A threat to vaporize 100 Muslim cities

WorldNetDaily ^ | 12-03-04 | David C. Atkins

[No Surrender No Retreat]

Your response is one of logical thinking as to this cancer is concerned. My thoughts are, "Power Perceived Is Power Achieved." However we are dealing with hoodwinked zealots who think death is a one way ticket to allah and the 72 camel booties. I hope we are never attacked, but we must be prepared to (unleash hell) on those responsible a thousandfold. Your plan would be a good one and mine as a backup, is competent as well. I hope we never have to resort to my plan, but we must be prepared. NSNR

[dennisw]

btttttttt

[weenie]

bttt

[varon]

I agree wholeheartedly!
When we were totally engaged in the cold war, it was a war against communism. Not radical communism, not far left communism but communism and all of the states under the umbrella of the USSR.

If I recall correctly, only about 10% of the USSR population were card carrying communist party members and of those the majority were members just for the few privileges party membership offered such as job security, better housing and access to consumer goods not available to the masses. Therefore, the threat to our existence was perpetrated by a comparative handful yet we didn't hesitate targeting not only military complexes but industrial and population centers.

We were in a war against Communism and no one invoked PC to say we were in a war against a few radical Communists.

Today we are in a war against Islam, no two ways about it. The ones that are carrying out their mission are for PC sakes called radicals to as not to affront the sensitivities of the other Muslims that are passive participants. How do they rate this consideration when all citizens under the Soviet rule were painted with the same brush and threatened with annihilation?

Why are we afraid to define the enemy? Did we differentiate between the rabid Nazis and the rest of the German population or did we fight against the whole German nation?

Did we just fight against the whole Japanese nation or just the Emperor and his minions?

Just what has earned the Muslims this special privilege in history where they can send in shock troops in sneak attacks and be held blameless?

Have we been brainwashed by the anti-American element (liberal) in our politics and society to accept death and destruction as a price for having achieved the highest standard of living in history and provided our citizens access to knowledge and riches beyond belief under a government of the people, by the people and for the people?

IMHO we have two distinct enemies, Islam and their fifth-column collaborators (liberals/socialists/communists/Democrats) and if we are to pass on to our children and grand children even an iota of the bounty we enjoy today, we better be prepared to engage our enemy and engage them with sense of purpose and finality, preferably with a preemptive first strike.

[mad_as_he$$]

I believe you may not have a clear understanding of the First Ammendment. It was the intent of it that Congress WOULD NOT establish a state religion. It was not intended to establish freedom of religion. Most "qualified" religions are only so for tax purposes in the eyes of the Feds.

Flame on all but the Federalist Papers make the leg intent clear.

[mad_as_he$$]

This has been my position on the issue since BEFORE 9/11. The list should start with the most holy places and go down. One Trident could finish the job before lunch.

[nyconse]

No it's not over the line....these people do not fear deportation. We must come up with a plan that would cause real fear...this plan would do the trick. You don't even have to get into the country to use a nuke - Mexico (near the US border) would do just fine. The threat to destroy all Islamic cities and individuals is a bold move, but if we were attacked what choice would have....sit around and sing kubyah while waiting for the next bomb? We would have to eliminate the threat, and the threat comes from Islam and its evil societies. Best to warn the decent (if there are any) people in Muslim society that aligning themeselves with the terrorists will ensure their destruction.

[William Terrell]

I should sit down and figure out how many Americans you'd kill in those attacks. And non-Muslims foreigners.

Once America made this proclamation worldwide, anyone dumb enough to visit those cities more than 5 minutes at a time would deserve what they got.

[nyconse]

I am sorry...I think I missed the point here-a free society? Do you really think our society could endure a nuke killing millions and not be irrecovably changed? One must find a way to defend our free society from nukes. Keep in mind during war some freedoms must be curtailed temporarily. It has happened during all wars. Maybe just maybe Arabs who don't want to ge see Allah next week might rat their vicious brethern out if they perceived a threat to themselves and to their holy sites.

