Posted on 07/24/2005 3:10:02 PM PDT by 4.1O dana super trac pak
Put him in the wider context of world politics, and yes, he's an ignorant embarrasment.
"Love me" PC all the way, and where islam is concerned, dumb-as-a-brick.
He's from the school of thought that if he has a cockroach infestation, he ignores it because "there's too many of them". What a doofus.
Reason with cockroaches and reach an "accomodation". That's the ticket!
"I don't get embarassed by smart tough talk either, what I am embarassed about is knee jerk tough talk, which gives our enemies propaganda points."
Nuking Mecca is tough talk. And you are embarassed by tough talk. Face facts. You fear that being spread around. I hope they DO get the word out. They know we have a nice side. They also see too much of our wimpy side. It's high time they know that many Americans are quite willing to vaporize their entire culture if need be.
That's what was great about Reagan. He put fear in the hearts of his enemies. So would Tancredo, if he were president. Just imagine the Pucker Factor.
' He was asked a question about how we'd respond if some of our cities were nuked. His first response was "bomb Mecca". '
That was a strong first reaction, too. We are, after all, talking about a nuclear attack on the US. It was tough. That's the kind of man I want to fight al qaeda. That's the kind of man who can rally Americans behind the war.
Here's what a lot of 'thoughtful moderates sound like: "Uhhh.... ehhh... er.... uh..... well perhaps.... ehhhh..."
I'm not afraid to bring the hammer down -- I just want to hit the right nail.
You seem to be missing the subtleties of the debate. I for one, agree with you entirely, as I'm sure do many others.
The debate is all about the faux horror at articulating the obvious; a political screw up. The reaction is more horrific than the proposal.
Whether we nuke mecca first or last is of profound importance. My personal vote is last.
The substance of the argument is if a billion savages are totally pissed and vow to kill you or support those who do, how can it get any worse with mere words?
"Until 'mainstream' Islam can bring itself to stop rationalizing terrorist attacks and start repudiating and purging people like Ali and Hajjar from its ranks who do, this war will continue. As long as this war goes on, being 'offended' should be the least of anyone's worries."
Well said. It's nice to see an elected leader with a spine.
Tancredo BUMP.
Do you actually believe that common sense will sway a paid or volunteer propagandist?
"The substance of the argument is if a billion savages are totally pissed and vow to kill you or support those who do, how can it get any worse with mere words?"
I agree there. We couldn't stop at Mecca. Once you smack the bee hive, you need to take out all the bees you can immediately. Hesitation would kill you. If we are nuked, we must erradicate entire nations of Islam with lightning speed, not merely Mecca.
"The substance of the argument is if a billion savages are totally pissed and vow to kill you or support those who do, how can it get any worse with mere words?"
That sentance is so well-crafted, I need to state my reaction more clearly.
Tancredo is merely taking steps in the right direction. He didn't go far enough. But half a loaf is all I see right now, so I'll encourage it.
LOL! Well done.
Very appropriate question Arthur Wildfire!
It is obvious that way too many in the USA (FR included) and other countries have forgotten what happens when you do not fight a war to the end by beating the bloody crap out of your enemy.
Vietnam, Korea come to mind where we listened to the "reasoned and caring" left MSM and fought a war while on a leash. There are way too many people on the FR who seem to be of the same mind as hanoi jane.
The USA and others have shown that if you unleash your best weapons and efforts you can win a war. When was the last time Germany or Japan fired a shot at us?
It does not have to be a nuke on mecca, a nice big MOAB would work just as well. We also need to declare islime an illegal hate cult and close down all their breeding grounds, (mosques). islime should be banned in our prisons as well. What complete idiots we are to allow this devil worship introduced to inferior people who have already shown contempt for other citizens.
Stupid is also stupid regardless of who makes the statement.
Most Freepers can tell the difference; partisan hack talking points is a sure poison in the well of ideas. That's it.
