November 2008: America is nuked

WND ^ | February 2, 2007 | Kevin McCullough's

[RayChuang88]

I have my doubts, because the Iranians are maybe insane enough to destroy one of Islam's holiest sites (Jeruselem) just to wipe out Israel. Mind you, Iran will face the wrath of Israeli Jericho II missiles armed with thermonuclear warheads that will totally destroy most of Iran's major population centers and industrial capacity.

[TigersEye]

She had better hope the war is over and there's no threat at all from the Muslim/Arab world by Nov '08 or this statement will haunt her failure. Personally I doubt that she gets the nomination.

[Jack Hammer]

Even should something very like this occur, within weeks, possibly days, dhimmi moonbats within our own borders would be apologizing for the "poor, oppressed" perpetrators and blaming "America's misguided foreign policy" for the events. Bet the farm on it. Sign of the times.

[Jezebelle]

L.A. is about 55/45 in favor of the rats. Kerry carried L.A. County in '04 with 63% - 36% for Bush. About 30% of the population lives in L.A. County.

When I said SF, I actually meant the entire Bay Area, which includes Santa Clara County (San Jose), and 8 other counties. Almost 20% of the state's population is in the Bar Area, and it is very rat. That's why I said if they took out SF instead of L.A., the state would go red. The Bay Area averaged about 68% for Kerry in '04.

The other urban areas, San Diego and Fresno, went for Bush by smaller margins than L.A. and SF Bay Area went for kerry. kern, another urban area, went for Bush by a good margin. The other urban area, Sacramento, was almost evenly split, but went to Kerry by a fractional margin.

Most of the rest of the state is red. So, if they took out SF (Bay Area) instead of L.A., the state would still go red, because even though the population there is about 10% less than L.A., they'd be taking out a higher percentage of rats. L.A. is a huge income center and is beneficial to San Diego County, so losing L.A. would be more critical for the state than losing the Bay Area. There's a lot more industry, per capita, in L.A. than there is in the SF Bay Area.

[Vote 4 Nixon]

Just like 9/11. To turn the doves into Hawks. There is method to their madness. That is precisely the reason I don't believe anywhere in the south will ever be hit. It would do no good to hit the obviously most warlike segment of the population.

[capitalist229]

have you ever considered the possibility that a sitting President might not make such a move, even after we suffered a devastating strike...?

Zactly.

For one thing, we need their oil because $10 gasoline would destabilize this country.

We would send two million marines into harms way to secure the oil fields of Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Personally, I think that the ME is headed the same way as Europe post-1945.

Occupied for 50 years until they breed a generation of adults.

BUMP

[Fierce Allegiance]

No country or terrorist group would dare attack America while under the leadership of George Bush.

Where were you the morning of September 11, 2001?

[ryan71]

"I can't imagine why they'd want to nuke the most pro-terrorist ('Rat) areas of the country."

Aint that ironic. The libs living in cities support the terrorists yet the cities are the terrorist's primary targets.

[Kozak]

The middle east would be the worlds largest sheet of glass and Arabic and Farsi would join Mayan and Latin as dead languages....

[ryan71]

Hillary is a fool. Let's not build her up to be more than she is.

[MuttTheHoople]

If they knock LA, NY, and Washington, there won't be any bedwetters left blaming the right.

[baubau]

"GWB was inaugurated on Jan 20, 2001, 7 1/2 months prior to 9/11. Or are you speaking of the next time?

No, I was speaking ever, but I made a boo-boo.

[baubau]

""No country or terrorist group would dare attack America while under the leadership of George Bush.

"Where were you the morning of September 11, 2001?

I didn't think while writing that post.

Sorry!

[Zeroisanumber]

"We're all going to die unless we listen to the great sages Hugh Hewitt and Michael Savage!!"

Whatever.

[Zeroisanumber]

Wipe out those cities and even the stupidest lib will become a frothing at the mouth war monger.

Wipe out those cities and we're probably going to have an American Caesar. Of course, by then the global economy will have totally collapsed and our retaliation will quite possibly trigger a nuclear winter, so your new overlord would probably look something like this:

[Zeroisanumber]

For one thing, we need their oil because $10 gasoline would destabilize this country.

$10/gallon oil wouldn't matter because the economy would already have totally collapsed. Total damage to the economy from 9/11 was roughly $8 trillion. Any strike like this would run into the hundreds of trillions, and pretty much finish us as a nation.

We would send two million marines into harms way to secure the oil fields of Iraq, Iran and Saudi Arabia.

Whichever dictator took over in the aftermath of such a strike would destroy the ME in response in order to secure his position in the eyes of the public.

Personally, I think that the ME is headed the same way as Europe post-1945.

I'd rather just stick with developing alternate forms of energy and let the Arabs have what's left over.

[Landru]

"...Without Chicago, IL goes red. Without LA, CA also possibly goes red, especially if they were to hit SF too, or instead. Without NYC and Manhattan, NY goes red."

Maybe so.

Is an attack (as described) what it'll take to wake this nation up, or are your & the other similar sentiments a sign of desperation?
Insanity?

Perhaps?

...a little of both.

[RightWhale]

On the Shore. Not this Christmas.

[nwrep]

This guy sounds plainly ignorant of politics, physics, history, military, geography, and logic.

[wireman]

What a load of hokum.