Nuke Mecca? Nope.

Frontpage Magazine ^ | 28 July 2005 | Robert Spencer

[tessalu]

Muslims apparently believe that men can destroy their most holy book, the Koran.

The true God has protected the bible over the centuries, and it is not man who protected it.

[Billthedrill]

Your siggy looks a little peaked, there, my FRiend - hope you're doing all right.

Nuking Mecca is a much more effective threat than actual tactic - for one thing you can only do it once, for another it is a deliberate insult that absolutely solidifies a fight with all Moslems at large. If, by then, that is what we face then it isn't invalid, IMHO, but it is entirely symbolic.

Of course, taking the city, establishing a defense in depth, and putting the stump grinders to work - that might do the job. Or setting up a subway turnstile and charging them for the Maypole dance around the rock...

[MEGoody]

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

Then what would be an appropriate response if terrorists vaporized a couple of large American cities with nukes? Look for the 'bad guys'?

Come on, we've been looking for OBL for quite some time, and thanks to his Islamicist buddies, he's got plenty of hiding places.

The response to such a deed has to be swift and strong. Spending years looking for an 'aloof' someone who would then have to be 'tried' is not appropriate.

[Rob_DSM]

"Islam must change from within or it will be destroyed. No amount of concessions will satisfy the radical elements of Islam."

I agree. They must change within if they are going to save themselves.

According to that one British survey, 1 in 4 muslims over there sympathize with the terrorists. The other 3 need to educate the others, as they know that their future depends on it. I don't understand why they aren't more public and active about it. Their silence and indifference says a lot to me.

[JamesP81]

I would also like to mention that I don't really relish the idea of using nuclear weapons. I don't even like to think about all the women and young children living in or near Mecca that would kill. I am not bloodthirsty killer. But putting forth the use of nukes as an option may make islamists take pause. In that, alone, saying such things have their utility.

[Cyber Liberty]

Check out JamesP81 #23 post.

It isn't just "not exactly the same". It's radically divergent.

[JamesP81]

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.

You're right. It's not the same. Christians wish to support Israel because they God's people. Whether or not we support Israel is not going to cause them to be destroyed. God's plan is not thwarted by silly little things like foreign aid, treaties, and declarations of war. If God promises that Israel will be a nation until the end times (prophesied by Christ in Matthew) then nothing we do is going to change that.

As I said in a previous post, things like churches are not held with the idolatrous reverence muslims hold for their most important mosques.

[tumblindice]

Spencer makes a 'straw-man' argument here and argues beside the point as well.
I suppose a few of us may think we should just strap Slim Picken's body to a hydrogen bomb, as in the movie `Dr. Strangelove', and drop it on Mecca. Following this article and others by conservatives, the question remains unanswered: what do we do if the unthinkable becomes reality? (Below)
If I were a reader for al Quaida, my understanding of this article would be,
"If we were to strike them in such a manner, they would not respond in kind."
I'm sure we have contingency plans, but our leadership should make the salient thrust of those plans clear to the enemy, and that would be that our response would be nuclear strike against an Islamic target. (Spinning the wheel . . . although I suppose even at that stage there would be some who would argue, "Gee, but won't that make them mad?")

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirty_bomb

[Future Snake Eater]

...the idea enunciated by Maulana Inyadullah of al-Qaeda shortly after 9/11: “The Americans love Pepsi-Cola, we love death.”

I wonder how in love with death they would be after this:

was applied to this:

[Sergio]

Interesting quote from the article.

The ultimate goal of such groups is the restoration of this office, the reunification of the Islamic world under the caliph, and the establishment of the Sharia as the sole law in Muslim countries. Then the caliph would presumably take up one of his principal duties as stipulated by Islamic law: to wage offensive jihad against non-Muslim states in order to extend Sharia rule to them also.

So exactly how is it that a religion with this as its goal, can be called a "Religion of Peace".

Best Regards

Sergio

P.S. By the cryptic comments in some of the posts, I gather you have been a bit under the weather lately. Glad to see you posing and hope you are feeling better. Best wishes for continued health.

[anonymoussierra]

How do you feel?thank you

[r9etb]

Your answer seems to be "kill 'em all, let God sort them out." Not unexpected, but sadly lacking in any rational or moral content.

[TKDietz]

"Muslims aren't like this. If you touch one of their holy sites they go into convulsions of rage."

That's one of the problems with Islam. Their religious writing teach them not just to be protective of their holy sites, but all of Arabia, which to them includes modern day Israel. In parts of the Koran and other accepted Muslim holy works they are instructed to expel the non Muslims from Arabia, or murder them. Those they perceive as coming into their lands and making "mischief" or aiding those who do get put on the hit list too. It's a pretty scary religion.

[95 Bravo]

If Christians or Jews were running amok all over the world murdering thousands in the name of Jesus or Moses, every man's hand would be set against them.
But somehow, the Muzzies get a pass when it comes to serious, catastrophic consequences for the population as a whole?
Bullsh*t.
As far as I'm concerned, if rank-and-file Muslims refuse to PUBLICLY CONDEMN the jihaddists, and proceed to clean out their house, they can suffer any consequence that comes their way. What's that I hear so far? Dead silence?
Just in case you think I arrive at this point of view easily, I don't. I also don't like thinking that maybe, just maybe, the Muslim guy my wife works next to may someday wear the latest in terrorist fashion chic to work and have a real blast.
I've simply had e-damned-nough of the pap that "most Muslims are peace-loving" while we're clearing away the bodies from the latest homicide bombing. If they're not publicly supporting the effort to destroy Islamic terrorism, then they're either complicit or they tacitly approve of it.
It isn't Swedish grandmothers setting off IED's in Iraq, or blowing themselves up in Israel or London. It's Muslims, every single time. And it's Muslims who had better become part of the solution PDQ, or the demand for vengeance is going to outweigh the restraint of politicians, especially if New York or LA disappear in a nuclear flash.
Screw Mecca. My give-a-damn's busted.

[Cyber Liberty]

Hey, that was a good point back in #23. Blow up a Christian church or a Synagogue, you get another church or Synagogue. Blow up a Mosque and you get a swarm of fire ants wailing, rending their clothes and gnashing their teeth.

[hosepipe]

Bomb Messa Mecca.?.. NOPE...
Instead..

1) Capture a terrorist, or insurgent...
2) Hold him for a few weeks... (insert tracking mechanism into him)..
3) Track him like we do animals..
4) Spread the news(leak) that he will be released after finishing CIA school.. paiseing him for good grades..
5) Collect his (and his familys) bodies for burial..
6) Go To 1)...

[TKDietz]

"As I said in a previous post, things like churches are not held with the idolatrous reverence muslims hold for their most important mosques."

What about things like the Wailing Wall?

[Cyber Liberty]

What about things like the Wailing Wall?

I haven't seen anybody say that as long as the wall stands, so does the religion.

The wall, important as it is, is just a wall. To the Muslims, the black rock is Allah.

[OKIEDOC]

As far as I am concerned all the fuss over Tancredo's remarks come from a very minute part of America.

Mainly the left wing MSM, politically correct politicians, radical Democrats with a stone to grind and the all present cowardly (bend over and take it in the rear) pacifists crowd.

[Modernman]

Please clarify what you mean by "Muslims nuking Washington DC...." Which Muslims?

A point that will go over the heads of most posters, I fear.

If NYC was a glowing crater, we'd need to figure out what group was responsible and who backed them. However, randomly nuking a Muslim city would accomplish nothing, other than killing more innocent people.