Michael Medved - Why Not Bomb Mecca?

Townhall.com ^ | August 8, 2007 | Michael Medved

[HAL9000]

This article is an excellent analysis of Tancredo's irresponsible remarks, which have zero value as a deterrent, and will only provoke more terrorism.

Tancredo and Obama should learn how to keep their motor-mouths under control before they inflict more damage to our national security.

[Tribune7]

Tancredo and Obama should learn how to keep their motor-mouths under control before they inflict more damage to our national security.

Dittos to that.

[what's up]

which have zero value as a deterrent, and will only provoke more terrorism

Absolutely. Actually, if you want to INCREASE terrorism, go ahead and bomb Mecca. That will do the trick.

[mnehring]

As a strategy, it is best to keep the Islamic community divided. Bombing of a holy site would give them something to unify behind.

[DonaldC]

It may reveal more targets, err, I mean incite terrorism, but it would be a good start and no different than what ROP followers have done to Christian and other religious sites for centuries.

[Mr. Mojo]

An alternate view: The Doctrine of Collective Responsibility

[doodad]

Unfortunately, every square inch of any raghead country has some *holiest* of whatever so it is practically impossible to not piss the savages off.

Just to make a point.

[ejonesie22]

Exactly. Want to really increase our issues, get every Mmuslim here pissed off over night.

[lesser_satan]

Here’s a better plan: Quietly tell the Saudi Royal Family to deny the Islamonazi extremists access to Mecca, or else we’ll nuke the Royal Palace.

[DoughtyOne]

Look, on general principles I agree that Tancredo’s remarks were intemperate. If we did bomb Mecca on a whim, it would certainly be ill-advised.

What would we say if two or three of our large cities were nuked and Islamic terrorists took credit? If it were confirmed, I think we’re playing under a different set of rules.

I do think that at some point you put all options on the table. I do not think waving that flag around intemperately prematurely is productive, and that’s where I fault Tancredo.

[ejonesie22]

Yeah, but Mecca would even drive the “straights” among the Muslim population nuts...

[samtheman]

Tancredo’s never going to be president and I’m pretty sure he knows that. So it’s not the same when he speaks as when Osamabama speaks, since Osamabama has a very good chance of getting into the WH as the shoe-shine-boy-VP to Her Big Fat Thighness.

Tancredo’s on the political periphery and he probably knows that.

Given such outsider status, what’s wrong with putting the idea out there that we just MIGHT bomb Mecca if the justification is there?

Remember, we’re not dealing with high intelligence here, on the part of the intended audience. We’re dealing with sh1t-wrapped-in-rags. Vivid imagery might be the only thing that gets through to them.

What’s wrong with adding a measure of doubt in the sh1t-for-brains portion of the world’s population?

[muawiyah]

In reality virtually all Moslems are brought up under a belief system that cannot be differentiated from slavery (from the inside).

Islam does, after all, mean "submission".

This has enabled a small minority of psycho-sociopathic madmen to regularly seize power in any Moslem country and bend the people to his will where he loots and plunders.

Bombing Mecca affects only the wealthy elites in the ruling class. No one else can afford to make the trip ~ well, with a couple of exceptions. American Moslems can afford to go, as can European Moslems. The poor people in Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia cannot.

I doubt the broad masses would care about it more than ten minutes.

[doodad]

True. Which is why Akmed’s falafel stand that mo shat it might do instead. And we save a nuke.

[ejonesie22]

Cuts down on overhead, that’s for sure...

[karnage]

Heh heh heh.

[finnman69]

Tancredo is done, not that he had a chance to begin with.

[JamesP81]

The reason Tancredo's plan won't work is because we will not carry out such a threat, and our enemies know it. Deterrence doesn't work if your enemy doesn't believe you.

As for it unifying the islamic world against us, well, it's like this: most muslims aren't terrorists, but the vast majority think terrorism against us is just fine. They are enablers of terrorism. As far as they are concerned, it's not their problem so they just continue to enable terrorism. Say what you want about Tancredo, but threatening Mecca would do one thing: it would make it their problem. That might mean fighting the entire middle east, but I'm increasingly becoming convinced that we may not be able to win this war if we aren't willing and able to do just that. I hope I'm wrong on that count.

There is a possible solution. We need to do something to re-establish our credibility. We need the other side to believe that we can and will carry out any threat that we make. Once we have that, it may prove useful to make the threat Tancredo is suggesting. Right now, though, it would be a disaster for us.

[HAL9000]

If I were running for president, here is the limit I'd be willing to go on-record with:

"If the government of Saudi Arabia is overthrown by al-Qaida, the United States reserves the option of using military force in the area."

And leave it at that.