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? Why threaten? Why threaten lives when that can only create more 'martyrs'? Why not castrate the cult NOW?
Islam does not function in a democracy and so you will see that every Muslim country on the planet is an authoritative government and that actually is the objective that many in the west fail to either realize or understand. Islam is much more than a religion, an idealogy that encompasses all aspects of life.
What Islam eventually does is to take care of their own at the expense of the non-believers (the khafir or infidels). The term in arabic is refered to "dhimitude". We are lesser than the Muslims.
I have explained it at times to friends in the states by saying that I now understand what it might have been like to be a negro in the United States during the early part of the century.
smoking crater ping
Where's the Petronas Towers? Isn't the Kuala Lampur? Aren't those buildings an islamic symbol?
I suspect the 10-20 largest Islamic cities including Mecca and Medina
would suffice.
Something like this needs to be published, imho.
Unless they are a martyr, of course...
btw, you're saying it is NOT a sane place..
Totally agree....we must warn the terrorists that if we are attacked with WMD's then all bets are off for the safety of any country who even nods in their direction....They have no clue what they are messing with......
Another thing about the Cold War was no matter how much bluster you got the leaders on both sides were not ready to see what a nuclear holocaust would bring. The problem with muslims is they would welcome it. Why would any sane person strap dynamite on their body and then blow it up. Their outlook on life, treatment of women, etc. is totally in another playing field. When someone suggests doing as they did in the article, remember, it only works if those it is intended for sane and sensible, not fanatics that would do anything to promote their cause.
I've been saying since 9/12 that we should install a tamper-proof, MASSIVE thermonuclear weapon in the meteor-hut in Mecca. Then make an announcement that the second a WMD is used against the US, we detonate the bomb and incinerate their "holiest" city. BUT, I think I like this idea better...has a little more kick to it.
I know where I am allowed to go and where I am not. I know what I am allowed to say and what I cannot.
It is really difficult to explain, but eventually the insanity becomes a normality. You learn not to fight, not to speak out and not to rock the boat because you will get in trouble.
Ok, I was thinking indonesia for having so many.
Funny how these asians got suckered to following such a primitive arab tribal system.
I like the idea of just having one of our nukes just 'sneaked' into mecca. Just boom. No claim, nothing.
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.