A more effective way to deal with islamic terrorists

Vanity ^ | 9/12/2001 | self

[rudehost]

Well it happened. The big attack everyone has talked about and expected finally happened. The most devastating terrorist attack ever conducted was not only directed at the United States but occurred on US soil. The question now is what to do about it.

The one thing that seems abundantly clear is that indiscriminately bombing Afghanistan will make us all feel good. In fact we will feel soooo good we might all need to smoke a cigarette afterwards. It also seems clear that this won't do much good in seriously addressing the long term problem. Killing a handful of terrorists if anything fertilizes the ground for more terrorists to spring up like mushrooms. For every terrorist we successfully bomb we harden the resolve of 3 other potential suicide bombers. The bottom line is that threatening suicidal fanatics with death is similar to threatening a child with extra slices of chocolate cake. Try it on your kids sometime. It just doesn't work.

The inherent problem here is that targeting people is pointless in a culture that doesn't value human life. A successful strategy would be to target something they do value. What would that be? How about real estate? Specifically let me suggest this. Islamic terrorists don't seem to shed too many tears over lost suicide bombers but they do seem to get quite bent out of shape when you mess with geographical areas that catch their fancy. The temple mount debacle and ensuing violence seems to bear this out. The secret then is not to threaten them with attacks on human life that they don't value but rather on holy sites that they do.

One approach would be as follows. The United States continues to try to take out the terrorists that sponsored these acts as a basic matter of justice. At the same time we send a simple message to Islamic fundamentalists that goes something like this.

"OK guys you got us on that one but Ill tell you what should there ever be another similar attack on US soil you can expect Mecca to be a crater within 30 minutes."

Would this work? We can't say for sure but if you put their most holy religious site on the table you are actually requiring that they put some 'skin in the game'. This is a win win from an American perspective. First we can provide advance warning of our plans to allow the city to be evacuated thus ensuring we do not take unwilling lives. Second it avoids the nasty problem of carpet bombing an entire country in the hope of nailing a constantly moving terrorist target only to find you nailed 3 aspirin factories a herd of llamas and an auto junkyard. These holy sites are the exposed jugular of Islamic terrorists much like innocent civilians are the exposed weakness of a civil free society. We hit something they care about and they live in constant fear that the real estate they hold dear can be vaporized at the whim of a righteously indignant nation.

We cannot expect terrorists to care about human lives but we can use their excessive infatuation with certain pieces of land against them much like they have used our humanity against us.

[rudehost]

Would it be effective?

[hobbes1]

No...Not all Moslems, are Jihadists...But they would be then...

Targeting their Host countries w/nuclear fire would be far more effective, as it would make them see it as Attrition 1000 of theirs, for every one of ours. we can enforce that ratio..they cannot reverse it.

[DWPittelli]

There's one problem with your plan: Mecca is in Saudi Arabia, whose royal family is an ally of ours. Not the most steadfasta ally, certainly, but to the extent it has opposition (and it does) its main complaint seems to be that the royal family is too pro-American. Blowing up even the mosque there would make about as much sense as blowing up the mosque on the temple mount in Jerusalem. (Then again, maybe Israel would secretly be happy about such an attack -- not.)

[tm22721]

Dropping bombs on isolated terrorists and their sponsors will make us feel good but will not permanently solve the mideast problem which deserves a more comprehensive solution.

We must take Iraq while the world is sympathetic to our plight. Pump enough oil to significantly reduce oil prices, stimulating the world economy. The lower oil prices will cause the mideast regimes to collapse so we must set up democracies there. Buy western Jordan for a new Palestinian state with infrastructure paid for by the Iraqi oil fields. Create US bases in Iraq from which to enforce regional stability. Afghanistan/Syria/Iran/Sudan are much easier to deal with once the US bases are in place with a million troops to back up our policies. And it gets rid of the requirement for US carriers over there.

DO IT NOW. WE MUST USE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO STABILIZE THE MIDEAST AND NEUTRALIZE TERRORISM.

BUMP

[rudehost]

Sounds a bit too expensive in terms of money and lives. Keep in mind the comments above are a half tongue in cheek half a serious wouldnt it be great if we ....

The soviets couldnt occupy and hold afghanistan. Theres no way we could manage the entire mideast.

