What would media and right-wingers say if Bush dropped the bomb.. ?

[kentuck]

on Baghdad. This is a hypothetical, of course, but if Bush gave another ultimatum - for example like the 48 hour ultimatum he gave Saddam - to the people of Baghdad to evacuate the city because we were going to level it, what do you think would be the reaction of the media and his rightwing supporters? No doubt, most of us think no one would be so insane to do such a thing. However, is it really that far out of the realm?

The media would probably come on with one of their special Iraq reporters and calmly report that Bush has given the people in Baghdad 48 hours to evacuate or they will be leveled with the city. Then they would probably put out a poll question for their viewers, "Do you think it is a good or bad idea to drop atomic bomb on Bagdad?"

Then after a short commercial, they would bring on their "special experts" to advise on the rationale and the reasons for deciding to drop the bomb. One would quote Harry Truman and give us all the details about how many lives were "saved" because we dropped the bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Then he would explain the technical aspects about how much more accurate these bombs are today.

On the other side of the question would be some token liberal that would say something to the effect that we need to get an international force in there and we need to withdraw our own troops. The host would then ask him if that was a "realistic"
alternative? They would then thank both guests and return after a short commercial.

As for the right-wing supporters of Bush, they would cheer him for showing courage and backbone and thank God we finally have a CinC that is brave enough to do something about this "terrorist" problem. "Remember, we were attacked on 9/11," they would say. There would be jokes about turning sand to glass and high-fives around the water coolers. After the attack, they would brag that this was the real "shock and awe".

[DinahMoeHum]

1. "They all hate us anyhow, so let's drop the Big One now"

- "Political Science"
Thank you, Randy Newman !!

:evilgrin:

[phaseolus]

2. It would be the Holy Hand Grenade

...wildly popular in certain circles. 'O Lord, bless this Thy hand grenade that, with it, Thou mayest blow Thine enemies to tiny bits in Thy mercy.'

Seriously, though, such an action would further divide the U.S... A LOT of people would be deeply ashamed. Probably lots of rioting would ensue here in the U.S., prompting a brutal crackdown.

I'm guessing such a thing has been considered, on a 'brainstorming' level. I'm hoping even the present administration isn't *that* stupid or evil.

[mmm]

4. a love fest among some; others would cower same as now

blood is in the water as Bush turns the screws.
Hatred rules the day.

[leftofthedial]

3. they'd defend the decision

and attack anyone who opposed it.

"holy hand grenade!" LOL!!

[kentuck]

5. Isn't that a scary thought !

:scared:

[sendero]

6. Woo Hoo n/t

[DBoon]

7. They would celebrate

They would applaud. They would be screaming in delight.

I work with these people. They have expressed just these opions prior to the war.

They would also applaud rounding up anti-war activists as well.

[Zorra]

14. I agree, I was in a cantina

before the war began, and there were a bunch of retired expatriate republicans in there spewing pro-war anti-Muslim platitudes. There was one other democrat in the cantina. I looked over at him, smiled, and said really loudly, "You know what I think? I think we should just nuke the whole region, and get rid of all of 'em". There was a happy, resounding response from the repubs. "Yeah!" They had no idea that I was being sarcastic. I looked around, and walked out of the cantina. Pretty scary.

[Beaker]

8. Ummmm- what purpose would it serve?

"...No doubt, most of us think no one would be so insane to do such a thing. However, is it really that far out of the realm?"

Yes, it really is "that far out of the realm".

Exactly what purpose do you think that he would think it would serve?

Despite what your teacher might have told you- there is such a thing as a stupid question.

[finn]

9. shrub the ratshit eater

would get more support from those slobs who think it is just great we are not taking nothing off any one no more.

[Wapsie B]

10. It isn't

far out of that realm or any other realm in the mind of a neocon.
It would be one big wet dream for the pod people. They'd love to drop a couple big ones on some brown people.
That way chimpy could declare victory and then move on to Syria or Iran in his perpetual war.
The reich in this country would want his likeness on Mt. Rushmore tomorrow.

[Beaker]

16. What purpose would it possibly serve?

even in the mind of a neocon? WE supposedly control Baghdad- WHY would we nuke it?

[kentuck]

17. Because we have never controlled Baghdad...

and that is where the war has been all along...around Baghdad and surrounding cities and villages of the Sunni Triangle. We had control of the other areas of Baghdad even before the war.

[Beaker]

18. But what purpose would it serve?

give the people 48 hours to evacuate the city, and then level it...then what?
if the city is evacuated, the bad guys evacuate too. so everybody gets to leave their homes, and then watch us destroy them, 'for their own good' or what?
It makes no sense to suggest a scenario that makes absolutely no sense and has no purpose.

[kentuck]

19. Are you assuming this bunch acts rationally ?

What purpose did it serve to invade Iraq in the first place? You're thinking like a "liberal" - looking for things that "make sense" and has "purpose". Perhaps they might think it would end the war, like Truman did? They are not rational thinkers.

[Beaker]

22. there were a myriad reasons to invade Iraq in the first place-

most of them centered around oil, but for starters-

Sadaam was selling oil for euros instead of dollars,
In order to rmove our troops from Saudi Arabia like Osama Been Forgotten wanted, we had to remove the threat of Sadaam, which was the reason we were in SA to begin with.
take your pick...
but it's downright silly to contemplate us nuking Baghdad at this point, no matter what your opinion of The Junta is, they wouldn't do something that irrational.
That anyone would take it seriously shows just how far the level of discourse here at DU has fallen. It's becoming more and more the freerepublic of the left.

[grannylib]

11. Nukes?? We have nukes??? Not according to the Enola Gay exhibit...

No nukes involved, just a cool plane, eh???

Wouldn't put it past the inbred little cowboy though...bet he would feel almost like a REAL military guy if he called in the nukeyooolar schtuff...

[CWebster]

12. nothing

they are bombing Tikrit again but it is barely mentioned.

[tom_paine]

13. Coporate TV Pravda would say it was justified

They would invent the rationales based on position papers issue from Bushevik Think-Tanks (Propaganda Mills) and the Party-Loyal Right-Wing Sub-Media.

Corporate TV Pravda will play ball. Period. Expecting anything less is unreasonable given the current state of Imperial Amerika.

[DuctapeFatwa]

15. The right man with the right move for America at the right time!

The voting class would agree that although it was of course a hard decision, it was the right thing to do, and the best for all concerned.

[Terwilliger]

20. I don't know, but if the Dems allowed it to happen, they should be jailed

and all of them sent to Gitmo

[kentuck]

21. How could the Democrats prevent it from happening ?

Espcially if the propagndists promoted it as if were nothing more htan another military mission?