.. Are you kidding me??
Where the heck have you been these last few years??
Posted on 07/18/2005 10:58:49 PM PDT by Checkers
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 should 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.
UPDATE: More at CaptainsQuarters, RovingTheologian OneClearCall, OpaqueLucidity Brainster's Bogus Gold and Mark Daniels.
I want to be very clear on this. No responsible American can endorse the idea that the U.S. is in a war with Islam. That is repugnant and wrong, and bloggers and writers and would-be bloggers and writers have to chose sides on this, especially if you are a center-right blogger. The idea that all of Islam is the problem is a fringe opinion. It cannot be welcomed into mainstream thought because it is factually wrong. If Tancredo's blunder does not offend you, then you do not understand the GWOT. Yoni Tidi is a frequent and popular guest on my program, a deeply religious Jew and a retired major from the Israeli security services. On the program tonight he condemned the idea of attacking Mecca or any other target that is "Muslim" as opposed to "terrorist-supporting." We are not in a war with devout Muslims. We are in a war with Muslims who think that their faith compels them to kill non-believers and the nations that support those extremists.
A SCOTUS nomination will sweep Congressman Tancredo's remarks from the headlines, but I hope center-right bloggers will stand up and be counted on this issue. And I really hope that Congressman Tancredo, a fundamentally good man, will appear and regret his comments in unequivocal terms. Congressman Tancredo has seen the aftermath of Islamist terrorism up close when he visited Beslan. He knows the cost of encouraging such violence. I believe he will want to make clear that the vast majority of Muslims do not support that kind of butchery.
The strategic value is in the threat, not the action.
You've yet to disprove what Mo1 said, because you have the inability to think outside the box.
Which nation are we at war with today, Einstein?
The Soviets controlled the State.
Contrary to belief, they were only willing to sacrifice the lives of their people. Their own hides were ranked too important to lose to a nuclear fallout.
The terrorists do not own a state. They have friendly authoritative regimes, but this is not quite the same. Those regimes do not control an army that will stand down at request. The terrorists operate independent of these regimes' wishes, nor do they fear the end of any life including their own.
Bombing Mecca would be tantamount to taking two steps backward.
Again, whether Kennedy said something or not, the impact is zero. The terrorists have plenty of propaganda available already that seems to be doing the job of recruitment just fine.
They don't fear death. They fear not being able to reach paradise. Their weakness is not that complicated.
.. Are you kidding me??
Where the heck have you been these last few years??
Yeah, that's Mullah Tancredo's spin, too. "I was just threatening. If it were in my power I'd never really do it!"
Well, they can brainwash themselves with propaganda, but the truth of the matter is, public perception has changed in the Middle East because the terrorists have allowed Islamics in the Middle East to side with the "infidels" with their own actions, like bombing mosques and desecrating Korans. The terrorists have hijacked a religion, they aren't following any theology taught in the Koran, they are merely perversing the words of the Koran for their own gain.
I guess you're right. Words just keep pushing those moderate Muslims into the arms of terrorists. If only they had the most basic of reasoning abilities to resist that propaganda. < /sarcasm >
I fail to understand your point.
1) I stated they do not fear death. I assume you are agreeing with me?
2) Explain how fear of not reaching paradise can be exploited if Mecca is bombed (or threatened danger). In such an instance, according to the twisted belief of the extremist, this would result in the promised paradise. Whereas Refusing to sentence them all to an early death and Global Jihad by virtue of releasing atomic weaponry to carpet the Middle east, would result in denial of their dream of numerous virgens in heaven.
Agree .. it would have very little strategic value .. plus it would make the Muslims over there go even more crazy
Which would end up making the WOT harder to fight .. Our troops don't need that .. they know what they are doing and yjey know how to fight a war
They are our Best of the Best!
Can't say the same about some in Congress
Actually the terrorists are following the Koran just as they are supposed to be. The moderates are the radicals ignoring the teachings. Just study the history of Islam and you will see which is the dominant and correct view of following the teachings.
Can't say the same about some in Congress
Islam is a "holy place" religion. It is not at all like global Christianity or post-Second Temple Judaism which can function well with only a symbolic or metaphorical reference to the Holy Land and Jerusalem.
Every good Muslim who can MUST go to Mecca. So the precepts of the religion are fundamentally different from contemporary Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism, etc, and the bombing, nuclear or otherwise, would be a devastating blow to Islam's core identity.
As I outlined, there would be leaders and scholars who would transfer devotions to Medina, but this would not be universal and Islam would fracture into a wide variety of smaller sects some more spiritualised, some built on exacting blood revenge by eliminating all Americans.
You are either dense .. or just going off the cliff to defend Tancredo
But of course, once Muslim terrorists have nuked Atlanta, for example, most every American will want Mecca AND Medina nuked... including many who profess otherwise now. It is the way of things.
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.