change', then we will explore those options. You cannot avoid the reality that contestants to governmental powers and authority can end in either a 'regime change' or dissolution of a country. With the latter, there is no need for US to 'nuke' anyone.

A distinction without difference: in the end, it's all about power. What matters is that, in all these cases, criminal gangs operate with impunity by taking advantage of weak governments' lawlessness.

You are correct, there is no difference in that there would be a 'regime change'. For the worse.

Exactly which government does AQ control? Any more so that the drug cartels? As mentioned above, AQ operate in lawless regions of various countries; exactly as drug dealers and pirates do. Drug cartels control large parts of Mexico and Colombia which are no-go zones for regular law enforcement and military. Many elements of these governments are believed to be working for the drug lords. Somali pirates wield similar power in Somalia.

By Dooley's (and your) analogy, this ongoing situation (several decades in the case of drugs) should justify drawing up scenarios to nuke major metropolitan areas in South America.

The goal of Al-Qaeda is not merely to control but to CHANGE the Islamic world into the image of what Al-Qaeda believe that world should be.

Your arguments regarding the drug cartels and the pirates continues to fail and reveals your intellectual dishonesty.

 

[King Solomon]

This going on the premise that the civilian centers would host refuge and provide support to the terrorists. The article is pretty clear this was meant as an end-game scenario. I presume after some monstrosity would have happened originating from the Muslim world.

There is also no military gain one could achieve by nuking Mecca/Medina unless the entire governing aparatus (which would now be openly hostile and providing support to terrorism) was there in session or something similar.

Also the lecture and its material were removed/confiscated on grounds of hate speech by the US military themselves and the lecturere is under investigation.

Its a dumb lecture anyway....but the populist view of some of the members made the debate about it reach page 32...

Are you sure there is no military gain to be achieved by nuking Mecca/Medina? That is one of the strategic points of 2 billion of mankind. Nuking both the cities would immediately start civil war in pro-western muslim governments. The option is surely on the table as a contingency.

 

[gambit]

Read the OP.

It says specifically that, since the terrorists don't obey the rules of war, this should be the green light for the US military to abandon the Geneva Conventions and start nuking civilian centers.

Lt. Dooley has gone off the deep end.

One of the goals of Islamic terrorists is to convince the muslim warriors to obey an alternate set of rules of war. Part of that process is to act in accordance to those alternate rules. And it looks like the arguments are convincing enough in Iraq and Afghanistan. Even some here approved of those alternate rules by framing those tactics as 'asymmetric warfare'.

And who says only 'the West' can play with words...

 

[King Solomon]

Hah, you're comparing apples with roses. Taliban are not common citizens; it's an organisation who's main purpose is kill kill kill.

The civilians of Iraq, be they Sunni Muslim or Shia Muslim, are are bunch of people which don't deserve to be killed like dogs by the "saviour" USA. God is not cruel buddy, please don't Slander him by saying he's supporting a Terrorist.

Terrorist? Looks like you are confusing the term. You generalize the whole US military based on the isolated actions of one or two haters. God is definitely supporting and blessing the USA for war against terrorism. That is why you see terrorists losing everywhere and USA winning. The sooner you come to terms with this fact and stop supporting terrorists - the better it is. On one hand you support your army's action against taliban terrorists on the other hand you oppose same actions of US military just because US is an infidel secular nation. This double-facedness isn't going to get you anywhere. Now your arguments about Iraq are already answered here:

You're welcome. Well, about Iraq, it is just that the one or two incidents of killing by US soldiers that gets reported widely. We should not generalize the whole US military due to those one or two isolated incidents.

As per reported statistics, the majority of civilians were killed due to the shia-sunni sectarian war from 2005-2010. If people kill themselves you cannot do anything really. Earlier it was saddam doing it but now it has taken the form of suicide bombing and other terrorism. But overall, stability has been achieved now after US troops left.

Most civilians were killed before the war due to the sanctions and food shortage. But why do you blame the US for that? Other muslim countries like pakistan supported the sanctions against iraq after the gulf war. Could US have sanctioned iraq if not for the support of neighbouring muslim countries?

I would laud the US for cleaning up Iraq from the mess that it was. I hope Iraq can prosper economically again and successfully exploit its natural resources to its advantage. I don't see why people hate US. It is the muslims who killed muslims why blame US for that?

 

[VCheng]

Translation: when moderate Muslims fail to control the militants, we will nuke Mecca.
Analogy: when moderate black Africans fail to control Somali piracy, we will nuke Kinshasa.
Analogy: when moderate latinos fail to control drug trafficking, we will nuke Sao Paolo....................