[stockpirate]

I agree with the use of nuclear weapons, and deportation of ALL Muslum non-citizens. I also think that we should start now with any attack on any US interest in the WORLD, we take out a major city of the Muslum world.

Mein Kampf is actually very widely read in the Musmum world and the roots of the terrorists can be found in NAZI Germany where there were two SS divisions made up of Muslums and run by Muslums.

http://www.tellthechildrenthetruth.com/

[kidd]

6 of the 20 largest cities in the world are primarily Muslim:
1. Karachi, Pakistan (10,889,100)
2. Istanbul, Turkey (9,631,700)
3. Jakarta, Indonesia (8,987,800)
4. Lagos, Nigeria (8,682,200)
5. Cairo, Egypt (7,609,700)
6. Teheran, Iran (7,317,200)

Number 1 and 2 are cities that are allies to the US. Number 3 and 4 have not been significant problems to the United States. Number 5 has citizens that are certainly been a problem, but the government of Egypt has generally been well behaved (Mailer because of foreign aid).

Teheran is a real problem, of course. However there is a significant movement there to overturn the government. Threatening Teheran with a nuke will stop that movement cold in its tracks.

Adaptation of this policy (destroy 100 Muslim cities) would, by every definition of the word, make the United States a terrorist nation. Even under MAD, the primary targets were military, not civilian.

Such a policy would only encourage Muslim nations to pool their money to develop/obtain nuclear weapons. We would definitely lose VERY important allies, such as Pakistan and Turkey.

This idea is a poor one.

[William Terrell]

Moreover, a promise to destory every one and every thing "Muslim" will ensure many non-radicalized Muslims will join in the fight against us, via whatever means possible, including terrorist borne WMD's.

Good, smoke out the liars. And they will do exactly what, under this threat?

Adequate deterence can be achieved by other means.

What other means? Destroy their bases? Where exactly are their bases?

[William Terrell]

It'll clearly guarantee that we'll be hit.

But, you see, the policy specifies that we be hit first.

[JustDoItAlways]

Three weeks ago, I said the same thing.

Posted by JDIA - Nov. 14, 2004 "What kept the Russians from starting a nuke war with us, from invading Europe, from sneaking suitcase nukes into the US and setting them off ...

MAD. Mutually Assured Destruction.

I think we need to make a clear statement now of our intentions should OBL or some other Islamist set off a nuke here. That would be the capitals of all terrorist supporting states get one of their own. "

[eno_]

It's not a First Amendment protected religion, but a bloodthirsty political cult hellbent on world domination, much like the NAZI Party.

Bingo. The Germans outlaw both Scientology and Naziism. Why is Islam treated differently?

[Uncle Vlad]

Actually, the race is on in Iran to see if they can develop a nuclear bomb before the people throw the mullahs out. The mullahs know their hold on power is very tenuous, and we could wake up one morning soon and see the name of the country changed from Iran to Persia, with a Democratically elected, pro-West government in place. Let's hope it happens soon.

[ßuddaßudd]

read

[Melas]

Don't get me wrong. I have my issues with Islam. However, I'll fight the idea that a belief system is off limits to American citizens with my dying breath. That's anethma to everything I believe in.

[iconoclast]

Bummer idea.

We'd go broke rebuilding them, probably complete with mosques! ;o)

[Melas]

Would you say that Christianity, Islam, Scientology, Hinduism, Judaism, the Church of Satan, and the Church of Homer Simpson are all religions and all equal?

Well, I guess this is really the crux of the matter isn't it? I know this isn't a popular sentiment among theists, but I'd have to say yes, they would be equal. Christianity, Judaism and Islam, would certainly have a longer history, greater tradition, and obviously more believers than the church of Homer. However, in all honesty, I'd be lying to you if I told you that I thought the divinity of Homer was any less credible.