Has U.S. threatened to vaporize Mecca?

Seems that the idea was taken seriuosly then, interesting indeed wouldnt you say?


Has U.S. threatened
to vaporize Mecca?
Intelligence expert says nuke option is reason bin Laden has been quiet
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: January 7, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern


Why hasn't Osama bin Laden's terror network executed an attack on U.S. soil since 9-11?

Simple, says Dr. Jack Wheeler, creator of an acclaimed intelligence website dubbed "the oasis for rational conservatives": The U.S. has threatened to nuke the Muslim holy city of Mecca should the terror leader strike America again.

On his website, To the Point, Wheeler explains how the Bush administration has identified the potential of wiping Mecca off the map as bin Laden's ultimate point of vulnerability – the Damoclean Sword hanging over his head.

"Israel … recognizes that the Aswan Dam is Egypt's Damoclean Sword," writes Wheeler. "There is no possibility whatever of Egypt's winning a war with Israel, for if Aswan is blown, all of inhabited Egypt is under 20 feet of water. Once the Israelis made this clear to the Egyptians, the possibility of any future Egyptian attack on Israel like that of 1948, 1967, and 1972 is gone."

Wheeler says talk of bin Laden's Damoclean Sword has infiltrated the Beltway.



source

But could never happen. The US does that, the world declares war on us.

Let me put forward another possiblity as to the lack of terror attacks in the US since 9-11...Effective counter intel. Either we have effective spies, or the US has threatened to nuke Mecca...I'm going to go with the likely possibility instead of the empty threat

Seriously, how could we justify blowing up Mecca because a global terrorist network attacked us?

I think this is a fabulous idea. Make it plain and simple. Promulgate that fact in every medium worldwide. Be nice or no Mecca.

I don't see this happening. Imagine the cost of extracting oil from a radiated land.

The USA would suffer more than the obvious loss of a square shaped rock.

Too big of a hit in the pocketbooks of the oil men to justify such an action.

The real reason that we have not been attacked again is ....

we have been....

then we send this really cool blue sphere back in time 7 days so that we can stop the attack before it has happened....

doesn't anyone watch TV anymore?
GEEZ

I don't think we can rule out "wiping mecca" anymore than we can rule out A COMET destroying us all....
not likely, but anything is possible with shrub in the whitehouse...

I like Sirr's post on this much better.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

He refferenced some mythology to spice it up a bit.

He may have said it was an option, but lets not kid ourselves-we really, really don't want to nuke mecca.

Whatever muslium support the US may have would be gone.
We would be the first and second country to use nuclear weapons in a battle/war.

The use of a nuclear weapon on innocent civillians there would make the US Nazi-like monsters, even more than we do now

I am not saying I know how to get him in a way that won't be disasterious, but with all our advisors, I hope the president comes up with a better answer- there is always the idea we threaten and bin lad., calls our bluff.....................

It would not hurt the majr oil fields, but it dose and will keep extermist down. It is the only way to handle people like this. They should also demand that they give up all the terrorist or lose mecca and madina would also go just because it is so close.

....just a thought, aren't you just a tiny bit worried about tens of millions of muslims that are currently no followers of UBL that would pick up the sword/stick/gun whatever? Wouldn't be much holiday locations in the world where american citizens could hang out without risk of losing head?

Consider the pain in the neck of those few pesky insurgants in iraq multplied tenthousand times, have fun!

Actually UBL might be secretely hoping somebody trashes the holy places to jumpstart the masses for the jihad, also a few cristian fanatics seem to want to git it on hehe (preferrably with nukes while quoting some fitting bible text about Gods wrath and Fires from Heavens) , two sides, same coin...

Well, I guess there is only one way to find out...


[edit on 7-1-2005 by Countermeasures]

[edit on 7-1-2005 by Countermeasures]

Good idea, and will happen sooner or later.

Another idea would be to place the Kabaa in the bottom of the Mariana Trench in the Pacific Ocean. Then generous individuals like myself could offer to help pay for Mohammedan pilgrimages to visit that sacred stone which stands in proud memory of the revered pedophile. Wouldn't cost too much either seeing as how it would be a one way trip.

If the US nukes Mecca, there will me millions upon millions of people willing to kill themselves in order to kill Americans both in the US and abroad. There will be weekly attacks on US soil, the US will become isolated worldwide and will have no support from anyone.

Now before all you flag wavers say you dont need other countries, you do because the US needs to import a whole host of items because they cannot be self sufficient.

I cant believe any can even remotely consider nuking mecca a posibilty.

Be nice or kill a few million innocent people? Your a sick What happens after that? Put all the Muslims in America in jail?

