N.Y.C., D.C., Madrid, now London, when is enough enough?

I agree with the rage, but it needn't come to this. We have immense military might, and we have immense economic power. Terrorists are only bad now because we have refrained from using it for the last 40 years against our REAL enemies. Instead, we fought sad little proxy wars in Korea, Vietnam, and, frankly, Iraq.

We have to recognize that our hesitance to make a serious statement has led to the flourishing of this junk. Nations like Syria believe that attacks like this morning are their legitimate means of making war on nations they couldn't beat otherwise.

It's time to say, hey, you guys make war your way, we'll make war our way. You finance the murder of civilians on our soil, we will destroy every single military target in your country with little or no regard for collateral damage.

If Palestinians want to make war, let them strap their boots on and go to friggin war. "Measured responses" haven't done a damn thing about this. We have to see these attacks as what they are, declarations of war from nations that use terrorism to ply their interests.

If Iran supports Hezbullah, and Hezbullah attacks Israel, Israel should consider itself attacked by, and at war with, Iran. The Arab world is attacking us by-proxy, and fighting a proxy war with them will just end the same way all our proxy wars have, in dismal failure.

Bakerstreet: Not that it will matter, but that rates an Insightful from me. I agree 100%, and while everyone is very angry and emotional right now, we need a voice of reason. Thanks for being that voice.

But which is worse BakerStreet? To take out a weapon of mass destruction and use it against say Syria, or to take out several individuals and use them as poster children for why no one should dare think of messing with the U.S. or out allies?

Personally, I'd rather use the approach I described above, and reserve that weapon of mass destruction for just a bit longer. Not that I wouldn't dare use it, but I'd like to save it just in case the message still doesn't get through.

You see though, I believe the message can get through, if we dare be mean and cruel enough to send it.

Terpfan, all I can say is, at what point does what you say here smack even remotely of "common sense"? What you suggest here is becoming everything the far left already thinks we are. Are you ready to throw in with Durbin, Kennedy and other jerks just to make a point? I agree we need to stop pussy footing around, but hey, why don't we just run into Baghdad and rape all the women and castrate the men? That'll show 'em!! Because of your passed common sense, I'm willing to overlook this as the ranting of a very (and rightfully so) pissed off person.

I agree more with Bakerstreet's reply to you. We need to use all the weapons at our disposal. Military, economic, food, etc. We need to come out and say which countries we have identified as the enemy. Iran and Syria have already decided they are at war with us, we need to take the fight to them. Again, through military, economic and food.

We as Americans need to act like we are at war. We need to shut them down where they stand. As a national strategy, NO goods from any country who makes war against us... Not even oil! NO food, cars, or anything else from the U.S. Tell any American working in any of these counties that they are on their own if they want to stay, then help get the ones who don't want to stay out of there.

Then, nothing in, nothing out. Total blockade on the nations. The order of importance in targeting, Government, Military, Terrorist support. Shut down their bases, their refineries, their power, their infrastructure. Most of this could be done with minimal loss of life and no cutting off of fingers or cowardly threatening the lives of family members who may or may not have any information any way.

If you are all for not pussyfooting around, I'm 100% in agreement with you. If you want us to become cowardly wimps who pick on anyone we can find out of frustration, then you can count me out!!!!

" But which is worse BakerStreet? To take out a weapon of mass destruction and use it against say Syria, or to take out several individuals and use them as poster children for why no one should dare think of messing with the U.S. or out allies?"

It isn't a matter of 'worse', it is a matter of productive effect. I'm sick to death of fighting with a handicap just because the people we are fighting can't do so in our league. We are taking the damage of someone fighting with one hand , no both hands tied behind our backs.

The people you would torture are lackeys, little turds the REAL monsters send to do their dirty work. If they had any empathy, they'd feel it for the innocent Arabs they are murdering in Iraq. They don't though, and they feel just the same about the people you would abuse.

Take it to THEM. If Syria actively supports people who attack us, then we should, as history always has, see that as an attack from SYRIA.

The day a fat, oil-rich Arab is scared to death to send someone into Israel with a bomb will be the day the bombing stops. This isn't about Allah and umpteen virgins, this is about them getting away with it because they can.

