Yeah baby! - "Congressman: Mecca a possible retaliation target"

Originally posted by wecomeinpeaceIraqi insurgents should nuke the Vatican because Christian Bush and his gang of terrorists used all those WMDs on Iraq...

< Shaking my fist in the air in my best imitation of Jon Stewart> "Darn you wecomeinpeace! You beat me to it!"

You have already voted for wecomeinpeace this month.

OR... if a crazed, right-wing, extremist, American terrorist (and we know they exist) went on a killing spree overseas in the name of God ("God told me to kill 'em"), I guess it would be all right if they nuked the Vatican in retaliation... I'm sure that would matter to him!

That is some powerful logic...

[edit on 18-7-2005 by Benevolent Heretic]

[edit on 18-7-2005 by Benevolent Heretic]

This has already happened in the past history of the US.
The drop of the "Little Boy" on Hiroshima destroyed a number of religious and historic monuments. So, it is not inconceivable of such occuring in the future to a place like Mecca that is considered a holy place by muslims.
If, as the jihadist have done in the past, use such a place of worship mosques or even Mecca, then even though I do not agree with it and the US would see world condemnation for it, If the US "discovers that Mecca is being used as a hideout, then the US may indeed hit it.

Here is a quick link to the history and it's historical sites of Hirosima

Originally posted by Dr. Know
Matrix -

While your points are valid ones, how do you put the crap back in the horse once it's out? You could take the government to task on how they could "allow" this sort of thing to happen again, but how is that going to fix what just occured?

See, the real problem in this hypothetical senario is that there is no sovereign government to stike back at, there is no sovereign government to levy sanctions against. How do you formulate a sound solution when you only know that the persons responsible for this are Islamic fundalmentalists? Hit them where you know they are most vulnerable, Mecca.

Second, who says you have to level Mecca with a nuclear weapon? Why not just a couple of strategically placed conventional missles?? Limits casualties and let these fundalmentalist know that the US isn't going to tolerate this type of terrorist behaviour. They're not safe even in their holiest of cities.

The US citizentry isn't going to sit back and wait for the government to formulate a politically correct retalliation. They will want swift vengance.

I know you say you can't fight fire with fire or you'll eventually get burned, but what happens when you haven't been burned only once but twice now by these fundalmentalists? Same analogy apply?

It seems to me that if you followed through with a bombing or rocketing of Mecca, you would end up at war with every Muslim country in the world, not just the radical insurgents that we're dealing with now. So, tell me, how does going to war with 10-12 other countries solve our problem.?

Or another example. There have been numerous, confirmed instances of Catholic Priests using their positions in the church to molest children. Not just a couple of cases but dozens. And many with the priests sharing victims and assisting each other. Is it time to start burning churches?

Just because a group cloaks itself within another doesn't give us the moral right to attack the latter. The congressman was talking nonsense. But hey, he's a politician. What do you expect??

Originally posted by Dr. Know
See, the real problem in this hypothetical senario is that there is no sovereign government to stike back at, there is no sovereign government to levy sanctions against. How do you formulate a sound solution when you only know that the persons responsible for this are Islamic fundalmentalists? Hit them where you know they are most vulnerable, Mecca.

How can you strike at all the Muslims? If there was an Islamic extremist religion, then I can see going after their organization, but only a small percentage of muslims engage in extremist activity. The vast majority of Muslims are calm, peaceful, loving people. How can we strike at all of them? They also have NO control over what the extremists do! What good would it do? Make the rabid Americans feel better. Get that vengeance?

Hey, I don't have any problem with retaliation or vengeance, but take it against the right people. And if you cannot figure out who that is, then think harder and figure out another solution.

Do we punish all the white people because of a crime a white person does? Do we punish all the Cathilics because of the priests who can't keep their hands off of little boys?

We must punish the individuals, Failing that, we must protect ourselves from further actions.

"Yeah baby"


I say this because its about time somebody in our government grew a pair and made an extreme suggestion to combat these terrorists. You cannot fight extemists who play by no rules, "by the book".

And I will tell you another thing: I am sick and tired of mainstream Islam not taking any action against their OWN extremists. After all, these poeple are sub-portion of thier own religion. They refuse to police thier own. Other than Pakistan, nobody has done a damn thing other than praise these mass muderers.

