Can War work?

[Jackalope]

You know, that's a strategy I haven't tried in Civ starting with Civ 1. City goes into revolt, raze the city.

Somehow I think it might not work so well.

I don't like my people complaining. If they piss me off I'll raise the city. Even if I need it.

I'm disappointed that there is no option to kill just the dissenters, particularly when in Despotism.

What unhappy citizens? Oh you mean the ones with their heads on pikes lining the city walls? Why do you ask, citizen? Are you unhappy too?

[Anomalocaris]

In the case of the US and EU, I think it's Damned if they do and Damned if they don't.

In that case why don't we do what is best for us.....for a change.

What's best for us involves a series of knock down effects outside of Syria.

---

I don't like my people complaining. If they piss me off I'll raise the city. Even if I need it.

I'm disappointed that there is no option to kill just the dissenters, particularly when in Despotism.

What unhappy citizens? Oh you mean the ones with their heads on pikes lining the city walls? Why do you ask, citizen? Are you unhappy too?

Brute! Civilized dictatorship is marked by the fact that no one could be found to testify to any dissent having ever existed.

[Jackalope]

I'm disappointed that there is no option to kill just the dissenters, particularly when in Despotism.

What unhappy citizens? Oh you mean the ones with their heads on pikes lining the city walls? Why do you ask, citizen? Are you unhappy too?

Brute! Civilized dictatorship is marked by the fact that no one could be found to testify to any dissent having ever existed.

If Civilization were a multiplayer game, I surely would seek you out as an ally.

[Godscreated]

In the case of the US and EU, I think it's Damned if they do and Damned if they don't.

In that case why don't we do what is best for us.....for a change.

What do you think that would entail? Can we afford to allow those chemical weapons to find their way into terrorist hands.

[CapnAwesome]

What do you think that would entail? Can we afford to allow those chemical weapons to find their way into terrorist hands.

Of course. Saddam Hussein had Chemical weapons for years. The Iranians have them, North Korea is Nuclear. The Soviet Union had enough Nukes to destory the entire world. If we invade Syria or whatever random country happens to be the enemy of the moment we'll kill many multiples the number of people that terrorists could possibly kill with some Chemical weapons plot, which would undoubtedly fail anyway. The most fatalities from a Chemical terrorist attack in the history of earth has been 8 (subway attacks in Japan.) Today it's harder than ever to pull off a mass terrorist attack and particularly difficult with Chemical weapons.

Less propaganda, more thinking please.

[Anomalocaris]

In that case why don't we do what is best for us.....for a change.

What do you think that would entail? Can we afford to allow those chemical weapons to find their way into terrorist hands.

The easiest way to keep that from happening is to let Assad win as soon as possible.

---

. The most fatalities from a Chemical terrorist attack in the history of earth has been 8 (subway attacks in Japan.) Today it's harder than ever to pull off a mass terrorist attack and particularly difficult with Chemical weapons.

There is a great deal of difference between the compactness, reliability, deployability, and lethality of a chemical device cobbled together in some terrorist's basement, and military chemical munition.

A chemical artillery shell detonating in subway would be totally different in likely result from the paper package enclosing a chemistry experiment that was smuggled aboard the Tokyo subway.

[Jackalope]

There is a great deal of difference between the compactness, reliability, deployability, and lethality of a chemical device cobbled together in some terrorist's basement, and military chemical munition.

A chemical artillery shell detonating in subway would be totally different in likely result from the paper package enclosing a chemistry experiment that was smuggled aboard the Tokyo subway.

This.

Weaponizing chemicals is not something that's easy to do as a home science project. Making the stuff is relatively easy. Delivering it efficiently is hard.

Had the Tokyo subway attack been perpetrated using military chemical munitions, the death toll could have been in the thousands.

[CapnAwesome]

This.

Weaponizing chemicals is not something that's easy to do as a home science project. Making the stuff is relatively easy. Delivering it efficiently is hard.

Had the Tokyo subway attack been perpetrated using military chemical munitions, the death toll could have been in the thousands.

If we go to another war in the middle east we will assuredly kill thousands of people.

[Ryantology]

I say, go for it. It'd be one less country in the Middle East we can say we haven't gone to war over.

[Godscreated]

This.

Weaponizing chemicals is not something that's easy to do as a home science project. Making the stuff is relatively easy. Delivering it efficiently is hard.

Had the Tokyo subway attack been perpetrated using military chemical munitions, the death toll could have been in the thousands.

If we go to another war in the middle east we will assuredly kill thousands of people.

I'm not saying we should go to war, but those chemical weapons are a real threat to our national security. Right now it looks as if rouge elements in the army are using these weapons on their own people and this will escalate if something is not done and thousands will die in individual attacks. Sometimes a little show of real force will discourage the cowardly.

GC