Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tallhappy

Nuking Mecca won't accomplish anything, except alienate almost all the Muslims in the world. But threatening Damascus, Khartoum or any other potential terrorist- harboring states is more practical. Even that Libyan leader is untrustworthy.


11 posted on 01/07/2005 12:42:24 AM PST by Moderate right-winger (We won 2004! Now, win '06 and '08!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies ]


To: Moderate right-winger

I think it maybe enough to warn the Muslimes that SEVERAL nuke missles are aimed at Yecca and it wouldn't take much to let one fly. I think that rock would remain pretty hot for a long time.


12 posted on 01/07/2005 12:45:15 AM PST by Dallas59 ("A weak peace is worse than war" - Tacitcus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Moderate right-winger
We shouldn't want to alienate the mohammadans, should we? Now, let's all have a big hug. I think anyone who doesn't believe all options remain on the table, have been living in a box with no personal contact whatsoever with the US military. The next attack on our soil might well be a WMD. If the Russians did that, we would nuke Moscow. If the islamofascists do it, we will nuke Mecca. If those elusive "moderates" in Mohammedanism can't curtail actions by their brethren which lead to the total destruction of their most hallowed spot on earth, well next time they'll get out of bed a little earlier. These are the consequences of war, and why you don't pick a fight if you can't take the punches.
36 posted on 01/07/2005 12:59:23 AM PST by blogbat (Blogbat: ein Fahrgeschäft durch die Weltnachrichten)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Moderate right-winger
Nuking Mecca won't accomplish anything, except alienate almost all the Muslims in the world. But threatening Damascus, Khartoum or any other potential terrorist- harboring states is more practical. Even that Libyan leader is untrustworthy.

Considering that Islam is nothing more than a cult of death and opression I say nuke it anyway.

39 posted on 01/07/2005 1:01:17 AM PST by Paul_Denton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Moderate right-winger

We don't take anything off the table and make it clear (privately), that Mecca is on top as the target of choice. Then we dismantle the Middle East, country by country, chomp, chomp, chomp -- and if you don't think that's what we're up to, you're dreaming. The Middle East must be brought into the modern world, kicking and screaming, or docile as a Libyan lamb. (And that last didn't happen by accident.) So we establish Iraq and Afghanistan as democracies. We don't give them an alternative. All this is predicated on the Arab world and everybody else believing GW will do what he says, and so far, like it or not, GW has been a man of his word.


151 posted on 01/07/2005 3:42:33 AM PST by hershey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Moderate right-winger
Nuking Mecca won't accomplish anything, except alienate almost all the Muslims in the world.

Islam is not a spiritual religion, it is very physical. Nuking Mecca alone would be a huge blow to the Muslim psyche, systematically destroying every major "holy place" and mosque would be a direct and overt challenge of Allah himself. It would be like Elijah and the Baal prophets on Mt. Carmel or Moses and the plagues on Egypt.

It would break the back of Islam. You would have a few diehard crazies staying on the path of jihad but most Muslims the world over would simply abandon the religion. It is far too dependent on the symbols and appearance of power to survive humiliation. Besides the crazies (who are already there doing mischeif anyway) any believers left would transform Islam into a much more spiritual, and therefore peaceful religion.

197 posted on 01/07/2005 5:26:46 AM PST by hopespringseternal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Moderate right-winger
Not that I advocate this action, but if the Hajj were unable to be performed, if Mecca were uninhabitable for 100 years, do you think there would be any Muslims around?Islam views the world as being in an unending march toward an Islamic planet. If Mecca does not exist, Mohammed could not have been the "final prophet" and all of the apocalyptic predictions of Islam wither away.

And the West would never do it, but I do not put it past some future Indian regime.

224 posted on 01/07/2005 7:14:28 AM PST by AmishDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Moderate right-winger
Nuking Mecca won't accomplish anything, except alienate almost all the Muslims in the world. But threatening Damascus, Khartoum or any other potential terrorist- harboring states is more practical. Even that Libyan leader is untrustworthy.

The world's muslims are already alienated, so nuking Mecca can't possibly make things worse.

233 posted on 01/07/2005 7:43:54 AM PST by Spirochete
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: Moderate right-winger
Nuking Mecca won't accomplish anything, except alienate almost all the Muslims in the world.

What would they worship? 5 times a day, you see the Muslims on the floor bowing down toward some meteorite in Mecca --- what happens when it's gone?

451 posted on 01/07/2005 10:34:21 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson