[Anonymous Rex]

The level to which we’d retaliate after such an attack would mean the end of the middle east and islam.

[Little Ray]

I sincerely doubt it.
Dumb@$$es in Congress would whine about “genocide”, the traitors in the US State Department would whimper about “proportional response,” and the Russkis and Chinks would threaten retaliation to protect their clients.

We’d have to suck it up.

[Rummenigge]

can’t nuke iran without nuking israel, turkey and half of europe.

[My Favorite Headache]

Don’t be so sure about that. With the PC world we live in today we would immediately have to play the victim card and embrace the goodwill of the world. The U.S. deciding to kill hundreds of millions of Muslims because 40-50 nutballs set off NUKES in U.S. cities would not be justified in the eyes of the world and you think Iraq is a PR disaster?

We would wind up doing 3 things:

1. Nuke the border of Pakistan and Afghanistan
2. Internment camps would be set up for anyone of an Arabic background
3. Militias would wind up roaming the U.S. taking out Islamic sites of worship and business.

I do not see the U.S. resorting to a total nuke em’ all policy. Yes, we would lose a milliom Americans. BUT I just do not think we would take out countries let alone Mecca where we would be not only killing a million there alone but asking for a war with a religion for the rest of our nation’s history.

[MarkT]

Sadly, that depends on the occupant of the chair in the Oval Office. If it is Hillary, we will send a strong message to the U.N., if it is still there. If Fred or Rudy is there, good-bye Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia.

[Jim Noble]

The level to which we’d retaliate after such an attack would mean the end of the middle east and islam.

I seriously doubt we would retaliate at all.