[dennisw]

The Musli have an obsession with dynamiting the churches and synagogues of the people they steam roller over. This indicates they are VERY concerned about their religious sites. 

I really believe it would demoralize them and take the wind out of the sails if Mecca were nuked and if the Dome of Rock and the AlAksa Mosque were blown off the Temple Mount. I expect neither to happen but this would greatly impress the Muslims of the planet. The good ones and the stone killers too.

[Darth Sidious]

Here's an idea...

Blow up the Al-Aksa mosque in Jerusalem, bring the damned golden dome down into rubble, and litter the remaining ground and rubble with dead pigs.

It is wrong to blame Arabic peoples en masse for this. There is nothing wrong at all in calling Islam what it is: a violent, bloodthirsty "faith" that has caused this weary world far too much grief already.

[Stirner]

I think you are on to something, but for reasons others have pointed out, we should not start with Mecca. Sometimes, the way people treat others reveals a lot about themselves. In sort of a perverse twist on the Golden Rule, we can see what (some) Moslems care about. When the Albanians took over in Kosovo, one of the first things they did was destroy Orthodox Christian churches and monasteries. When the Palestinians in the West Bank got upset about a year ago, they desecrated Jewish holy sites such as Joseph's tomb. By these deeds, they show what they care about, what are high value targets for them. There are hundreds of holy sites in the Islamic world. We should make a list, issue warnings, and start relatively small and keep at it until they break. But to start with the holiest sites of all would merely radicalize the "moderates".

[Fred Hayek]

"Blow up the Al-Aksa mosque in Jerusalem"

Then the Third Temple is built. Mr. 666 a.k.a. the Beast, the AntiChrist on the scene shortly afterwards. Christians, the time could be close.

[RichardW]

I think this is an exceedingly good idea. As far as the Saudis are concerned, the royal family is living on borrowed time anyway. Some terrorist will eventually seize power there and they will no longer be an "ally." I would also suggest that we use any possible pretext to wipe Baghdad off the map and seize the oil fields as war booty. We would permently solve our oil problem and let the crazy Moslems scream bloody murder. What do we care? They hate our guts anyway. May as well make it worth our while. What are we waiting for? The next time we'll have 300,000 or even 3 million dead. When do we get engaged? We should already have bounced the rubble in Afghanistan several times. The whole country should be carpet bombed for several weeks until we kill every single terrorist living there. Then we should put any other Moslem nation on notice that they are next in line should they make one single statement against the U.S. As some have said, they are either for us or against us. It is either our survival or theirs. No middle ground here.

[Darth Sidious]

Then the Third Temple is built. Mr. 666 a.k.a. the Beast, the AntiChrist on the scene shortly afterwards. Christians, the time could be close.

And at this point we shouldn't even BEGIN to be speculating on this. It'll happen... but on God's time, not ours.

[Temple Drake]

I really like the part about the dead pigs. Bomb Mecca with cans of SPAM!

[gatorman]

. . . "The inherent problem here is that targeting people is pointless in a culture that doesn't value human life." . . .

You are stereotyping a whole society with an extremely wide paint brush . . . are you really aware of what you are saying and its impact? Statements like this just stir up a lot of unnecssary hatred.

We are all in a state of shock and disbelief at this time. Collectivley, it helps for all of us to discuss our feelings concerning this most horrendous act of cowardice. Revenge and retaliation are very natural emotions. But, let's channel all of these feelings in the right direction. Not every Muslim or Arab is a terrroist, nor do they all not value human life. You would be more correct with that statement referring to the Jihadists or Sheites (not sure of the spelling).

Make no mistake . . . as a nation we will extract our pounds of flesh and spill the blood of those guilty monsters. But for now, cooler heads need to prevail. This is exactly what happended to the American-Japanese after Pearl Harbor.

As hobbes1 pointed out in Post #2 if we did what you suggested all of Islam would be forced to the causes of the terrorists. Let's just leave the revenge to the professionals and give them our dedicated support. Dubya will deal with the real villains in due time . . . "payback is hell".

[hobbes1]

Thanx for the mention.....

[harpseal]

The soviets couldnt occupy and hold afghanistan. Theres no way we could manage the entire mideast.

