Arkansas Senator wants to nuke ISIS

[dragon]

I love some of the comments but man some politicans

CONWAY (KFSM) – An Arkansas senator has called for a “nuclear weapon” to be used in the fight against ISIS, according to a post on his Facebook page.

Sen. Jason Rapert, R-Conway, said that with ISIS continuing to spread, he wondered why the civilized world “just sits by when we have weapons that could wipe out these barbarians where they are concentrated.”

“I believe it is time to annihilate the strongholds and pursue the rest [until] we have them all captured or killed,” he said.

He continued by saying a strategically-placed nuclear weapon would save the lives of soldiers.

“It is time for the insanity to be stopped,” the post states.

link

[The Romulan Republic]

ISIS is losing ground in Iraq, America has lost no troops against ISIS (unless one or more US soldiers were killed in terrorist attacks outside of the actual war zone in Iraq/Syria), and another nuking of a non-nuclear force (the first since World War II) would set a horrific president.

Edit: Another argument for "The Republican Party is a death cult." They seem to have an obsession with using the most violent response to any situation.

[Lord Revan]

ISIS is losing ground in Iraq, America has lost no troops against ISIS (unless one or more US soldiers were killed in terrorist attacks outside of the actual war zone in Iraq/Syria), and another nuking of a non-nuclear force (the first since World War II) would set a horrific president.

it's even worse then that since has horrific as Hiroshima and Nagasaki were Japan as a nation was still at state of war with USA, IIRC neither Syria or Iraq are fully under the control of ISIS to point that you could consider actions of ISIS as actions of those nations. so the president isn't "you get nuked even if you don't have nukes" but rather "You can get nuked if the extremist elements of your nation are anti-american even if your nation as a whole isn't anti-american."

Edit: Another argument for "The Republican Party is a death cult." They seem to have an obsession with using the most violent response to any situation.

I would less of a death cult and more like bunch of collage jocks that never grew up.

[Simon_Jester]

I would challenge him to locate on a map the exact spot he wants blown up... but it's a foregone conclusion he'd lose.

[Borgholio]

From a purely logistical standpoint, one nuke wouldn't even be enough. Given how spread out the ISIS groups are, you'd need possibly a couple dozen warheads and even then you wouldn't get them all.

[Baffalo]

GOD FUCKING DAMNIT.

Last time an Arkansas senator showed up in the news, it's because he published a letter for the Republicans to sign interfering in Iranian nuclear talks, and now this bullshit.

I swear to God if I had the money I'd move to another state. Fuck this.

[K. A. Pital]

I am sure he is just representing the will of his electorate!

[Elheru Aran]

State senate. So he's representing a fringe of a local constituency. Not going to make much of an impression, but probably trying to posture in hopes of building up for a Federal run later on.

[Grumman]

If tomorrow every single member of ISIL spontaneously imploded, the world would be a better place for their absence. Wishing we could kill ISIL and put an end to the atrocities they commit is not unethical, what he wants is only impractical.

[K. A. Pital]

What he wants is pretty stupid since by nuking them, you basically declare yourself crazy genocidal megamurdering maniacs and make them, cruel and horrible as they are, martyrs. It worked for the Japanese who had rewritten the history of World War II at home to play victims, and they were every bit as cruel and genocidal as IS.

[The Romulan Republic]

If tomorrow every single member of ISIL spontaneously imploded, the world would be a better place for their absence. Wishing we could kill ISIL and put an end to the atrocities they commit is not unethical, what he wants is only impractical.

Its a good deal more than impractical, its lunacy. I mean, let's say you nuked, let's say, Mosul. Sure, you'd kill a lot of IS fighters. You'd also kill thousands or millions of people who are not part of IS and clearly establish that America has gone nuts.

Edit: Of course, since this is a southern Republican, I wouldn't be surprised if the lives of Muslim Iraqi civilians are worth less than nothing to them.

[Elheru Aran]

Yeah, a nuke is just a little too much of a disproportionate response. Boots on the ground is meeting them at (more or less, technological disparity notwithstanding) their own level, so from an international relations perspective it's a little more... humane.

[Grumman]

Yeah, a nuke is just a little too much of a disproportionate response. Boots on the ground is meeting them at (more or less, technological disparity notwithstanding) their own level, so from an international relations perspective it's a little more... humane.

