Replies

I am not sure you are reading it right. Opinion quoted was Hanson's, and I don't see him as a trigger-happy. Neither am I.

The only time I mentioned nuking anything was in a mental exercise where the author of the article was pondering some Muslims unquestionable belief in Allah and his micromanagement of their affairs. The logical question was to ask if Mecca and Medina are obliterated (don't have to be nukes), is there a chance that they will decide that their god was a false one? It also inferred that because other major religions don't see their God participating in the day to day activities anymore, the similar devastation does not necessarily shakes the believes. (Actually Holocaust did make many Jews unbelievers, because how G-d can allow that... I read that and heard, have no statistical evidence).

As I said before, I take allies where I can find them. That Muslims who will fight jihadists will be my allies. That leftists who see the terrorism and Muslim extremism as more important than our differences will be my allies too.

Do I need to defend myself more?

My reading of Hanson is that IF 9/11 repeated on large scale, the response will be devastating, and we will stop being extra careful where the bombs fall (as we are now). I am not sure its necessarily true, but has a high probability. And I share Hanson's hope that it won't come to that. Also I share his opinion that we need to emphasize Iraqi participation in rebuilding of their country and make their role more visible.

In regards of Fallujah, if we said we are going to take it, we should not back down, because perception is big part of Mideast reality. But hey, its just me, I just being stupid.