The analogy breaks down simply because only one of the groups above has actually attacked USA (hint: it is not the Somalis or the Latinos). Further, the "moderates" who support the militants by condoning the attacks themselves by definition may not be all that "moderate".

 

[gambit]

The analogy breaks down simply because only one of the groups above has actually attacked USA (hint: it is not the Somalis or the Latinos). Further, the "moderates" who support the militants by condoning the attacks themselves by definition may not be all that "moderate".

And it was no other than the University of Jordan who found that out. Al-Qaeda's unpopularity was because of its affiliate members' tactics (not strategy) of killing fellow muslims, so much that Osama bin Laden himself had to notice and advised restraints despite his contempt for the muslim governments he wish to overthrow. So all al-Qaeda or similar militant Islamist groups have to do is focus their violence on non-muslims and eventually these 'moderates' will change their minds about al-Qaeda.

 

[Malik Usman]

Shame on every muslim and specially the Saudis and Arab World.........they are the most favorinig countries of US (That's why they allowed them to maintain their Air bases in their countries..i.e. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, UAE etc.).....specially the Saudi Kingdom.....they are totally on the instructions of Americans.

 

[Zabaniyah]

^That's kinda rich coming from someone living in Kuwait

But then, they all have their priorities.

 

[Juice]

Oh give me a break mate. Look at the outrage in America at the slightest comment anti Jewish is sufficient to get you censored. Imagine if they had run a course about eliminating Israel or Jews.

Lol, you always claim it is illegal in the west to whine about the Jooos hiding in your closet, but you live in the west, do it all the time, aren't in jail. Who's a liar now?

Do you suppose there is a course at JFSC that "presents an alternative point of view" to nuke major population centers in Africa to discourage Somali pirates?

The subtext here is that the enemy is all Muslims and Islam itself, hence targeting Muslim holy places will form a credible deterrent. Courses like this reinforce that view of the conflict. This is not idle speculation; the repeated incidents of anti-Muslim bigotry by active duty personnel do not happen in a vacuum.

What you never bring up, is "why" is there this anti-muslim feeling? I always notice when some one disscusses why people are anti-semetic, the jew haters always bring up "why are the jews hated?"

 

[Juice]

Well, my friend we just reached the point that Einstein mentioned in his famous quote:

"I don't know what WWIII will be fought with but the fourth will be fought with sticks and stones"

In a universe that we just imagined, the war, should it go nuclear, will result in Nuclear Holocaust and there will be more casualties from the post-Nuke Det radiation then from the explosions themselves, crops will fail, radiation poisoning will spread, economies will collapse, international market will be in ruin, the fuel supply will be reduced to a trickle (We just nuked the Iranians/Saudis), society as we know it will collapse and there will be anarchy. Like I said, we would be thrown back into the middle ages.

Not sure about the middle ages, but society would not resemble anything we know (and I some how doubt it would be an improvement)

 

[Juice]

It takes time to develop an oil filed , while there may be large reserves they are not being actively used for extracting oil , no corporation will put its money on a field that they cannot extract oil from so these reserves cannot be just brought online over night. Sudden shortage oil will be disastrous for the western war machine.

Ever heard of the strategic reserve?

 

[Juice]

How do you know we dont have ICBMs , we might be having them but just not declared

US presence is near by in Afghansitan which can be targeted and US presence is in all Gulf states which will be targetted. If we move our misslies to Saudi Arabia then we'll be able engage even more targets from there.

Move them how? And with no interdiction?

 

[Juice]

I find it interesting that the only two "Americans" trying to defend this course run by American is a Vietnamese and Pakistani American.

Are you guys trying to prove your loyalties to America by being more Americans than Americans to justify your loyalties. Cos methinks the lady doth complaineth too much

I'm "American" American, (with mostly British heritage). If it came down to it, I would fight beside and lay my life down for Vcheng and Gambit, that's how we roll here.

(sorry for so many post, I'm reading from mid-point, replying to post in order)

Oh come of it sycophantic Indian (and I know there are many of you out there) Can you imagine if the course was about eliminating Hindus of this earth?

Don't even try justifying what is unjustifiable

But it ISN'T! Why is that?

 

[lem34]

I'm "American" American, (with mostly British heritage). If it came down to it, I would fight beside and lay my life down for Vcheng that's how we roll here.

Of course you would Juice. But the point we make and are critical of Cheng is that he is too often tries to tell Pakistan what is best for it as a Pakistanis. As long as it is accepted that that is from an American perspective we do not take issue.

btw lay down your life is a bit of emotional drama for you is it not? lol

But it ISN'T! Why is that?

Because they are American proxies. Why would you want to eliminate your proxies lol

 

[regular]

Move them how? And with no interdiction?

We already taken care of those interdictions....My friend so what U gotta say now??......