If there is a terrorist the US can take out, should they do it? If so, how?

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

Since drones cost less in terms of equipment, training, and skill and are less dangerous to operators, jets haven't been used for airstrikes for a hot minute. Not like the 90s or early 2000s.

And jets came to be used more often in lieu of special operations teams on the ground that jeopardize dozens of lives.

So, should the USA be taking out terrorists, enemies of the state, etc.?

If so, how, and what methods?

 

[Orbital-Fetus]

tactical nukes.

 

[NSSVO]

Anyway the officers see fit. I am pretty left, but these fukk nikkas bomb everybody fam. No need to be nice. Bomb, bullets, poison, or god damn ninja assassins. Get rid of em.

 

[OneManGang]

tactical nukes.

 

[Orbital-Fetus]

search your heart, you know it's true.

 

[BaggerofTea]

If that's the case, America should wipe itself out then

 

[☑︎#VoteDemocrat]

tactical nukes.

I hate the term "tactical" as if that shyt is clean

 

[ZoeGod]

Israel has been doing this for decades and it hasn't been effective. All it does in the short term hurt the organization but in the long term they thrive. To effectively defeat a terror organization you will have to use ground troops. And that is where it gets messy. Drone strikes and air strikes can only take you far. They aren't effective cuz the Taliban are still active.