Posted on 12/03/2004 11:00:39 PM PST by ChristianDefender
Back in the days of the Cold War, the U.S. had a nuclear-weapons doctrine called Mutual Assured Destruction, or MAD for short. This doctrine held that if the U.S. were attacked with weapons of mass destruction, or WMD, we would immediately and without debate counter-attack the homeland of the perpetrator in such a way and with such overwhelming nuclear force as to make the cost of the initial attack too much to bear.
For instance, if the Soviet Union or the Chinese would have attacked us with WMD in the Cold War, we would have counter-attacked at the very least by destroying their 100 largest cities. The theory was that once you have destroyed the 100 largest cities of any society, even an evil empire, that society effectively ceases to exist, perhaps for several generations, thus deterring any WMD attack. Variations of this same nuclear doctrine were held by our Cold War allies and advisories, including the evil empire.
Although gruesome sounding, the beauty of MAD is that it worked. Even though both the U.S. and the Soviet Union were armed to the teeth with nuclear weapons, none was ever used. In fact, both sides went to great lengths to establish hardened and redundant command, communication and control systems to prevent the accidental or unauthorized launch of nuclear weapons, fearing the dire consequences.
The primary reason MAD worked is because it was simple and unambiguous. Both sides let the other side know in no uncertain terms that a nuclear first strike would be followed immediately by an overwhelming nuclear counter-strike destroying the heartland, culture and society of the attacker. This was a price even the most evil 20th century dictators would not even contemplate.
We now have a new enemy, Islamic terrorism, hellbent to either enslave or destroy us. This enemy is in many ways much harder to cope with than an evil empire. It does not have an army, an economy, an infrastructure, a capital or a state to attack. This enemy refuses to show itself on the field of battle so we can destroy it with our superior weapons and tactics.
However, Islamic terrorism could not exist if it did not enjoy comfort, support and succor from the Islamic societies from which its members are recruited. Besides the overt state support from Syria, Iran, pre-invasion Iraq, Libya, Sudan, North Korea, etc., this enemy also enjoys popular support in Islamic states. The popular support of the terrorists is much larger than it is politically correct to discuss in most forums in the West. But, does anyone doubt that bin Laden would be elected dictator-for-life in Saudi Arabia if that nation had free elections? Let's not allow political correctness to blind us or kill us. The terrorists are merely an extreme form of widespread corruption, totalitarianism and venality prevalent in Islamic states and societies worldwide.
Now, here is the urgent problem. The Islamic terrorists are seeking nuclear weapons to destroy us. If and when they acquire a nuclear weapon with the help of their state sponsors, they will use it in the U.S. homeland without warning. Can you imagine the effect of just one nuclear weapon being detonated in New York or Washington? In addition to the initial horrific destruction and casualties, the U.S. economy and perhaps the world economy would go into a depression that would make the Great Depression seem like Sunday school. Investment would stop for fear of further nuclear attacks. If they have one, maybe they have more? Our wealth would be dramatically reduced, and the economy would be in chaos for at least a generation. The American way of life would be dramatically altered, perhaps permanently. In short, the Islamic terrorists would win.
The stakes are as high as can be, and our current strategy of planting democracy in the Middle East may work too slowly or not work at all. How do we prevent that first nuclear attack and mobilize the world, even the Islamic societies, against the terrorists' nuclear ambitions? We need a new nuclear doctrine that puts everybody's skin in the game. We need a new nuclear doctrine that places the American people, the American society, the American economy and the American way of life far above politeness and political correctness.
I propose that the U.S. immediately adopt and publish the following nuclear doctrine:
In the event of a WMD attack by terrorists on the U.S. homeland or U.S. military facilities overseas, the U.S will immediately and without discussion use its immense nuclear weapons capabilities to destroy the 100 largest Islamic cities on earth, regardless of state, and destroy all of the military facilities of Islamic-dominated states. This will include all of the capitals and at least the 10 largest cities of all Islamic-dominated states and the "holy" cities of Mecca and Medina. In addition, North Korean cities and military installations will be destroyed. Now suddenly everybody from Casablanca, Cairo, Damascus, Riyadh, Tehran, Islamabad, Pyongyang and Jakarta have skin in the game. The last thing they want would be a WMD attack on the U.S. It would mean certain destruction of their societies. They might even be motivated to actually and feverishly work against Islamic terrorism instead of the tepid lip service they currently give. Those "freedom fighters" currently being cheered in the streets would be transformed to deadly threats in the very societies that spawned them.