[edit on 7-1-2005 by asala]

Hitting Mecca with a nuke would cause a major backlash against the US, from the entire world. But it is not only the nukes that would cause backlash: drop a few MOABs on the rock and you would totally destroy it, and see similar backlash but maybe not from the entire world.

But the threat of doing it does work as a psyops tool.

I think if the US nuked Mecca, you would have every muslim in the world ready to jihad. I'm talking average moderate muslims in western countries who hold good jobs and converse normally with westerners strapping thselves with bombs and aiming for the destruction of the west.

From this perspective, nuking mecca is exactly what the extremists need to bring the rest in line.

It would be suicide for the West. But then again, what are these internment camps in the US for?

[edit on 7-1-2005 by cargo]

Nuking Mecca would serve no purpose other than to sate the American bloodlust. If you want to have every country in the world as your enemy (yes, including the UK, even Tony B.Liar couldn't spin this one) then go ahead.

Oh, and if you do, I hope you have enough native oil and gas supplies because pretty much every country in the world will cut you off.

I fail to see how killing millions of innocent people makes up for previous killings. One analogy would be if a man commits a murder, kill everyone who lived within ten blocks of him.

But who cares, eh? They've got brown skin and talk funny and most importantly, they're not american so their lives don't matter a damn.

Nice to see you back ed... compared to some of the other right winged nutters that have turned up recently you seem very awake (hint hint)...

Anyways, the reason there have been no attacks on US soil since 9/11 is the same reason there were no attacks in the three years prior to 9/11 by islamists... its not that big a threat... its been played up by the governent so they can pass laws like the patriot act that take away your freedoms...

If the US ever nuked mecca, they'd have every islamic country in the world declare war on them... and as much as the US would like to think they can defeat anyone in war... they cant... they cant even take out a small number of resistance fighters in Iraq, let alone a whole religion.

Not to mention the rest of the world would probably have no sympathy for the US when they get their asses kicked. Its a ludicrous idea that the US would even consider nuking Mecca... and bin laden doesnt care if the US does or not... he just uses Islam as an excuse to commit atrocities, the same way the USA uses freedom and democracy.

Hahahahaha, that is a great idea! Wait, I am not a Ann Coulter fan... or Bush&Co fan.

Nuke any country, I would nuke Africa, I know Africa is a continent, but still, would be fun to nuke it. Or Portugal, does that place still exist? No, wait, THE VATICAN! Holy jewish hell on christmas. Nuke the vatican, not only a city, but the smallest country in the world, That would be great, Bush nukes Mecca, a holy city, so i nuke the Vatican, a holy COUNTRY!

You guys keep using words/phrases like 'justified' and 'muslim backlash'....


Are we all joking? Whether or not something is justified in this war has become meaningless. Above all else Osama reveres the kabaa -- the site of the holy stone the pre-muslim arabs worshipped -- and so he will do anything to protect it. It doesn't matter if the us is justified in killing the people of mecca or not, what matters is that osama is afraid that we will actually do that.

To be frank, talk about how the world would be mad at us just encourages him to think that we would never do such a thing... which, to be frank, is bad. Whether or not Bush would really go through with it is almost immaterial... Osama has to THINK that Bush would do it and that the American people would support him.

As for the Arab backlash... I can't figure out all this talk about winning over the muslims. They already hate us and always will. If they could form an army and attack us en masse, with any chance of success, they already would have done that.

1/ Osama isnt stupid, he know the US wouldnt do this no matter how retarded your president is. The fact there has been no attacks on US soil isnt any indicator of succes, coz no Muslim attacked US soil in the 3 years prior to 9/11 either... its like saying this rock i have keeps tigers away... i dont see any tigers so it must work... if anything terrorism is worse since the US went on its little crusade...

2/ Muslims dont hate the US, its stupid ignorant remarks like that that make people want to hate Muslims. Radical Muslims hate the US, but they make up less than 1% of the islamic population... Its like me saying all americans are bloodthirsty warmongers who declare war on who they want and kill 1000's of civilians in the process... thats not true, just a small handfull are...

For a place that tries to deny ignorance, ATS is sure full of ignorant people and statements sometimes.... maybe we should adopt some sort of screening process.

I think that bush would do it with or without the support of American citizens. I think that if he truly thought that he needs to do it that he would do it...to protect whatever...

I think that the killing of innocents and destruction of a country would be of little consideration. He has already did that once. Most of the world already hates us. He will do what he wants to get what he wants or to protect what he wants. I think we have seen that in Iraq.

(Ok, MIB...I know you are reading this )