So where does that leave the USA? Fighting an enemy that cares nothing for life of any kind driven by thier own religion. That religion is more dear to them than anything in the material world, even thier very own families. The ONLY way to keep them from attacking is to kill them or take away what they foght for, and the only way later is going to happen is if thier PEERS care to stop them.

And the only way, it seems, to get mainstream Muslims to care about anything other than themselves, is to threaten the very thing they warship the most.

Hey, dont get angry people. nobody is suggesting just nuking Mecca, we are suggesting nuking Mecca if we are nuked by the extremists first. And you cant blame a nation for defending itself.

You know its, funny, nobody is commenting on why the USA would be driven to such an extreme. None of the haters seem to care about the USA getting nuked that would lead to such a response.

Sad to live with such hate. I feel sorry for you.

[edit on 18-7-2005 by skippytjc]

Originally posted by kenshiro2012
This has already happened in the past history of the US.
The drop of the "Little Boy" on Hiroshima destroyed a number of religious and historic monuments. So, it is not inconceivable of such occuring in the future to a place like Mecca that is considered a holy place by muslims.
If, as the jihadist have done in the past, use such a place of worship mosques or even Mecca, then even though I do not agree with it and the US would see world condemnation for it, If the US "discovers that Mecca is being used as a hideout, then the US may indeed hit it.

Here is a quick link to the history and it's historical sites of Hirosima

Erm, by nuking Hiroshima, they attacked a NATION. And got that nation to surrender.

How on earth can this in any ways be compared to gangs of terrorists that operate worldwide, come from places all over the world and use not war, but random death as their way of fighting?

You know its, funny, nobody is commenting on why the USA would be driven to such an extreme. None of the haters seem to care about the USA getting nuked that would lead to such a response.

Sad to live with such hate. I feel sorry for you.

Who pushed the Islamic extremists to become so extreme?

And dude, last time I'm telling you, quit calling me a US hater.
I don't hate the US, I am the US too you ignorant racist.

I love my fellow countrymen, family and friends, no matter where they came from or whatever religion they affiliate themselves with.

You on the other hand show openly on these boards how you are the one filled with hate, wanting to nuke and bomb everything and everyone that isn't american and want whoever that opposes your opinion to just shut up.

You post thread after thread with more hatred towards Iran, Islam and people that aren't of the same oppinion as you. You support torture, murder, use of nuclear weapons and mayhem in general.

Worst of all is, most of what you post is things you read on sites like Jihadwatch, which is 50% propagandized, spinned bullocks with a pinch of actual facts and 50% outright lies.


[edit on 18-7-2005 by thematrix]

I completely support this, but it should be no ordinary bomb, it should be a cobalt bomb that makes Mecca uninhabitable for decades due to radiological contamination.

I have read elsewhere that the Bush administration has communicated exactly this threat to the Al Qaeda / Saudi leadership early in the war.

It is not something that I’d like to see but exactly how do you influence religious zealots hidden / protected by Muslim “moderates”?

Put yourself in Bush’s shoes for a second…and do so in a realistic manner. Remember, you may have been told nukes could already be inside your cities…how do you protect your people right NOW?

Let’s reverse this. If our government and the Vatican allowed nukes to fall into the hands of right wing radicals and then, once the threat was known, continued tacit support of the radical’s efforts then I would say the Muslim countries would be well with in their rights to nuke the Vatican if, say, several Muslim capitals / cities were vaporized.

I think several cities / sites have had a pre-programmed minuteman missile reserved for their exclusive reception since 9/11. The attendant radiation being a mere courtesy detail of course.

Meanwhile, Bush’s strategy is to stick our soldiers right into the ant’s nest and see if we can’t fight our war in more conventional terms. (The actual strategy has been to project US force into the center of the Arab world so we can pressure many countries at once without invading them. Bush could not come out and say that hence the song and dance for his reasons).

I do believe that if a nuke goes off in our country that most of the Arab / Muslim world will be attacked in kind. Saudi Arabia, Syria, Iran, and Indonesia would probably suffer.

