Replies

It's obvious, if a US city is nuked Mecca and Medina become dust. 48 hours to evacuate, then, Kablooey.

I have suggested this before, and when I suggested it I was only half-way kidding. Now I'm not so sure. WHAT, exactly, would be the best military response to the killing of ... let us say ... a couple million Americans?

Imagine, for a moment, what it would mean. It would make the United States the victim of THE worst single military strike in the history of the world. Hiroshima ... Nagasaki ... the death and destruction caused there would pale in comparison to the loss of life and material which would result from the nuking of a medium-sized US city. What would we DO in response? We couldn't do nothing ... not and survive as a nation. But WHAT?

If another country is the source -- China, let us say, or N. Korea -- then the response becomes easier. In the very least , we would demand their immediate and unconditional surrender ... then Nuke all of their military installations if they don't do as we say. Meanwhile, the UN and the Euros and the Middle East would be yelling at us to not taking any provocative action. Yeah, RIGHT.

If it's a terrorist organization that's the source, then we would have to think carefully about the best way to hit them back.

Nuke along the board with Afganastan ... several low yield devices in all those areas where OBL is expected to be hiding? Perhaps.

Nuke Mecca? Having suggested that in the past, that would be the most "satisfying" action in terms of a visible signal. But, in the end, it wouldn't do any good.

Nuke their source of support??? HECK ... we'd have to Nuke 20 or 30 cities in the Middle East! I don't see that happening.

Identify ONE sponsor of State Terrorism (Syria) and use them as an example and Nuke them back into the Stone Age? How is that any more just than what happened to us if that sponsor didn't have a DIRECT connection to the attack on us?

I suppose if we could trace the source and identify WHERE the nuke matieral came from, that might be a start. If it didn't come from us, or from Russia, but ... rather ... came from Iran's production centers, then Iran would be an excellent target. But what if it came from our supposed ally, Pakistan?

In short, responding to a terrorist's Nuke strike would be a real quandry. We would HAVE to respond, and in a way to strike terror back at the source of the attack. But WHO, WHAT, and WHERE are the principle questions. I'm glad I don't have to make that decision.

I understand your concerns, but I think that if one of our cities was nuked, the pressure for retaliation, even on flimsy evidence, would be very strong. And, if the Islamists took credit for it, they, I think we'd go to a full mobilization, DefCon4, and round up all the moslems in the country. We, and I think we'd get help from even the Europeans, would start squeezing every moselm and every source, and we'd let every moselm nation know that unless they coughed up the perps tuit suit they, too, were in line for early termination with most extreme prejudice. No one wants to do anything like that, but if the Islamists start playing with nukes, even with chemical weapons in the west, we have to. This is WAR, not a criminal investigation.