Look at what a single attack did to put Libya in its place. Granted, they ebbed and flowed thereafter, but that had more to do with the fact that we elected Presidents they were no longer afraid of.

This will end it, period. The next time Hezbullah kills Israelis, the leaders in Iran should be attacked, mercilessly. Then, perhaps the next leaders will be loathe to support them. Eventually, they'll all know better, and the asshats will be back to throwing rocks.

What do we do? We just fight on their level. We get on the ground with them, make ourselves targets, and try to ply the sympathy of the world. Screw that.

I may sound more like I'm pissed off and ranting, but think about it.

Economic weapons have done what?? Not a damned thing.

Military weapons? Well, if we unleash them perhaps, but again, to do what -- more collateral damage and be accused of not being concerned about the unlucky targets?

Did I say rape the women, kill the children and drag their bodies in the street? No. Drag the bodies of the combatants into the street? Yes, or at least in the street of public media. Get the pictures on Al Jazeera and other sources. Use the media to send the message and make the message clear - mess with us, and pay a terrible price.

Does it make Kennedy and Durbin right? No. They've never been right, and they aren't likely to start just because of what I've written.

Again, I'm asking for a measured response -- one that demonstrates the heavy price that the terrorists and their family will pay. We must stop fighting convention wars, with conventional tools. We have an unconventional enemy, and they understand only that they are defeating us because they use the courts of public opinion and they use the media to get their message out, or they let the Kennedy, Pelosi, Reid, etc., people do it for them.

Well the message needs to be changed to one that says these people have lost. Once that message is out there, we will have broken the will of most of these clowns. They are the ones that have preached terror and told their followers that they'll be rewarded. Once the rewards are no longer possible, the incentive to even think about trying for the rewards are gone. That is how you break the will and end the fighting.

Meanwhile, you can carrot and stick a bit and continue to offer economic incentives, financial rewards and humanitarian assistance (like we have) for those that cooperate and help us.

What we have been missing so far is the correct stick, and I still firmly believe what I've described is the right stick to use for this job.

Baker - the turds you describe, the mindless cowards that have let themselves be led by the nose into commiting these heinous acts are doing so because they are following the words of their leaders. The Mullah Omars and Osama Bin Ladens of their world. But they've done it because those morons know how to use psyops type weaponry on their followers. WE must do the same.

What the means is to get the message out fully packaged and ready to roll. Again, use Al Jazeera and other Arab TV to show what I've described, and after a week of public condemnation we'll see far less thoughts among the potential followers of believing the lies and propaganda of the Bin Laden's of the world.

Make it even more effective -- get the CAIR folks, the Muslim clerics that have mostly sat on their hands and not condemned the acts of these cowards, and others that will surely cry over the actions we take and give them even more air time to cry over the outcome that Bin Laden's followers will be raining down upon themselves. Let these people hear from others in their religions that they should be following that the paths they choose were not the right ones, and worse yet, if they really believe the crap that Bin Laden was selling, that it really was the wrong way to go.

Again, once done, the message will be clear, and the war will be won. With relatively few casualties, and with little or no real collateral damage.

We aren't fighting conventional wars, though. They are blowing up our kids, and we are whining about it. Giving them more of us to shoot at. Do you REALLY think that if we killed 50% or so of the Iranian leadership in one fell swoop that the next leaders wouldn't hesitate a bit to write that check to Hezbullah?

What about the tenth time we wipe out their leadership. Do you really think they are stupid enough to keep it up? Consider the cost of a ground war as opposed to what it would take to destroy their newly-built Legislature every time Hezbullah attacks?

No, Like I said, the people responsibile for these attacks have no sympathy for the people who you would be torturing, and the pigs themselves are too brainwashed to fear you. The only thing you can do is make THEIR WORLD END when they make a mistake like this. The next people might like their world to much to try again.

You want to make them angry, I want to make them dead, and the living ones to fear for their lives. Only that kind of fear is ever going to make an impact on them.

You want to make them angry, I want to make them dead, and the living ones to fear for their lives. Only that kind of fear is ever going to make an impact on them.

No Baker, I want to make them fear also. Not so much for their lives, more for their afterlives. For the lives of their friends, families, and more. For the afterlives of same.