(Yes, not to offend you Iranians I do know that Iran is Persia…my God rescue you from those Arabs mullahs sometime soon).

thematrix,
did you read my post?
I will quote myself:

If, as the jihadist have done in the past, use such a place of worship mosques or even Mecca, then even though I do not agree with it and the US would see world condemnation for it, If the US "discovers that Mecca is being used as a hideout, then the US may indeed hit it.

As mentioned, If the gangs used Mecca as a hideout believing that they cannot be touched since it is holy and no non-muslims can enter then it would be CONCIEVABLE that the US MAY hit it as a last resort IF the us was HIT FIRST.
I used the Hiroshima reference since before WW2 the US stated that it would leave religious and historical sites alone and would not attack such places. Hiroshima as well as Nagasaki were exceptions to this.
I do not agree with the tactics, but I do not simply write such off. When you consider what the mind set of the US would be if there ever was a nuke attack on the US. The US would easily attack such a holy city if there seemed to be no other way of exacting revenge.

So destroy something of worship for millions/billions because of what a few did?

Sick morons. You would have every muslim on the planet beying for the US' to be destroyed, is that what you want? I expect so, give you racists an excuse to kill all those A Rabs eh.

Yehaw, gotta love the red neck cowboys.

[edit on 18-7-2005 by Kriz_4]

If the U.S. was hit by a genuine nuclear bomb, say in New York City killing millions, the ME would get off lucky if only Mecca was hit, more likely a full strike on every Arab/Muslim city would occur in retalitation.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
If the U.S. was hit by a genuine nuclear bomb, say in New York City killing millions, the ME would get off lucky if only Mecca was hit, more likely a full strike on every Arab/Muslim city would occur in retalitation.

Just shows the racist mentality of those in charge, at least that show of force would.

If Russia had hit us during the cold war with a first strike, we would have replied with a full response hitting every Russian city, even though only a few in the politburo had made the decision to strike.

I see no difference.

Originally posted by djohnsto77
If Russia had hit us during the cold war with a first strike, we would have replied with a full response hitting every Russian city, even though only a few in the politburo had made the decision to strike.

I see no difference.

I see the difference. These terrorists deserve to be got don't get me wrong, trouble is they have no real affiliation with any country.

If a country attacked the US, I agree attack the country back. So punish every muslim in the world because of some sorry excuses for human beings from who knows where? I don't think so.

That would smack of religous hatred, just what these extremeists are all about. Becoming one of them solves no problems.

[edit on 18-7-2005 by Kriz_4]

Many of these countries, especially Saudi Arabia where Mecca is located, fund the terrorists and radical madrasas that are terrorist factories even in Western countries.

Their hands are not clean, and if the U.S. is attacked with a nuclear bomb, they deserve in-kind retaliation just as if it was ICBM launched from their soil on their command.

Kriz_4
Where are you?
I take it by your responses that you are not us.
I will give you this scenario:
Whatever country you live in gets hit by a nuke that is exploded by a muslim extermeist. This nuke will of course kill thousands (if not millions) of your fellow countrymen. Your goverment discovers that the people who did this, who planned it are staying in Mecca so that they cannot be extradited and who believe that they are safe since no one will attack a holy place.
Are you sooo sure that your goverment, your fellow countrymen would just simply sit there, wringing thier hands, pleading with the muslim world to turn over these murders? Or do you deny that your goverment (any goverment in the world for that matter) would not just blow the heck out of holy place?

Well if they are located in Mecca, then fine, I imagine a strike will occur. But if they are not, if the bombers are never found? I stand by my argument.

Originally posted by kenshiro2012

Your severely twisting the subject of the thread.

If the people who organized the attack are in Mecca, go after them, but don't do overkill.

The subject of the thread is that if terrorists detonate a nuke on US soil, its supposedly ok to randomly nuke Muslim religious sites.

I agree with this guy 100%. We need to make it clear to Islam that if a nuclear or radiological device is set off in the United States that we will retaliate in kind by wiping Mecca and/or Medina off the map. No matter what you want to say, these terrorists are living in Muslim communities. The locals know who they are, whether they want to admit it or not. So unless they're willing to cooperate and turn in these cowards to their respective governments, then they're running the risk of having their holy sites blown away.

It's time to start playing hardball with these people.