This isn't a boxing match, Elheru. Humane only means not drawing their deaths out more than you have any practical reason to and minimising harm to people not in ISIL. If aerial bombardment works and if we can do it without hitting civilians, it would be stupid to avoid doing so just to be sporting.

[Baffalo]

Yeah, a nuke is just a little too much of a disproportionate response. Boots on the ground is meeting them at (more or less, technological disparity notwithstanding) their own level, so from an international relations perspective it's a little more... humane.

This isn't a boxing match, Elheru. Humane only means not drawing their deaths out more than you have any practical reason to and minimising harm to people not in ISIL. If aerial bombardment works and if we can do it without hitting civilians, it would be stupid to avoid doing so just to be sporting.

Go look at every sports movie ever made. It's always showing one team as being hopelessly outclassed by another, much larger and stronger team. Why do we watch it when it's the same story repeated time and again? Because people always root for the underdog.

In this particular case, people are going to sympathize with ISIL when it comes to being nuked because it's the coward's way out. You're essentially saying, "We can't fight them fair and square so you're just dropping nukes so you can win." Really, it's like how sports movies would work if they had any basis in reality, namely where one side has a huge advantage and just stomps on the underdogs so hard the losing team is essentially just running away at that point. But people still root for the underdog and want to see a fair fight, even if it's completely retarded.

[Joun_Lord]

Sure, you'd kill a lot of IS fighters. You'd also kill thousands or millions of people who are not part of IS and clearly establish that America has gone nuts.

Edit: Of course, since this is a southern Republican, I wouldn't be surprised if the lives of Muslim Iraqi civilians are worth less than nothing to them.

Which is why dumb fucks shouldn't be advocating for "glassing the desert" or "making it glow" or any of the other dumb shit spewed by morons (possibly myself included) back after 9/11 and repeated now.

ISIS/ISIL/Daesh/AQ 2.0/whatever are some evil motherfuckers that do need put down like a rabid dog. Not because they are a threat to pig dog Americans in their McMansions and Hummers, but because they are murdering hundreds or thousands of Iraqi civilians. Men, women, and children are being killed systematically by these giant cunts.

Nuking ISIS would probably kill far more civilians then ISIS has. While ISIS is bad I don't think they are bad enough where whole villages of people are willing ot die to end them.

Now if ISIS was out in the middle of nowhere singing kumbaya and roasting marshmellows and children, I'd probably be okay with a small nuke frying the bastards. But as it stands now ISIS is in civilians towns and cities, to hit them means to hit the people the world is crying about saving (when they aren't crying harder about things being destroyed).

And no the lives of "Mudslime" Iraq civies don't mean shit to Republicans, hence why tossing nukes or firing Predator's hellfire missiles at ISIS indiscriminately seems so appealing to them.

[salm]

Rarely has there been a better situation for this Peter Arnett quote...

[Channel72]

Low-level state senator says crazy feel-good shit to appeal to average idiot voters. News at... 11?

[salm]

People who consider nuking a country feel-good shit should probably be nuked.

[Baffalo]

People who consider nuking a country feel-good shit should probably be nuked.

As someone on the ground here, I can tell you that most of the average voters who see this shit roll their eyes and it's mostly the older, super conservative voters who get spoon fed this bullshit. I love my home state but I see shit like this and it's no wonder that we get labelled as a backwater. I'll be the first to admit it's like that in several places, but most people are honest people who think our politicians are retards sometimes but at least try to make our lives a little better. So long as they're doing good overall, they'll just keep voting for whoever the Republican party puts in front of them because they know their neighbors will, and so it's a sort of endless circle jerk where the Republicans can count on endless support because they're the only ones in town. Do you honestly think the Democrats give two shits about trying to swing Arkansas in the delta? No. They'll try and swing it around Fayetteville and maybe Little Rock, but 3/4 of the state is considered red. Or, if I wanna show my true Arkansas colors, Razorback Red.

[Ralin]

Low-level state senator says crazy feel-good shit to appeal to average idiot voters. News at... 11?

Someone once ran for Congress in Louisiana on a platform of nuking Baghdad. His slogan was "Let's drop a bomb on Saddam."