The Student Room Group

Do you support nuking ISIS?

Seen 3 vids of them which to me justify using nuclear weapons to rid the world of them:

1) En masse slaughter of locals with handgun and throwing bodies into river.

2) Cutting someone's throat who is wearing a western sport t-shirt and throwing his body into a grave in a praying position probably facing Mecca.

3) Posing with kidnapped western children they have captured.

I really do not see why America hasn't nuked them. Or at least begin to use them for testing their latest robotic munitions? Of course, the USA doesn't consider them a threat, because they are so far away and they have such puny resources and they are clearly welcoming their own defeat. But I really don't understand why they don't use them for scientific experimentation? There is a lot to be known about the human body and we could find out using these people, so why not? There is just cause.

edit: ****, was supposed to include a poll

So would you support the nuking of them or the capture of them for use in lethal scientific experimentations? Geneva convention is outdated now and is being exploited imo. It's time to get 21st century on them.
(edited 8 years ago)

Scroll to see replies

Where exactly do you place such nukes?

Trololololololol.
Reply 2
Avatar for kyragrace
kyragrace
Neither, once captured they should still have to stand trial, and then face given punishment, killing them is the easy way out, and carrying out lethal scientific experiments on them would be inhumane. No matter how despicable their own actions, there's no point in lowering 'ourselves' to anywhere near their level.
Reply 3
Avatar for Trapz99
Trapz99
21
How about no..,
Reply 4
Avatar for Joep95
Joep95
19
Not yet but if it were possible to do so without a lot of civilian casualties then I wouldn't be against it.
No. Then you're also killing the groups and people you're condemning them for killing. Nukes don't just explode the bad guys.
Reply 6
Avatar for Josb
Josb
6
Original post by kyragrace
Neither, once captured they should still have to stand trial, and then face given punishment,

There is no functional justice system or prison in Syria and Iraq. What you propose can't happen.
Wut???!!!
(You cannot be serious)
Reply 8
Avatar for C-rated
C-rated
2
Realistically, the only three countries that can really deal with ISIS properly without mass devastation are saudi arabia, Russia and Israel. However, Saudi Arabia don't really give a damn, Russia has its balls in a death grip by NATO and there's no way in hell even ISIS would be dumb enough to poke the Israelian bear.
Reply 9
Avatar for kyragrace
kyragrace
Original post by Josb
There is no functional justice system or prison in Syria and Iraq. What you propose can't happen.


I know it can't at the moment, but somewhere someone has to work out a better way to deal with them than blow the place up. The world will never be rid of terrorists and nuking ISIS 1. Won't kill all them all, and so 2. Will just cause us more trouble, and even gain them more allies, and that's never good
Reply 10
Avatar for Josb
Josb
6
Original post by C-rated
Realistically, the only three countries that can really deal with ISIS properly without mass devastation are saudi arabia, Russia and Israel. However, Saudi Arabia don't really give a damn, Russia has its balls in a death grip by NATO and there's no way in hell even ISIS would be dumb enough to poke the Israelian bear.


The Kurds would do it if we promised them an independent state.
Reply 11
Avatar for Josb
Josb
6
Original post by kyragrace
somewhere someone has to work out a better way to deal with them than blow the place up.


Well that guy should better hurry and find a solution now.
Reply 12
Avatar for C-rated
C-rated
2
Original post by Josb
The Kurds would do it if we promised them an independent state.


That's true, although there's so many ways that could go horrifically wrong. The best thing we can hope for is for ISIS to accidentally piss of Israel.
Original post by Josb
Well that guy should better hurry and find a solution now.


Tell me about it! But I think we could be waiting awhile seeing as it's always left to the politicians.
ISIS members are all around the world, where will you nuke exactly? Furthermore, ISIS is an ideaology, a nuke wouldn't kill every ISIS supporter thus keeping the ideaology strong.
Original post by ODES_PDES
Wut???!!!
(You cannot be serious)

I didn't save the picture, but if you saw the picture of this little white girl crying in the hands of an ISIS militant who smiles with every terrorist in the background smiling, you would be suggesting much worse things than I am (if you have a heart). Where did they get this girl from and how? I am seriously considering picking up arms after what I've seen, how can I raise my child in a world like that?
Original post by C-rated
Realistically, the only three countries that can really deal with ISIS properly without mass devastation are saudi arabia, Russia and Israel. However, Saudi Arabia don't really give a damn, Russia has its balls in a death grip by NATO and there's no way in hell even ISIS would be dumb enough to poke the Israelian bear.

It ain't a bear.
Original post by kyragrace
I know it can't at the moment, but somewhere someone has to work out a better way to deal with them than blow the place up. The world will never be rid of terrorists and nuking ISIS 1. Won't kill all them all, and so 2. Will just cause us more trouble, and even gain them more allies, and that's never good

The world can easily be rid of terrorists, just gotta be willing to get them.
Original post by SageJiraiya
ISIS members are all around the world, where will you nuke exactly? Furthermore, ISIS is an ideaology, a nuke wouldn't kill every ISIS supporter thus keeping the ideaology strong.


This is why I suggested capture and scientific experimentation as another option. However if you cut off supply routes then they will gather near a resource they depend on, and then you can drop it on them.
(edited 8 years ago)
Reply 17
Avatar for Pulse.
Pulse.
18
Under no circumstances. Not only would it be a disproportionate response to the threat that they pose but it would also set a precedent regarding the use of nukes.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by Pulse.
Under no circumstances. Not only would it be a disproportionate response to the threat that they pose but it would also set a precedent regarding the use of nukes.

Posted from TSR Mobile


What about sending in robots? Or capturing them for experimental purposes.
Original post by C-rated
Realistically, the only three countries that can really deal with ISIS properly without mass devastation are saudi arabia, Russia and Israel. However, Saudi Arabia don't really give a damn, Russia has its balls in a death grip by NATO and there's no way in hell even ISIS would be dumb enough to poke the Israelian bear.


http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/feb/04/saudi-arabia-ground-troops-syria-fight-isis

I'd hardly accuse the Saudis of not giving a damn. If anything Russia has made NATO look weak with its actions in Ukraine. Their intervention in Syria has also shifted the balance decisively back in Assad's favour, before this the rebels were starting to encroach on his heartland.

ATM IS and Israel's long time enemies(Hezbollah and Syria) are killing each other so I'd expect they have zero interest in stopping that happening.
(edited 8 years ago)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you