Re: hostage taking and public executions Re: extending the M.A.D. Fleet to encompass global terrorism

From: Archimedes Plutonium (a_plutonium_at_iw.net)
Date: 07/30/04 

Date: Fri, 30 Jul 2004 13:20:34 -0500

29 Jul 2004 19:01:59 -0700 Silentotto wrote:
(snip what I wrote to save space)

>
> That might work a few times until the hostage takers wized up.
>
> It sure would suck to be the bait!

Otto, I am not sure whether whenever a world class engagement of war or hatred or fighting
requires for the side that represents peace and order must address every ugly tactic by the
opposite side (i.e. the West versus terrorism). I am not sure whether the tactic of hostage
taking plus public beheadings is a tactic that needs to be fully addressed and subdued. I feel
it should be. Because if not, then terrorists of the future will see this weakpoint and thus
this tactic will only increase.

Theoretically, I suppose when an enemy finds a tactic that is immensely successful and if the
other side does not address it to make it a *losing tactic* that it would end up dangerous to
the world at large.

So I kind of feel that the West cannot status quo of this tactic of hostage taking and
beheadings and that, no matter how painful the solution, that a solution to lessen and even
make it a loss for terrorists to engage in such a practice.

So I think we cannot sit still on this tactic but must find and employ a counteroffensive that
makes the price of hostage taking more detrimental to the terrorists. If we do not I expect the
news to be almost completely littered with who and how many hostages and beheadings occurred
today, tomorrow and ad nauseaum.

>
>
> There are a few problems that would have to be worked out first.
>
> One is that with todays technology and power supplies, an implanted
> broadcast device wouldn't be able to put out much of a signal and it
> would be easily blocked by buildings and such.
>

I think in the age of cell phones that a tracking chip implanted into the bodies of all
foreigners working in Iraq is easy breeze technology.

>
> That could probably be worked out.
>
> The bigger problem would simply be the terrorists learning what was
> going on and figuring out counter measures.

The alternative in that the terrorists have a huge and ample means of committing acts of
atrocity any time, any where is more of a problem.

>
>
> Anything that puts out a signal can be detected and if it can be
> detected, counter measures can be devised.
>
> But like I said, it would likely have some limited utility for a short
> period of time.
>
>

It makes commonsense that every foreigner in Iraq at this time is potential hostage and so an
implanted chip is urgent.

I envision a chip so good that a SWAT team of special trained soldiers could follow the hostage
takers and eliminate the entire group of them.

I suspect that the number of people engaged in hostage taking and beheadings is a small group
of about 100 or less and that once this small group is eliminated that it will take a long time
before another such group or incidents reoccur.

>
>
> Wait a minute...
>
> Your M.A.D. Fleet was supposed to occupy itself with toppling
> governments, not with occupations.
>

No, the M.A.D. Fleet top priority is to make its prescence felt in the world and that if any
countries (Pakistan vs India 2002) launched nuclear weapons would be annihilated by the Fleet.

The world from 1990 (after the Berlin Wall came down) to July 2004 has no Motivation to not
build nuclear weapons and has no motivation to scrap existing stockpiles. The M.A.D. Fleet
gives the world motivation to junkpile existing nuclear weapons and gives nonnuclear countries
like NorthKorea and Iran incentive to never build such weapons. Because if they build those
weapons the M.A.D. Fleet will come park itself off their coastline and either regime change
them or annihilate the entire country should they be brazen enough to launch their nuclear
weapon.

The concept of M.A.D. must be co-existing along with humanities ability to manufacture nuclear
weapons. The old-West saying -- live by the gun and die by the gun is apt. What stopped a
nuclear war between USSR and USA during the Cuban missile crisis of the 1960s was a inchoate
form of M.A.D. Fleet that blockaded Cuba. What prevented the Cold War from going hot was M.A.D.
itself in the form of nuclear subs and land based missiles. After the Berlin Wall came down,
humanity has been naked of its protector shield of M.A.D.

It is imperative and the first priority in this dangerous world of 2004 and beyond that we
build, employ, practice a M.A.D. Fleet.