Given the kind of fanatics we are up against, we must make them fear, and I still believe we needn't waste 10 Hydrogen bombs on Iran, Syria and other similar places.

"For the lives of their friends, families, and more. For the afterlives of same."

Sounds like terrorism to me, I'm sorry. You either fight in uniform, declaring war and taking out valid leadership and military targets, or you resort to the same torture tactics terrorists use to frighten people. We're forcing our brave soldiers to go house to house, acting like the insurgents by denying them the right to fight for real.

I think our difference here is that you really think we've been fighting a war. On the contrary, we've been stalling insurgents long enough for the Iraqi people to keep the peace. You don't fight a war with your hands tied behind your back.

We are at war, period, we just don't shoot back at our real ememies. We chase their little lackies around, and let the fatcats keep playing the same game of chess with new pawns. Time to break the board itself, imho.

We as Americans need to act like we are at war. We need to shut them down where they stand. As a national strategy, NO goods from any country who makes war against us... Not even oil! NO food, cars, or anything else from the U.S. Tell any American working in any of these counties that they are on their own if they want to stay, then help get the ones who don't want to stay out of there. Then, nothing in, nothing out. Total blockade on the nations. The order of importance in targeting, Government, Military, Terrorist support. Shut down their bases, their refineries, their power, their infrastructure. Most of this could be done with minimal loss of life and no cutting off of fingers or cowardly threatening the lives of family members who may or may not have any information any way.

--I agree 100%, total cut off, i would hurt them, but yet others will step up...

Baker - slow down again and think about this: we are at war -- against a bunch of terrorists. What do you fight them? Again, we must stop fighting them with weapons that don't hurt them, and instead must fight them with weapons that they do understand and fear.

These cretins understand terror, and you better believe that there is plenty that would terrorize them and make them stop cold in their tracks before considering another attack.

Would nuking them back beyond the stone age do it? Honestly, I don't think so. They could care less if we flatten Iraq, Iran, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, the West Bank and the rest of the area they infest. Wipe out one area, no problem, they exercise their nomadic traits, and move along.

Further, think again -- Bin Laden *wants us* to be fighting against the Saudi's. He wants instability so he can create more fanatical followers. The only way to stop those potential followers before, and perhaps even after they start down the road, is to remind them that the people above them have been lieing to them about what will happen to them. They've been told that we are compassionate chumps, who will jail them, where they can use the legal system to fight a propaganda war against us and perhaps even just be turned lose if they promise not to fight against us again. That must be called as the bull-shit it is. Instead of just locking them up, feeding them veggie meals and giving them all of their religious demands, we need to let them know that their current religious leaders are wrong, and followers of that religion will be dead if they follow them.

It needn't require more ground troups. It may require special forces, and it may require the use of people that would typically be answering ads in Soldier of Fortune magazine, but there are people that would do the job and it would be damned effective if we choose to actually follow down that road.

" Baker - slow down again and think about this: we are at war -- against a bunch of terrorists. What do you fight them? Again, we must stop fighting them with weapons that don't hurt them, and instead must fight them with weapons that they do understand and fear."

There's where we differ. I don't believe we are at war with terrorists. I beleive we are at war with the nations who sponser them and send them to us. Without international support and the winks and nods of their leaders, they'd be petty criminals.

"Would nuking them back beyond the stone age do it? Honestly, I don't think so. They could care less if we flatten Iraq, Iran, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, the West Bank and the rest of the area they infest. Wipe out one area, no problem, they exercise their nomadic traits, and move along."

No, because people all over the world hate us. There are people in central and south america that hate us with the same passion that Arabs hate us. The difference is we have defined war with Arab nations as this bomb, reprisal, lull, bomb garbage that Israel perfected 20 years ago. IT doesn't work.

You could replace 'reprisal' with "cut the fingers off a terrorist and bury him in pig poop", and it would be the same damned thing. They live to see the next day, they say "Heck, we survived, they didn't win!!" You have to understand that unless you defeat these people, they don't think they lost. Why would they?

We don't need to use nuclear weapons. It didn't take nuclear weapons to put Khadaffi in his place. These people are cowards, and they couldn't care less if you cut every appendage off their pawns, and they'd be able to find more the next day.

THEIR appendages, on the other hand, are all important to them.