The beauty of this doctrine is that it encourages the 1.2 billion Muslims to actually prove that they are adherents to a "religion of peace," and it holds all Islamic states and North Korea accountable for their behavior. If you don't want your cities on the target list, you have to earn your way off the list. Give us the head of bin Laden on a stick, and you may get a pass. Shut down your nuclear programs in an open and verifiable way, and you can earn your way off the target list.
Another advantage of this doctrine is that it doesn't cost a nickel. We have the necessary weapons and delivery systems in place. This would only require a fraction of our existing nuclear warheads. I presume the platform of choice would be Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines patrolling the Indian Ocean.
Of course, the hand wringers, peaceniks and leftist elites would shout and scream bloody murder about how aggressive, unfair and politically incorrect this doctrine appears. However, I believe it would accomplish the same thing as MAD – namely, the successful deterrence of nuclear holocaust. All we need is the will to declare it.
WHy look to the government for food? Buy two instead of one of what you use (canned, dry goods, non perishables).(ALso buy extra toilet paper, a couple of jugs of bleach, trash bags, and fem hygeine supplies. A few bars of soap. ) Put shelves in a closet and keep doing this until they are stocked. Rotate your stock. You now have the means to survive for a month. All you need is to lay up some bottled water for drinking, 1 gal per person per day. More if you intend to wash. no biggie.
So MAD's nuking of 1000 cities wasn't insane?
I'm saying most people aren't survivalists, and the CHUD (as I said) are gonna come out of the blast zone and overwhelm most people.
I'm sure Raytheon, TI and other suppliers would like to see their munitions become active in a war.
I guess I'm just a war monger - not really, just a pissed off American that does not believe in bullies killing Americans. /rant
While I believe total nuclear destruction of Islam will never happen, I disagree with your premise of "depravity".
America is basically a peace loving country. We yearn to live and let live. However, once hit we tend to defend and attack 10 fold. We fire bombed Dresdan and other German cities. We nuked two Japanese cities, along with carpet bombing others. I have no regrets as a peace loving American that we did that.
A few of our misguided foreign policies aside, I have no reservation about wiping out anyone who would try to kill my children or grand-children. If it takes MOABs or Nukes or other WMD's to stop them, I have NO reservations. Unlike some, I still think we are basically the good guys. And I know from reading the Koran, Hadiths, Islamic opinion articles, and other modern clerical writings, that the Islamic community is filled with very bad guys.
So, as much as I don't want to see the mass extermination of a culture...I would rather it be them than us. It's called survival.
Islamofascists don't think rationally. They wouldn't be influenced by threats of this type without a demonstration/follow-through, and that brings us to a Truman and Hiroshima dilemma.
Oooh, you're profitting from my early hit of the post button.
When the Islamic Bloc has ICBMs targetting our major cities and industrial centers, I'll be perfectly happy with MAD.
If someone suggests that we vow in advance to nuke 100 cities in response to a dirty bomb in Orlando, I will continue to point that person out as insane. The suggested response, to anything so much as a dirty bomb, is insane.
The Moos really have a strong faith that their 'allahu fubaru' is more powerful than the One, True, Living, Lord God Almighty and evidence will be when THEY are able to hit US (America/Israel) with a NUKE!
If Mecca/Medina go up first, then, their god LOSES!
And we treat it like some religion. It's a death cult.
It's Mein Koran - the cancer is taking over the planet. They see their end times coming. Check out the Mehdi's beliefs.
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to [execute] wrath upon him that doeth evil.
Romans 13:4
Hear, HEAR!!
As I said in another post, why not just go back to the Constitutional limits on Federal Authority and let the states handle the rest, as the framers intended. It would ultimately be cheaper, and no matter what happened in the Federal District, order would prevail, and America would survive.
No one city is that essential to the rest of the country functioning.
Sorry if that busts any bubbles out there.
I have no reservation about wiping out anyone who would try to kill my children or grand-children.
Agreed.
But again to the article: The threat to vaporize 100 cities is insane. It is a promise that even if they blow their entire load in one shot so small as a dirty bomb, we will vaporize 100 of their cities.
Insane.
It's not insane. It's survival. We're in pre-wmd attack mode now. You know what matters to us? gas prices.. The job numbers.. Stuff like that.
After a wmd attack, it'll be how many can we kill in revenge. It'll be how can I eat today. It'll be something you can't fathom. This is because of your types that refuse to stop it before it happens, btw.
I don't have a sword.
WIth what? THey'll be sick from eating their dead. They will deplete their resources fighting each other at first and be easy for anyone with their poop in a group to take out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.