[GOPJ]

...but could think of better targets... Tehran, for instance. That would be the only real slam against the Islamofacist movement, and quite well deserving, I might add.

If you take out one or two cities, it's like swatting a hornets nest. It's won't solve the problem, but it'll sure make your life miserable.

[Bon mots]

If you take out one or two cities, it's like swatting a hornets nest. It's won't solve the problem, but it'll sure make your life miserable.

The muslims will not stop attacking us ever.

The only way, is to make them so miserable, they BEG US to stop.

With Japan, it took just two nukes. With the Muslims it will take at least 20 or so. But then watch the terrorism and extremism stop.

It worked for the Ismaeli Muslims, the Mennonites, the Japanese and even the friggin' Carthaginians, it will work on the Muslims too.

Otherwise, prepare for a radioactive New York and Washington.

[dajeeps]

If you take out one or two cities, it's like swatting a hornets nest. It's won't solve the problem, but it'll sure make your life miserable

As if some Iranian-funded terrorist group with nukes won't anyway. Tehran is on my list of "preferred" targets, not the only one. With its infrastructure in tatters it would no longer be able to afford nuke ambitions, or fund terrorists with the fight in their own yard.
I'm not sure what Bush was thinking when he went after Iraq first. The case was far stronger against Iran.

[Dan Evans]

If you take out one or two cities, it's like swatting a hornets nest. It's won't solve the problem, but it'll sure make your life miserable.

We took out two countries but since then, things have been fairly quiet here on the home front.