Should the United States and western countries Start an Operation SWORDFISH!!!!

Discussion in 'Politics & Religion' started by mahram, Apr 3, 2006.

Should the government have an Operation SwordFish Policy?

  1. Yes

    6 vote(s)
  2. No

    7 vote(s)
  1. I was just wondering in the movie swordfish, john trovolta's character said the only way to fight criminals and terriosts is to be even more horrible to them they can ever imagine. That if they kill one american or one westerner, we should kill 10000 of them, and not only them but their entire family and friends. If they blow up our ships, we blow up their homes, and cars. Something like what the isrealis policy towards hamas in the old days. Where Hamas leaders were even afraid to use telephones b/c israeli intelligence would use those phones to track them down, and fire hellfire missles into their homes. Killing them and their families. Should Americans or better yet black ops government agency start something like operation swordfist?
  2. Until this behavior actually happens, there is no war. It's only pretend.
  3. This is true. There are only two ways to really win a war.

    1) Push your enemy to the breaking point where they no longer have the will to fight and subjugate themselves to the victors. This is what happenned to Japan in WWII.

    2) Eliminate your enemy with extreme prejudice. Also called Carthegenian peace after what the Romans did to the Carthegenians.

    The West has the means but not the will to win a war whereas the Islamic extremeists (as well as the majority in the Middle East) have the will but not the means. Hopefully the West will gain the will before they gain the means.

    In an ideal world neither would be necesary but this is not an ideal world. I hope that the two cultures can learn to coexist before either scenario plays out but I am not holding my breath on it.
  4. Allen Dershowitz has said that he is surprised that there is not more vigilantism in society. That always struck me. Vigilantism would not prevent most premeditated crime and its results in curtailing terrorism is documented. People might feel better off and more secure though if there was a pogrom on criminals.
  5. Ricter


    Yeah, they'd feel a lot more secure if rule of law was abandoned, "criminal" could be defined arbitrarily, big guys and their gangs got to rule, and life as Hobbes described it was the norm.

  6. balda


    Aren't we already doing it?
  7. not really. If we were really serious, we would do what the isrealis would do. If they found a suspected terriost leader, they wouldnt hesistate, regardless of civilian lives. They would just launch an attack. Or they would bomb cars, commit assinations, poison. Stuff americans would find abhorrent. Even to the people who claim the means justifiy the cause. I dont think we can stomach the kind of operation swordfish type things. We arent even talking about retaliation. We are talking about fullscale revenge tatics. Like John trovolta said, they kill one of us, we kill 10,000 of them. Not only do we go after the terriosts, but we kill them and their families and friends. Its the mentality of MOSAD. And they were able to scare Hamas hierachy from ever using telephones or even using electronics.

  8. No! Most people are probably happy to live in a civilized society with rule of law. The legal system is only so good and Dershowitz was surprised that communities of normal citizens have not banned together and formed more proactive vigilante groups. I was comparing this idea with what is already going on in Israel where the state sponsors vigilantism with disastrous results. Dershowitz clearly does not advocate vigilantism nor do I (unless you piss me off .:p ).
  9. My, aren't we bloodthrirsty..... :(

    Hrmmmm, lets see. They killed 3,000. Between Iraq and Afghanistan we have killed well upwards of 50,000-100,000 depending on whose estimates you believe....
  10. lol Im just putting it out there. Its from a movie..
    #10     Apr 4, 2006