[Star Traveler]

You said -- "I explained that this was illogical because if we were truly at war with Islam Mecca and all the holy sites could quickly be reduced to ashes."

And that's exactly what we should be doing. We should be busy destroying the religion of Islam and all their self-conceived, important and critical symbols. They seem to derive their legitimacy of Islam from these symbols. The United States needs to destroy them all! (i.e., the religion and the symbols).

You also say -- "There are those whoever who desire not peace and who prey upon the innocent in the name of their religion. It is those Islamic extremists who must be hunted like mad dogs and given no quarter."

The problem with only hunting the terrorists is that those people are deriving their legitimacy from the "self-perceived legitimacy of Islam." There will simply be more terrorists, when you destroy the first batch. They are training the terrorists faster than we can kill them. We need to destroy the source of their legitimacy -- which is Islam. There's the only solution.

You also say -- "It is our national character to fight, and I believe that we will fight for the values that shape our country which may prove to destroy the extremists more than any bomb."

What you say was not enough during the Second World War. This idea that fighting "... for the values that shape our country ... may prove to destroy the extremists more than any bomb" is false.

During the Second World War we dropped bombs like rain on the enemy. We didn't stop raining bombs until the war was won. Then, after the war was won, we started teaching them the principles that we live for (not before).

We didn't drop leflets in Japan that "taught our principles" -- not at all. We threatened them with death and destruction and then we showed them what death and destruction was all about with two atomic bombs. After it was over, then we went into the principles that we live by.

You first deliver death and destruction to Islam -- and then you deliver the principles. You've got it backwards.

Regards,
Star Traveler

[dog breath]

You can destroy a buildings and people with bombs but you can't destroy a religion that way. Since Islam is found in every corner of the globe I am not sure in the end what effect destroying it's holy places would have. Simple pagan religions were often destroyed by destroying their sacred sites but their philosophies were not as evolved as Islam's. The Romans on the other hand never could destroy Christianity despite ruthless efforts. Genocide on a huge scale might succeed against Islam, which vaporizing millions of people would certainly be, but in the end to eradicate Islam would require actions which might of given Hitler pause. There is such a fine line to cross between winning a war and committing crimes against humanity.

[Andy from Beaverton]

From Victor Mordecai (pen name): "Of great interest is this insight into Islamic thinking, coming from monitored broadcasts. As soon as is possible, Jerusalem must be destroyed by nuclear bombs. This will prove that the God of the Jews and Christians is weaker, reaffirming "Allahu Akbar," which means "Allah is greater." Greater means greater than the God of the Jews and Christians. On the other hand, if the Kaaba in Mecca should be nuked first, then it will prove that the Jewish and Christian God is greater. Muslims will abandon Islam and convert to Judaism and Christianity."