You Want to Escalate, We'll Escalate, and You'll Lose...Big!

31 July 05 | HMV

[Hillary'sMoralVoid]

We hear the chilling news about the possibility of suitcase nukes inside our borders, we hear that 10, maybe even 20 of our cities may be at risk.

The risk we face is nothing compared to what the Islamic World faces if terrorists choose to escalate the war on terror.

We currently have Poseiden Nuclear Submarines on patrol in the Indian Ocean. No terrorist could ever find them, much less destroy them. A single sub can unleash 50 missiles with pinpoint accuracy, each with a warhead bigger than the sum of even 20 suitcase nukes.

If the terrorists want to ensure that there would be no retaliation, they would have to destroy not only our major cities, but also our bombers, our land-based missile systems, our complete command and control network, and our nuclear submarines.

They cannot do this, and escalation brings with it such huge risks of anihilation of the Islamic world that it would seem incomprehensible that they would try to raise the stakes. Let's hope it doesn't come to that.

[Publius6961]

No one in the US will release the nuclear genie. The political consequences and the environmental consequences would be viewed as too great.

Greater than allowing a moonbat gang of savages to feed on civilization for another 1400 years?

[JarheadFromFlorida]

I totally agree with ya. Tom Tancredo has the right idea. Our biggest problem that we face is the millions of muzzies who we have let into this country because of the sick twisted liberal obesession with multi-cultural and diversity. Half of the muzzies in this country are on the other side and rooting for the terrorists. We would also have to deport every single muzzie in this country and declare islam incompatible with western society.

[nathanbedford]

Have you seen this, maybe we are not just navel gazing?

An American Hiroshima? Frontpagemagazine ^ | 8-2-05 | Jamie Glazov/Joseph Farah

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1455248/posts

[Diva Betsy Ross]

I agree that there is a force within our country that is trying to destroy our Christian foundations. BUT the civil rights movement is not even close to what we have going on now.

Freedom and liberty are very cool and very Christan ideals- and that would be freedom and liberty for everyone.

The only place to draw the line is when people demand the freedom to kill other people, based upon their religious beliefs or the amount of pigmentation in their skin.

Illegal immigrants and terrorists don't want equal rights-they want special and different rights.

[Rebelbase]

Boston, NYC, DC, Atlanta, Charlotte, Orlando, Miami, New Orleans, Dallas, Houston, Chicago, St. Louis, Kansas City, Denver, SLC, Seattle, San Francisco(hahahaha), LA, San Diego.

That's 20 cities. Somehow I don't think retaliation is going to matter much.

[Leatherneck_MT]

"Demi-rat + President = Bye Bye 20 U.S. Cities."

Unsecured borders, no matter the President = Precisely the same.

[Rebelbase]

19 not 20. 20th is wild card.

[Hank Rearden]

I've got bad news for you: The destruction of Mecca is a prophesy to the end times.

Prophesy by whom? Some plastic-haired snakefondler on TV trying to take your money?

[FightThePower!]

Is anyone out there crazy enough to believe that if even 20 suitcase nukes were detonated in the US that we would unleash a full scale nuclear attack on the whole middle east? How would we know who's responsible?

[Mad Dawgg]

"What do the Islamofascists have to lose?" MECCA, well they won't really lose it, they just won't beable to recognize it.

[PigRigger]

"You may as well ask whether their attacking us with nukes is going to make us stronger or weaker. That's the real question...."

Alot of people around here don't like to think about the aftermath of dropping a few nukes. The consequences of any action should be weighed before taking such an action.

I will not get into what I think, but I will say, if it comes to this......the civilized world may no longer be civilized afterwards.....

[Publius6961]

That's 20 cities. Somehow I don't think retaliation is going to matter much.

And doing nothing would?

I'll get back to you on that one.

[Publius6961]

No, I had not seen that particular article, but I have seen several analyses of it and subsequent discussions.

Makes the Tancredo flap all the sillier.

[hispanarepublicana]

I don't know why I'm surprised everytime I read the comments. Maybe it's because I'm amazed that people actually believe that stuff. Yes you're right. I've always heard the saying 'don't start something you can't finish'.

I'm not so much surprised at his post as I am surprised that he/she is still at FR and that his comments are allowed to stay. Perhaps because his sentiments are buried in convoluted sentences? I laugh when I see his references to this country's earliest residents being "European Christians". He seems to have conveniently forgotten about some of the earliest residents who were already here (but in South Texas) or brought to the colonies without choice.

[sheltonmac]

The Taliban ... no, no wait ... Al Queda .... Doh, no .... Iraq? Yeah IRAQ!!!!!

Now, now, let's not be sarcastic. (Okay, let's.)

The war in Iraq has only made us safer. Just ask England and Spain. Heck, ask the citizens of Iraq. Besides, I'm wearing my anti-terrorism good luck charm. (Hey, we haven't had any terrorist attacks in the U.S. in three-and-a-half years, have we? It must be working!)

[rdb3]

TAquinas still has to explain exactly what he meant. It's not going to go away. I take elimination words very seriously.

[Publius6961]

I will not get into what I think, but I will say, if it comes to this......the civilized world may no longer be civilized afterwards.....

There have been dozens of novels and thousands of discussions about this scenario over the last 55 years. The bottom line is, nobody knows. The guesses range to no big deal beyond the actual dead to complete reversion to the stone age.

The present crisis is that regardless of which, the terrorists and their enablers, direct and indirect, seem determined to find out.

And the only ones in a position to prevent it is islam itself.

[bk1000]

"will destroying Mecca take the wind out of their sails, or embolden them?"

Japan was ready to fight to the last man. Farmers fighting with rakes and such. It took the reality of the horror of nuclear destruction to change their minds. I'm sure a few were emboldened but the truth was undeniable.

[Rebelbase]

If the Mafia were the terrorists would you nuke Sicily and Newark?

Or say it were Scientology terrorists. Nuke Hollywood?

How about the IRA? Bye-bye Ireland?

What if the perps were naturalized Canadian citizens? Take out Canada?

Or maybe black American Muslims? Nuke the mosques in America or just wipe out an equal number of cities in the Middle East?

Besides feeding your ego and acting like Billy Bad, What is the logic of such an ambiguous holocaust retaliation?

[Stu Cohen]

I'm wearing my anti-terrorism good luck charm. (Hey, we haven't had any terrorist attacks in the U.S. in three-and-a-half years, have we? It must be working!)

Tell me about it! I placed an "anti-tiger" rock in my backyard.

I haven't seen a single tiger on my backyard in over 5 years.

I'll sell you one for $10,000. You can't put a price on the safety of your children can you?