Instead of the whole Midle East let us just occuppy and hold the oil fields. Remove any non-American population from those areas. Then enjoy the benefits of low priced oil. Let those removed from the oil producing areas go where they will in the remainder of their own countries we just make sure they do not enjoy conveniences like anything that is powered by anything other than wind or animal power. The oil fields I am speaking of are those of Lybia, Iraq, Iran, and The Sudan. This is a simple and effective means of getting it done. One removes the capability of action from these nations.

As to the leadership of these nations who have engaged in these actions. Execution quickly and simply. Bullets previously dipped in pig fat (due to our sensitivity to their religous convictions).

Stay well - Yorktown

[Let's Roll]

"...There is nothing wrong at all in calling Islam what it is: a violent, bloodthirsty "faith" that has caused this weary world far too much grief already."

You are absolutely correct. Moslems cause trouble wherever they migrate: India, the Balkans, Indonesia, Europe (when the Moors were in Spain 500 years ago and now when the Europeans have allowed all the guest workers to come into their countries). The combination of their high birth rates and dedication to religious conversion by the sword if necessary is always deadly.

[mfulstone]

SAMPLE ONLY

Click for full size/resolution.

[EdReform]

Bump!

[wildandcrazyrussian]

Several years ago, when I read an article about the annual hajj (pilgrimage) to Mecca, a status symbool for any Muslim man in the world, I was surprised to find out that during that month, there are about 2,000,000 present at any time, visiting the huge mosque with the black Kaaba (sp?) stone inside, their holiest shrine in the world.

I thought to myself, what would be the ramifications if some great power were to do the unthinkable and drop a nuclear bomb on that mosque (remember, the US refrained from bombing the "holy city" of Qom in Iran under any circumstances). My conclusion was that there would be, from among 1 bilion Muslims of the world, even if only a 1% response rate for a REAL "holy war", maybe 10,000,000 dedicated, fanatical Muslims (of course leaving 900,000,000+ Muslims who would have nothing to do with it) given their final instructions as to how to retaliate: absolute and total retaliation.

We would see Christians massacred by the millions in all of Central and southern Asia, and Christianity ceasing forever there, exactly as happened in the 600's in northern Africa and the Middle East (formerly 100% Christian). We would see the remainig 10% Christian population of Syria, Jordan, etc. wiped out in hours, with Indonesia taking several days. We would see Africa consumed with tens of millions of Christians dead in hours throughout the northern half of Africa, especially Nigeria and other mixed-population countries. (Remember how Muslim Turkey massacred over a million Armenians in 1915, and Turkey is considered almost "European" by the West.)

It would be hell on earth, and it would all fall upon the heads of innocent Christians in the East who would have no inkling that some crazy people in the supposedly-Christian West would dare raise the hand of destruction against the very center of Muslim identity. That's how it has been for a thousand years now: the West has its stupid Crusades, accomplishing nothing, and the Eastern Christians suffer the consequences, after the West goes back home fat, dumb, and happy.

So, in general, I think the suggestion to nuke Mecca is about the stupidest idea I have ever heard, and of course I know you were merely expressing the desire for our forces to "do something". But we need to remember that the forces of radical Islam are like the radical Communist regime which ruthlessly took over the Christian empire of Russia and massacred millions of people. Yet the Communist were not fanatically suicical maniacs with a thousand-year view of history as we would see unleashed.

Since Osama bin Laden was reported recently to have access to perhaps 20 nuclear devices, which cities of what he sees as the Godless (non-Islamic) world, the "world of struggle" do you guess might the first of many to be obliterated in response to a bombing of the holy shrines of Islam?

As an Orthodoz Christian, whose ancestors had to contend with ruthless radical expansionist Islam over the centuries, it is not from any sense of sympathy for that religion that I claim that doing as some suggest is absolutely the wrong thing to do. Either the West is willing to spend the lives of millions of its soldiers in a long drawn-out fight to the death to take over the Middle East and Central Asis, or else it should just refrain from bravado statements.

[rudehost]

You are stereotyping a whole society with an extremely wide paint brush

Im making generalizations yes. The fact that 90% of the folks in Palestein supported suicide bombings in a recent poll tells me that as a generalization of the muslim culture in the mideast it is exceedingly fair.

The argument is not to retaliate against their holy sites now but to make it clear that holy sites are targets that are as legitimate or more so than american citizens. In fact attacking their holy sites is more moral than carpet bombing afghanistan and killing lots of innocent civilians in the process.