[rdb3]

Fair take on the matter.

[Tijeras_Slim]

How you doing?

[Porterville]

The very fact it is in the public square being written and talked about is a sign that things are heating up.

[NeoCaveman]

Finally, someone gives a strategic and intellectual rational for opposing the nuking of Mecca as opposed to an emotional based opposition. I tend to agree with the author.

[Cyber Liberty]

Will men who love death, who glorify suicide bombing and praise God for beheadings and massacres, fear the destruction of holy sites?

I think so. Since everywhere they look is a "holy site" and UBL supposedly used the US soldiers stationed in Saudi as a "recruting tool" for his skyjackers, then it's not a big stretch to believe they value the real estate more than they do human lives in any quantity. They sure as heck revere that black rock more than all the human life in the world, combined.

It seems unlikely in the extreme — and that fact nullifies all the value this thread may have had as a deterrent. Nuke Mecca? Why bother? It wouldn’t work.

Two assertions that the author completely fails to back up with so much as an explanation, let alone evidence. I think they would all shoot themselves harmlessly if the rock were rendered into melted glass.

[Cyber Liberty]

Oh, how you doing, rd??

[soundandvision]

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

Look, I know that FrontPage is a conservative site but I have to point out something...when the lead sentence, which is what is quoted above, doesn't contextualize Tancredo's remarks for the average reader (much like what AP does) it doesn' give a fair portrait of the comments. 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!!

I think that most readers read the first few sentences of AP stories or pieces and draw conclusions.

When heard in context, Tancredo's comments are perfectly reasonable.

[teenyelliott]

Glad to see you're up and typing.

[Mr. Mojo]

Meanwhile, and expectedly, the author fails to tell us what his solution to the problem (of getting hit by terrorist-deployed nuclear bombs with no return address) would be.

So easy to say that nuking Mecca in such a circumstance would be the wrong thing to do when one has no alternative idea.

And "bringing the individual terrorists responsible to justice" just isn't going to cut it if hundreds of thousands (at least) of Americans are incinerated and dying of radiation poisoning.

[mc6809e]

He makes some good points in general, but I think Mecca is the only place where such a strategy WOULD work.

If you want to shake the confidence of Muslims, show them that their god is powerless to stop the destruction of his most holy city. Scepticism in Islam would be the most important check on Islamic terrorism. People that lack complete faith in Allah don't kill themselves in his name.

Oh, and just make sure the Kaabaa is completely destroyed.

[eleni121]

BUMP for later.

[RichardW]

It appears to me that the genie is out of the bottle. Obviously no American president can withstand the vaporizing of NYC and tens of millions of Americans. Something will have to be done to respond in kind. You can be sure that there are plans for such contingencies or there had better be.

[mc6809e]

How about not posting the full article or linking to just the printable version?

If a site produces a good article, at least give them a chance to earn some $$$ as a reward.

[Bommer]

Will men who love death, who glorify suicide bombing and praise God for beheadings and massacres, fear the destruction of holy sites?

Oh yeah! Destroy the site they pray to on mats 3 times a day! Destroy the most holiest of places that the Koran says every Muslim must go to at least once in their lifetime! Destroy their most sacred site and you destroy their God! The only reason we have not been attacked with nukes is that the terrorist fear this type of retribution.

But for the anti-Tancrado crowd: What is the proper response to Muslims nuking Washington DC or even the Vatican?

[JamesP81]

I do not agree with the author.

Let's have a little bit of comparative religion class. Christians don't scream (usually) about it when a church is destroyed. Not like muslims do. To Christians, the church is a group of people. Where they meet is not particularly important. If my church burns down tomorrow, that's unfortunate. But we'll just build another one. If 100 terrorists were holed up in my church, they had no hostages, and the goodguys choices were a) Storm the building and take them out in close combat, suffering casualties in the process or b) blow up the building with a bomb, I have to say that I would blow the building up with a bomb. It's just a building. It's concrete, brick, mortar, and steel. Nothing holy about it. We'll put together our funds as a church and build a new one. This attitude among christians was witnessed when PLO terrorists seized the Church of the Nativity. They tried to turn Christians against Jews by making the (true) claim that Israelis had fired on the church. But it didn't fly with christians at all.

Muslims aren't like this. If you touch one of their holy sites they go into convulsions of rage. I think if we can make islam believe that we willd rop a nuclear warhead on Mecca, and turn it into a radioactive crater, they will sit up and take notice. However, if we formally make the threat, we can't make it and them not believe it. If we do, things will be worse for us. If we make the threat, and they really do believe it, it may help us out (as long as they don't come to disbelieve it at some point).

[thoughtomator]

I find his refutation of the proving-Islam-wrong-by-destroying-Mecca argument to be insufficient. The caliph, and the caliphate, are restorable; no permanent damage was done to their beliefs by its abolition. The destruction of Mecca would be a one-way trip and not reversible.

[reagan_fanatic]

A reasoned argument. However, it might not hold up so well should an 'American Hiroshima' were to ever happen as ol' Uncle Binny has threatened.

[TheForceOfOne]

Do you know about the plan to use Yukka Mountain in Nevada for nuclear waste? Um, I have a better idea......

USE MECCA!

[dennisw]

No way does this convince me. Nuking Mecca should be the first order of business if Muhammad worshiping lunatics detonate a nuke or two here or somehow unleash some terrible bio/chem agents on us. Mecca Medina Qom is how you do it right. Just effin' waste them if the Jihadist mutants push it too far.

[EdReform]

Ping

[llevrok]

Start at 200km. One terrost attack = 1 bomb. Go to to 150km and repeat every 50 klicks for every attack (car bomber, subways, etc) until they get the point. Simple.

The Muslem "community" must start to police their own or risk their holy site.