Posted on 07/18/2005 3:48:32 PM PDT by Balding_Eagle
There has been much speculation about what Tom Tancredo said on the now famous interview last Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Fla.
From what I am reading here on FR, much of that speculation is wrong.
Tancredo was, in fact, suggesting that we consider (not implement, just consider implementing) a strategy similar to the strategy that Reagan used to win the Cold War.
Listen for yourself. HERE
If you think Tancredo is a nut case, and you don't want to change your thinking, move along, this clip isn't for you. Just post your thoughts without listening.
Its a standard strategy, that has been in place for a long time.
Its also was an option in Europe with massive Soviet Tank Armies, crossing the Fulda Gap, we respond with Tactical Nuclear Weapons, since we cannot stop all the Soviet Tanks.
The difference is, we are doing a SPREAD pattern to hurt a culture that is not necessarilly associated with a single country.
This is a hint, for the ears of Terrorists , it could be psyops, but I'm sure the point was made before, on back channels to the right Muslim ears.
And if the Terrorist try it, (Nuclear Terror Attack against one of our Cities), the response should be unlimited total options open battle.
All options open.
Hahahahahahaha!....keep going. You just get better and better. I'm anticipating you quoting the Constitution next. Hahahaha!
FMCDH(BITS)
In 2000, Buchanan didn't run in the GOP primary but as a reform candidate and avoided going after Bush directly.
In 2000, Bush came up with his tax plan after Forbes, and slightly modified it, Keyes and Bauer definatly pulled the race on social issues to the right, on economic issues, Forbes pulled it, Look at Bush (and McCain) at the very begining, and then as the primary went on (debate and meeting wise), Bush started out a little softer socially, but maintained his disipline and focus but hardened up later on.
If you remember the 2000 race, you could make a strong arguement that Bush became harder on social issues after "Quale got ugly" (Bushs words via tape with his former friend).
There is a name for a candidate who looks to november and forgets about who is running in the primary, its called Howard Dean.
That said, if Tancredo talks about immigration, and other canididates ignore it, its at there own peril, and he becomes a swiss army knife who can't win, but can peel off votes from everyone to shape or draw influence.
On AOL, the headline just says he wants to nuke them.
The transcript does speak for itself, but good luck getting the media to show the transcript in exchange in full.
Then again the media is so obsessed with Rove/Plame right now, Tancredo could probably start a chain of fires and no one would notice.
He can pander to Billy Joe Bob with one glass eye for all I care, as long as he brings up certain issues and makes other GOP canididates come up with their own plans and spell out their views.
Tancredo is about, only one key issue, immigration, he can peel off just enough votes, or swing just enough guys to make another candidate get an edge, in other words, he is an influence on the race, and he helps to better prepare the eventual GOP candidate.
A battle tested, well prepared, conservative nominee for 2008 is important, Tancredo, is a necessary part of the process, he doesn't need to control the party, he just needs to be that little push to the canididates to go right.
Czar of Russia Balduphere Poontang
LMAO,,, Thanks! It took a few seconds .. ;-)
Yeah, so you can rename it the G-a-hole-P party . :)
Most act like Dems just on this issue. I prefer to think of them as Neville Chamberlain like!!
tancredo is about himself. He isn't going to influence anything. He has shown with his backstabbing of Delay, and his bellicose statements in the press that he is a loose cannon and just marginalizes himself even more to the vast majority of the GOP base.
He started as a Republican, I don't recall if was before or after New Hampshire when he switched to the Reform party after claiming that "They" had anointed Bush as the candidate.
Abortion was the big issue with Buchanan, Keyes and Bauer trying to out promise each other. Buchanan said that he would outlaw abortion by Executive Order on the day he was inaugurated.
But Bush never deviated on abortion or any issue. He stayed with the original position statements he had posted on his website at the beginning of the campaign.
Immigration is a media driven issue they think they can use to divide Republicans and talk show hosts use it to drive up ratings because racism attracts the curious.
But only a very few people rate it as an important issue. It may play with the Bush-haters but not thoughtful voters.
Where did you get that?
Remember from debates on this in 9/01 that Israel's Nuclear Weapon program is called "Project Samson" ..nothing like a good name like that to get them wondering.
I did answer the question and I said I trust our miltary leaders, in which you have implied you do not.
No you didn't. Could you please answer the above question.
Peaceniks spew their foolish bile on the dead bodies of those who fight to preserve their freedom to do so.
I have no use for them and whenever I get thec chance let them know, how disgusting they are.
Oh come on. Your not so dense as to think this hasn't already been seriously discussed are you?
And from Hugh Hewitt
http://www.hughhewitt.com/#postid1811
The Tancredo Blunder
Donald Sensing has all the links that really matter on the Tancredo blunder. (HT: StonesCryOut.) Pastor Sensing notes that I corrected the first post to specifically note that Congressman Tancredo talked of "bombing" Mecca, not "nuking" Mecca. The actual audio is available to anyone now at the website for WFLA 540 in Orlando. Note two things. First, Congressman Tancredo said that if we determined that "extremist fundamentalist Muslims" attacked the U.S. with nukes, then we shoudl bomb Mecca. Why, he should be asked, if "extremist fundamentalist" Muslims are guilty would we declare war on all Muslims? Why make the distinction about "extremist, fundamentalist" Muslims if the distinction doesn't matter in our response. Second, the Congressman also said "the most draconian measures" should be on the table." He didn't say "nuke," but it is a fair inference.
Tancredo is no doubt being inundated with "Stand tall Tom!" calls and e-mails from the anti-Islam crowd. This is a fringe opinion, but its supporters are not afraid of voicing it, much like the pro-Durbin remarks crowd on the left fringe urged Durbin to stand tall when he compared the American military to Nazis and Pol Pot's killers. This creates a problem for Tancredo: He will offend this very loud portion of his support by regretting and retracting his remarks which he surely must do, and the sooner the better.
The remarks he made are a positive disservice to the United States, for all the reasons Durbin's were. He has to retract them. And he ought to apologize to every Muslim soldier, sailor, airman and Marine for suggesting that the way to respond to an attack on America is to attack their faith.
I have been hearing from people who urge that Tancredo is just voicing the updated version of the MAD doctrine which kept the USSR at bay through the long years of the Cold War. That's silly. Destroying Mecca wouldn't destroy Islam. It would enrage and unify Islam across every country in the world where Muslims lived.
Let me be blunt: There is no strategic value to bombing Mecca even after a devastating attack on the U.S. In fact, such an action would be a strategic blunder without historical parallel, except perhaps Hitler's attack on Stalin. Anyone defending Tancredo's remarks has got to make a case for why such a bombing would be effective.
Take down the Syrian regime? You bet. Replace the House of Saud? Fine. Bomb every nuclear facility in Tehran? Absolutely. The US would respond to a savage attack with fury --but purposeful fury. Bombing Mecca would be the opposite of purposeful fury.
Those who support him have to explain what the strategic value of such a response would be. There is none.
Also
Tom Tancredo's gaffe on bombing Mecca.
Radio Blogger ^ | 7/18/05
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1445716/posts
Destroy Mecca and the Koran lied:
[9.28] O you who believe! the idolaters are nothing but unclean, so they shall not approach the Sacred Mosque after this year; and if you fear poverty then Allah will enrich you out of His grace if He please; surely Allah is Knowing Wise.
[9.29] Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
[9.30] And the Jews say: Uzair is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!
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.