Well, if the UN somehow survived the attack, I imagine we would, once again, go hat in hand asking permission to go to war. They would drag their feet again and another 18 month rush to war would start, which would be opposed every step of the way by the political party not currently in office and probably the entire world media - depending on which party is in office, of course.

Seriously, if 9/11 failed to wake up about 50% of the country, what makes you think a nuclear strike would be any more effective? Body counts are just abstract numbers that get more real as they get bigger. Some people would rather watch imobilized as our nation is dismantled city by city, rather than have to make unseemly moral decisions. The only saving grace is that these people seem to be more likely to live in cities than more rural areas. At some point, the war effort will have the clear majority it needs. But sadly, I think we are more than a few 9/11's away from accepting the new reality.

Cause and effect Brad.

What are the causes for such terrorism in the first place? And saying they just hate the US is not a proper answer. US policy since 9/11 has greatly increased the likelihood of such a outcome not diminished it.

Paul.

What are the causes for such terrorism in the first place?

Is the *anything* that would ever justify this act Solitair? US Policy decisions or something? I am dying to know what cause could *possibly* matter. At all. You are seriously trying Moral equivalency here? That is not a defensible position. Attacks against civilian targets with no military units involved are *never* justified. Not when we did them in WWII and not when others commit them now.

What are the causes for such terrorism in the first place? And saying they just hate the US is not a proper answer.

1. The hateful rhetoric spread by Arab media and education, encouraged and enabled by leaders who would prefer to have their populations fixated on Jews and Americans instead of reforming their government.

2. The suppression of rhetoric that does not conform to an Islamic viewpoint.

3. The belief that commiting an act of suicidal violence grants eternal blessing.

Causation is not justification. Solitair never brought up justification.

i hate to respond to questions with questions but the scenario is skewed to provoke a desired resply..

how does north korea respond?

what if there are cheering crowds in germany and france?

wholl take responsibility for foolishly causing our efforts, resources and focus to be diverted from capturing bin laden and disrupting al quaida?

Cause and effect Brad.

If this was justification then we would be justified in turning those countries into slag. Sorry, they (Mid east countries and peoples) who disagree with US policies must find another answer, playing the current game will only end with their destruction.

Solitair, no offense but you're skirting the issue.

What do you think the US reaction would be? Do you really think Americans would start going "why do they hate us?" If you think there is some sort of justification to intentionally murdering tens of thousands of innocent civilians then there's really not much to discuss.

But that wasn't the question - the question isn't whether you think the US deserves to have thousands of Americans murdered. The question is what do you think the US response would be.

Thanks for scaring the shit out of me!! New York is back on her feet and stronger than ever. Living in fear is completely useless. The US has tightened up security till its a stranglehold on the rest of the world. I know I'm just really politically naive, but I do live here, and it's not a fun feeling to wake up everyday scared of what might happen. I don't see the point in hypothesising or whatever, I don't think there's anymore anyone can do to prevent a repeat of 9/11, as you say- there's no justification for such attacks. I don't agree with the war on Iraq, and I hope if another tragedy occurs the government will find a different way of dealing with it than simply lowering Americans to the level of terrorists and killing a bunch of innocent people. Two wrongs do not make a right. I'm not smart enough to have any suggestions, and we don't appear to have any say in how the government reacts to terrorism anyway. All I can say is terrorism is relative thing, A lot of people called Nelson Mandela a terrorist, and now he's considered a freedom fighter, a hero. I'm not condoning terrorism, but these people have a system of beliefs they're probably brainwashed into, their beliefs and actions probably don't seem wrong to them, and beliefs are exceptionally hard to change. Raises an ethical question too, it would render us hypocrites to try and change their beliefs since this is the country that preaches freedom of speech and so on.

Dylan, people who set off to murder as many innocents as they can -- with the goal being quantity of murders, are terrorists.

I don't think Mandella ever put together a plan to murder as many white people (for instance) as he could.

Yeah that was a bad comparison. I just meant that to them what they're doing doesn't seem wrong, to them it's the right and just thing to do. If you try and see it from their perspective (their very fucked up perspective) then you can see how impossible it is to prevent this kind of thing happening again, because they're beliefs won't change.

The right wing ignorance on this site, with plenty of spicy righteousness mixed in of course, probably shouldn't amaze me, but hey, I'm gullible. I figure people who say they want to understand history and meaning have actually taken a look at historical sequence and relationships, as well as contemplating all sorts of thinkers---not just Ayn Rand's gems and Irving Kristol's rants and Henry Kissinger's Machievellian strategies, but critics and opponents of, and thinkers contrary to the reactionaries that make right-wingers feel safe and comfortable---who have been speaking about issues of meaning and understanding for the past several centuries of 'enlightenment,' science, and progress.

Thus, when Paul inquires about the roots of terror, one might imagine that folks could consider---instead of jerking their knees and shaking their fingers in opprobrium---all sorts of recent and more deeply rooted events and actions which may have yielded strong antipathy toward the rulers of the United States. Recent events would consist of, among tens of thousands of other incidents and dozens of important tendencies, such things as the financing and logistical support of Al Qaeda in a cynical, self-serving, and stupid attempt to make the downfall of the Soviets faster, the overthrow of President Mossadech in Iran and the installation of the Butcher Shah Pahlevi in his place, the installation and elevation of Saddam Hussein before he became the most recent Frankenstein not to kill his maker, the OSS's and CIA's open-armed policy to Nazi butchers whom they relocated hither and yon to continue their 'good works' among 'lesser peoples'. Deeper rooted developments concern the growth of the most powerful corporate-military alliance in history, that has benefited from wars and rumors of wars for a century and a half, always at the expense of average people who fill the morgues and body bags on all sides of the situations at hand; as well, the White Supremacist thinking, that continues to imagine slavery as some fantasy of kind massa's and grateful negroes, not to mention the butchery of indigenous Americans as one of history's great leaps forward, is a tendency that is at the root of the hatred of both American rulers AND the more universal proclivity to embrace ignorance like it was mama's titty.

There's a lot to all of this, no doubt. We're all ignorant, of course. I'm an idiot---depending on the person with whom you speak---between half the time and some proportion approaching one. But I do like to get a little deeper than stancescalling names and rallying around the tattered flag, as if such ritualistic childishness might have any effect on our futures and our fortunes. The real issue, to me, is that the leaders of our land, whom we continue to allow to act in our name, have polluted the promise of our nation, to which the people of the world look as a last hope for humanity in many instances. Nothing pisses people off like righteous, cynically motivated hypocrisy, which define precisely the thinking and motivation of this country's current cabal of crooks in charge.

As to the original post, the prospects for a SECOND USE OF NUCLEAR WEAPONS IN A HOSTILE FASHION---or should I say a third? since we bombed both Hiroshima and Nagasaki---are much higher in the next year or so than at a later date. That we survive to 2008 will mean that the righteous and childish ignoramuses and thugs have lost their cachet. That's the thinking of those much wiser than me in any case.

What do you think the reaction of the United States be?

I think that the US would invade Iran, Pakistan, Afghanistan, and Saudi Arabia.

Jimbo,

I noticed you didn't actually answer the question either for all your talk. What do you think the US would do if one of its cities were nuked in this fashion. I realize left wingers such as yourself are usually paralyzed from doing anything in the real world but surely in this hypothetical you could at least put forward what you think the reaction would be.

I have an answer, but I have a question first:

I am under the imression that these terrorist groups are being funded by wealthy persons, in order to procure weapons and fusion material.

Is it safe to presume that some of the funds are coming from persons who control the oil in Saudi Arabia?

IG