Nuke Mecca? Nope.

Frontpage Magazine ^ | 28 July 2005 | Robert Spencer

[mc6809e]

I don't think so. Think of whatever place/symbol means the most to you, and then consider your response if it should be destroyed by a nuke.

Are you going to be "shaken," or are you gonna go looking for blood?

I think I would feel like a fool for supporting an impotent god.

And don't think this strategy hasn't been used by Muslims already. Many mosques are built on the foundations of what were the holy sites of other religions. And they did that to make a point.

And it worked.

The middle east used to full of small religions similar to Judaism. Where are they now? The decendents of those believers are now praying to Allah.

[soundandvision]

Even in context they're wrong, for the reasons stated above.

We'll, we're going to have to agree to disagree.

[eggman]

Islam must change from within or it will be destroyed. No amount of concessions will satisfy the radical elements of Islam. Their goal is the extinction of infidels, first in the Middle East, then in the rest of the world.

Bringing up the threat of a nuclear annihilation of some portion of their core may help the moderates to realize that they are responsible for saving their religion from this radical infection.

[Scourge of God]

Mosques are the batteries powering terrorism. Hatred and terrorism starts in the mosque, and radiates outward. Destroy the mosques and deport the clerics (which is what this is going to come to) and the problem will be solved.

If we are hit in another massive terrorist attack, this will be the only solution.

[dennisw]

The ummah has huge death wish and Mecca-Medina are part of it. They know those cities will be turned to glass someday as a reposes to Muhammadan terrorism and they actually want this to happen. In the dark recesses of their minds.

Something like suicide by cop.
And Islamic faith will never recover if their bllshit Allah cannot protect his unholy cities.

[rdb3]

You call that a "fair take?"

That's what I said. I know I said it because I was there when I said it.

[takenoprisoner]

"We need to cut the conventional nonsense and cut the throat (no pun intended) of Islam itself so that it bleeds to death. Whether it be peaceful or militarily, we all know the violence will continue so long as Islam is a major religion."

Correction, some of us know.

[chris1]

I'm sorry, but nuking Mecca would be justified in the sense that millions and millions have sat silently by while their brethern have waged a war on the USA.

They reap what they sowed. Life sucks, but so does the USA getting nuked while we ask why they hate us.

[Bommer]

Your right, but it would come from those that want to "Kum-bah-ya my Lord" a bomber wearing a bomb vest. These are the people that side with the terrorists and have never read the Koran, figuring that they are immune from Jihad.

[dennisw]

After mega-terrorism destroy the Jihadist mosques and those who preach in them. The innocuous Mosques aren't worth bothering with

[chris1]

Exactly. Inciting violence in the mosque is not free speech.

[Digger]

Tancredo said 'if a nuke goes off in an American city *THEN* we should bomb Mecca'. Not that we should just arbitrarily 'bomb Mecca'. Get it right!!

Was this so hard for the media to get these facts straight? Yes. However, Tancredo sure got some milage out of this. This administration should take note & find out how these terrorist countries would possibly help us if they knew their possessions could go up in smoke if any terrorist act should happen again. That wouldn't be politially correct in the compassionate conservative administration but we are told that illegals only come here for jobs & Islam is a religion of peace.

[dennisw]

The middle east used to full of small religions similar to Judaism. Where are they now? The descendent's of those believers are now praying to Allah.

70 million Hindus were decimated when Allah's armies of death rode in. All those Muslim Pakistanis you see today were forcibly converted hundreds of years ago from Hinduism.

[ASA Vet]

We'd be relying on our famously unreliable intellegence community

MI Ping

[neoken]

This author is offering more of the "don't give them a reason to hate us" claptrap. It is actually a reason for them to fear us. So much better.

http://www.islamicity.com/mosque/pillars.shtml

A pilgramage (Hajj) to Mecca is a requirement of all Muslims financially and physically able to do so. Eliminating one of the 5 pillars would seem to be a pretty useful threat.

Tancredo was wrong to mention this. It plays into the hands of Muslims who aren't moderate but wish to seem so.

I wouldn't take it off the table. But I wouldn't mention it either.

[dennisw]

Looks like most freepers don't buy Robert Spencer's argument to leave Mecca alone.

[TKDietz]

"In Judeo-Christian belief, this kind of attachment to physical objects borders on idol worship."

You don't think there is the same type of attachment to Israel for Judeo-Christians as Muslims have for Mecca? It's not exactly the same but Judeo-Christian holy sites are pretty darned important in Judeo-Christian belief.

[MEGoody]

Why not bomb Mecca? Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO) has brought the issue to the table.

Yes, he did, when asked what America's response should be if terrorists set off nuclear bombs in the U.S.

I think this should be just PART of response from the U.S.

[OB1kNOb]

Now if the author or someone else could just elucidate an equally strategic and intellectual rational discourse on how to best counteract and eliminate the Islamofacist threat of mass destruction hovering over America, then I might sit up and take notice. To date, I've not seen any such approach on how to rationally deal with Islamic-based insanity. What is the best way to deal with the threats of the insane? I'm still waiting for alternative solutions. All I read others saying is what won't work. Time is getting short.

[JamesP81]

The worst thing we can do is to take any option off the table.

Absolutely, 100% correct. I stated similar views in another Tancredo/Nuke Mecca thread. This is how real diplomacy happens. Diplomacy works when there is an implicit threat to be carried out in case of non-compliance. That's probably a sad commentary on the human race, but it's true nonetheless.