I believe that if we were to use the threat against these targets it might help those supporters of terrorism in muslim governments, mosques, and other positions of power reconsider supporting, either overtly or covertly, a large scale nuclear or other wmd attack against the US.
Remember Osama bin laden has received permission from a Saudi sheik http://www.nydailynews.com/front/story/252390p-215993c.html to use nuclear weapons against US cities. Maybe this sheik and others in positions of influence in the muslim world would reconsider if they felt their holy sites would pay the price.
All that being said while I agree that using the threat as a deterrence might work, actually carrying out the threat, I just don't know. I do know this, I hope we are NEVER in a position to have to make the decision, because if we are it means at least one American city has just been destroyed.
Another world class geographist checks in...
Last time she was asked this question the answer was awesome: massive retaliation!
Unfortunately she was totally perplexed as to the target. I assumed the Boy Scouts. Or perhaps Tom Tancredo's office. Maybe the Vatican. Hard to tell.
Get with the program.
Well, I think that people recently killed deserve better than the fiction that the Saudis and other "Arab governments" pretend to cooperate with us and we pretend not to know that they continue to fund terrorism world wide, and to tolerate training camps in their countries.
But that's just me.
Time for a change.
"It does not have to be a nuke on mecca, a nice big MOAB would work just as well. We also need to declare islime an illegal hate cult and close down all their breeding grounds, (mosques). islime should be banned in our prisons as well."
Islamic moderates have been wicked in their inaction. They aren't even urinating on our fire. I am all for a Constitutional Amendment allowing complete monitoring of that infernal religion at this point. We've been trying to coax them with carrots all these years. We need our intel community to have complete authority to wire tap, bug, and stake out everyone who's been in the Islamic faith, dating back to the last two censuses, and also children of Islamics as well. We need to have the power to throw them into camps for mere suspicion. And any criminals who are also Islamic need to be placed in special, highly secure facilities [unless released-- that option needs to be open in case we want to see where they go, who they meet, etc.]
It would take an amendment to the Constitution, however. We won't get that amendment until after the next Ground Zero. Then, people like Savage and Tancredo will be called visionaries. But it will be a sad day.
"What complete idiots we are to allow this devil worship introduced to inferior people who have already shown contempt for other citizens"
I think that last sentance you made was a rant in the heat of emotion.
They aren't 'inferior people'. They are saddled with an inferior religion, which is, as you say a cult. They use 'fatwa' as a threat of duress over everyone's head. They don't worship devils, but their Koran does teach them to kill 'infidels'.
You've noticed too, huh?
You misread to whom I was referring. It may not have been clear in the way I phrased it. The inferior people I mentioned were criminals in prison. They have already shown themselves as unworthy to be in society and we are allowing them to be indoctrinated in devil worship.
"Well, I think that people recently killed deserve better than the fiction that the Saudis and other "Arab governments" pretend to cooperate with us and we pretend not to know that they continue to fund terrorism world wide, and to tolerate training camps in their countries."
Good point. The Saudis have their oil facilities wired for bombing. The way to handle them would take some major brass-- we would have to hold as many members of the Royal Family hostage as possible, or some other unorthodox tactic, maybe something very high-tech, to prevent that from happening. It would be better if we simply make oil obsolete first, such as that new idea: water fueled cars. We are getting close to ending the need for oil.
But if our nation gets nuked, the Saudis must be dealt with, along with Syria, the Iranian regime, Albania, and the KLA in Kosovo. Lybia has been cooperating, and Pakistan has been on the fence, but we would have to monitor those two very closely. Other allies in the Middle East would be shaken up as well. We would even have to keep a sharp eye on Kuwait.
We could also blockade the Persian Gulf and be very selective about where tankers are allowed to go. We could even charge 'passage fees', if we need cash. Any tankers who violate our demands could be seized and auctioned off. Also, we could sell Albanian, Saudi, and Syrian real estate for war funds.
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.