No. But hunt, and seize, and punish the guilty - and only them.
Show that we're better and will remain so.
Should the UK have nuked Dublin in retaliation for the destruction of the Baltic Excange building, or the Omagh bombing, because there were certainly sympathisers and funders, probably abettors, in that city?
For example, at least one plane was hijacked from Boston. There's possibly some of the pilot's organisation left there - they can't have got too far. 20 kilotons would probably kill these perpetrators. 200 kilotons of airbust nukes would surely kill them, eventually. With 'unavoidable collateral' damage, of course.
Launch?
But if you wouldn't do that, then how can you do it to Kabul?
Meanwhile, if you want to stop all such attacks... then either remove the cause, or the possibility.
The latter requires the removal of freedom, altogether. The terrorists would love that.
The former? Well, genocide is hopefully not an option. That leaves finding the perpetrators... and/or dealing with the motive. And it's that last which will be the only enduring solution.
<edit> the BBC is just reporting missile attacks, probably cruise missiles, landing in Kabul. So much for a tardeted, considered response.
How much do you think the inhabitants of Kabul have even heard about today's horrors? How do you thingk Afghans there and around the world will react to the shelling of their capital, even now... |
