But you haven't said how they would survive in a desert with no food or water... Maybe magic powers? A large number would indeed find a way to survive. But even if a minority died, say 20%, which is low in my opinion, you'd have more deaths than the Holocaust. So how would it not be genocide?
Ok, spend 20-30 years rebuilding for their pointless lifes, or quickly surrender their life to Allah and get the paradise and virgins promised. Hmmmmm... How many rivers and lakes do you think there are in a desert? Water is brought in through pipes that would be bombed out and unusable. With no electricity, no food distribution, no hospitals, etc etc etc how would you prevent anyone from starving? Oh, drop food? That worked well in Somalia. The warlords snatched it from the starving innocents and used it to pay their troops. But I'm sure it would be different here. If you think destroying all of the major cities of their countries without any sort of total war being present is going to eliminate terrorism, well, you may need some practice with your critical thinking skills. I mean, they are way past that time 60 years ago when Israel smacked them around, aren't they? The Japanese had a living God who ordered them to accept surrender.
I think he explained it already, but nowhere has he advocated deliberately killing off those populations....genocide. Unless you define unintended casualties of war as genocide, which I don't, but I believe you must.
Read this: Then this: It seems you just expect terrorists to stop being crazy just because. Think your plan all the way through. Will it do anything to destroy active terror cells? Will your plan do anything to stop the spread of terrorism? Will it foster pro-American sentiment anywhere? Does it really do anything to protect America?
Why not? Be specific. You're talking about mass murder. If you can't realize this . . . I just don't know what to say. Talk about useless. It would breed more hate than anything I can imagine.
If we ever did this I would take up arms against the U.S. as well. My grandpa didn't lose body parts shooting down Kamikazes to prop up a nation who intentionally murders millions of civilians for no reason other than the fact that there are undesirable people living among them.
disagree, they would either rebuild or starve and die. They would have no means of joining Al Quada. I've seen quite a few in Iraq haven't you? Have you been over there, I don't believe thats the only way to get water. If that was the case no one would've survived over there all the many years they didn't have electricity. Exactly the point, it sure worked with the Berlin Airlift didn't it? Depends on how smart or stupid your strategy is my friend. Besides if they fight each other for food they aren't fighting us are they? I think I did quite well at answering your questions with critical thinking is you want to get personal, angry or hostile that is your problem not mine. Shows you just how dangerous the radical muslims and those who support terrorism, Iran, Syria and Pakistan really are doesn't it? All bets are off when they start using their children or other people's children for killing.
Again: forcing millions of people into the desert where there are few sources of food and water is the same thing as deliberately killing off those populations. Just because you aren't pointing a gun at them and pulling the trigger doesn't mean you are responsible for their deaths. Forcing the civilian population into the desert with no means to survive is not producing "unintended casualties of war". It would be genocide, plain and clear. How long would you survive in the desert along with the population of say, Dallas, looking for the same scraps of food you are?