Without M.A.D. Fleet every tinbucktwo country like NorthKorea or Iran will and want to build a
nuclear weapons program. And every country like Pakistan and India which have nuclear weapons
will be more on the probability side of launching them than not launching them because the
greatest insurance policy of M.A.D. never existed to calm and cool politicians and military men
who can easily push a few buttons and away we go in a nuclear war.

>
> That was supposed to be left up to organizations like the U.N.

Well, the M.A.D. Fleet is to be a international body of countries all represented in the
material of the fleet, in the personnel of the fleet and in the funding. And in the rules and
regulations drafting of the Fleet.

>
>
> Are you expanding their mission?

I conceived of the M.A.D. Fleet while watching the sabre rattling of a nuclear war prospect
between Pakistan and India circa 2001-2002. And I said to myself, this world is too fragile and
too vulnerable to a nuclear war unless we employ all means of prevention and the greatest
source of prevention is utterly lacking and missing in a M.A.D. deterrant embodied by a Fleet.

So that is mission number #1. But since I talked about M.A.D. Fleet for several years now the
missions have increased because nuclear weapons is not one dimension. There is the dimension of
rogue leaders such as NorthKorea and the need for regime change. Then there is the mission of
terrorists getting a hold of nuclear materials for dirty bombs or actual detonation. So sprang
mission #2 of parking the Fleet off the coast of NorthKorea and or Iran and if the Fleet is
attacked in any form then a regime change is mandatory by the Fleet.

Then there is mission #3 ( I call them corollaries of the main mission #1). Mission #3 deals
with terrorist groups because they have a proclivity of suiciding themselves and would be happy
to go with nuclear materials.

Missions #1, #2, and #3 makes the M.A.D. Fleet an international police force.

In mission #3, hostage taking and public beheadings must be counterattacked and reduced to near
zero.

>
>
> You know, I've been thinking...
>
> You need a better name for your Fleet.
>
> M.A.D. stands for Mutual Assured Destruction.

No, I think M.A.D. is the best term to go with because it saved the world in the Cuban Missile
crisis and it saved the world from nuclear war during the entire Cold War time period from
about 1950 to the year the Berlin Wall came down. But now the world is naked and unsafe because
M.A.D. is missing and gone on vacation.

>
>
> There isn't anything mutual about the destruction you envision for
> your fleet.
>
> How about the Prozac Fleet?
>
> 'Cuz it's job is to restore rationality and harmony...
>
> How about the Doom Fleet?
>
> Let those evil dictators know what's coming.
>
> Or, maybe just The Black Fleet?
>
> You could dress all your sailors in spiffy black uniforms with lots of
> silver piping and gold braid. Make them look really intimidating like
> storm troopers or something.

The strength of the Fleet will be its representation by almost every country in the world with
sailors and with technicians. Of course rogue countries like NorthKorea or Iran will not
participate because they know they are doing everything against what a M.A.D. Fleet
represents--- order and peace and never fire a nuclear weapon and never build a nuclear weapon.

>
>
> Have you given any thought to an insignia?
>
> Remember the insignia from the evil Federation in Star Trek? The one
> where Spock had the gotee?
>
> They had the planet Earth with a sword through it.
>
> That would be cool...
>

A good insignia would be that triangular cutout of a circular ring that warns of the prescence
of nuclear material. I think that symbol is ingrained in many peoples mind from the era of
testing nuclear.

>
>
> Not all politicans are as prone to freezing as Bush is.
>
> Thank god...
>

Well it is a shame that Mr. Bush is as frozen as a deer about hostage taking and beheadings as
he was frozen as a deer on 11Sept01. In fact I would say Mr. Bush is derelict of duty as a war
president as he spends more time in campaigning whereas he spends no time on solving the
problem of hostage taking and beheadings. And that is probably why Mr. Bush ended up in the
National Guard during Vietnam and where Mr. Kerry actually went into those fields of Vietnam.

P.S. I know it is a horrible thing to be a bait for terrorists but I think there are many
people on Earth that are so very brave that they would see that as a challenge. And I believe
the governments and the M.A.D. Fleet would pay for the families of these daring and brave bait
takers should they end up dying in the missions. But hostage taking by terrorists must be
answered with directly for it can not go on as is.

Archimedes Plutonium
www.archimedesplutonium.com
www.iw.net/~a_plutonium
whole entire Universe is just one big atom where dots
of the electron-dot-cloud are galaxies

Quantcast