Tom Tancredo: We Could Nuke Mecca

[Cellis]

Exclusive: US Representative Tom Tancredo in Response to U.S. Nuke Threat:
We Could Nuke Mecca

Updated 19 July 2005: The Northeast Intelligence Network broke the story - and now, the major media has picked up on last week's interview with US Representative Tom Tancredo's remarks with talk show host Mr. Patrick Campbell, of AM 540 WFLA, taking unnecessary heat for speaking about a hypothetical situation of a real war against a real enemy.

Representative Tancredo, showing an excellent understanding of the current threat and wartime environment,added: "What is near and dear to them? [the Islamic terrorists]. They're willing to sacrifice everything in this world for the next one. What is the pressure point that would deter them from their murderous impulses?" he said.

Mr. Tancredo is best known in the House for his tough stance on illegal immigration and border security, both adversely impacting national security and vital to our success in our battle against terrorism.

------

LISTEN TO THE REMARKS OF CONGRESSMAN TANCREDO

[MGB8]

I don't know whether this is good or bad. The idea that Mecca could be at risk needs to be floated. I don't know whether an elected official is the right person to float the idea. A Pentagon person, or someone else who you could use as a bad-cop would be better.

Nevertheless, the idea that, g-d forbid, a major terrorist strike into the US could cause harm to Islam itself, may be one of the only things that will cause the Muslim community at large not only to renounce, but to declare Jihad on the Jihadists.

[Cellis]

thus millions of the muslim suicide bombers could destroy the USA... you dont know how important is the macce... think if Suudi Arabia Destroys Vatican...

[MGB8]

Hmm?

How would they get in? If a US city was destroyed by a Nuke from a Jihadist group - say 200-300 thousand dead, I would not be surprised if Mecca followed. In fact, given the reactions I heard to 9/11, I would be surprised if that wasn't what happened.

The biggest preventor of such an attack is the fear that the US would follow through which such a threat. In order for that threat to be effective, it needs to be disseminated and understood as real.

And Muslims all over, not just Jihadists, need to understand that the destruction of Mecca would probably mean the end of Islam, in the long run.

[Quicken]

The United States would NEVER nuke Mecca. Come on people. Under what circumstances did we nuke Russia - our vilest enemy for over 40 years? None.
Do we have a problem here with Muslims as a whole? or just the terrorists?

The pain that such a bomb drop would cause would be catastrophic, emotionally and physically. Even IF they bombed our cities and even IF we wanted revenge --would we really inflict the horror of a nuclear bomb on millions of innocent people??

If so... then I ask you...when do we become them?

.........the moment the bomb drops.

[MGB8]

If a Nuclear bomb is exploded in a US city by Jihadi terrorists, financed and morally supported by the Islamic world, I would give greater than 50% odds that Mecca is wiped off the map.

After 9/11, "only" 3000 some dead, we heard calls in the US to nuke the middle east. Now imagine that its 100,000, 200,000 dead. A city that for 10,000 years cannot be occupied safely. And "warriors of Islam" responsible. At that point, the difference between Islam and Islamism starts to become irrelevant. Jihadism cannot exist without Islam. The US cannot exist with the threat of Nukes going off in its own country. Jihadists may well get their wish of an apocaliptic war between Islam and the West. And Islam will lose - that is what they don't understand.

The problem is not just what we become after we drop the bomb. It is what do we become if we don't.

[MGB8]

ps - had Russia nuked us, we would have nuked Russia. If communist terrorists were acting on behalf of "the revolution" hit us with a Nuke, we would also have Nuked Russia. Russia, knowing that, would have done everything in its power to prevent such an occurrence from happening. Russia didn't want the end of the world. We reached defcom 5 a couple of times. If Islamdom, of which the Jihadis are part, hits us with a nuke, expect a hit back. Of course, the scary thing is that the Jihadists seem ok with the end of the world.

[Quicken]

No way. You may of heard individual Americans screaming for a nuke to fall, but no way .......ever!!! did you hear anyone in this Administration or any congressman/Senator even remotely mention a nuclear attack.

It wouldn't happen, ever.

http://www.cfr.org/pub7432/charles_d...etaliation.php

Prevention, Not Retaliation

By Charles D. Ferguson II

Foreign Policy Forum, October 05, 2004

[MGB8]

Well, this thread is about a Congressman's statements. You don't think others haven't said as much privately? You don't think the Pentagon has come up with contingencies? As for Israel, the Samson option is well known.

Meanwhile, it is a good thing that this threat exists. The existence of this threat may be the only thing that prevents a nuclear attack on a US city. It is questionable as to whether an elected US official should have floated this - though now, gauging your response, I am inclined to believe that he did the right thing. A threat is not a threat if it is not taken seriously. The russians took MAD seriously. This is a new version of MAD. The Jihadists don't value human life, but they do value certain holy spots - and that is the leverage that the US has in stopping them. That the love of those spots is shared by others is to some extent irrelevant.

[atricnorth]

i love the smell of fresh napalm and in the morning, song playing" rambling man" and " flight of the valkyries".

in this case, replace napalm with fresh uranium radiation readings.

good morning meccccccccccc ca, it is a silent spring in mecca today with nothing but sand...... disintegrated remains. expression " total FUBAR".

broadcasting news say that hmmmm, the expression is "chernobyl revisited"


news and song edited by robin williams. lol

[golani]

i love the smell of fresh napalm and in the morning, song playing" rambling man" and " flight of the valkyries".

in this case, replace napalm with fresh uranium radiation readings.

good morning meccccccccccc ca, it is a silent spring in mecca today with nothing but sand...... disintegrated remains. expression " total FUBAR".

broadcasting news say that hmmmm, the expression is "chernobyl revisited"


news and song edited by robin williams. lol

Better nuke Medina first because most of heinous prophet epileptic seizures occured there

See medina surats compred to mecca ones

"islam is to medina what a snake is to its hole" popular muslim quote...

[frizzer1]

I don't understand the notion that jihadis would be deterred by the possibility that Mecca or Medina would be imperiled.
They not only don't fear death, they long for it.To them this life is meant only for submission to Allah and dying for Allah.They believe that Allah will reward them for their actions,and that the afterlife with all it's attractions is what they should be concerned about.So why would they worry about what would happen here on earth?
Or perhaps a muslim scholar could explain why they might?

[Rune]

No I don’t think the US would retaliate in kind. At least not after the first US city is nuked. Just look at the 9/11 attacks, acts nearly as violent and brutal as nuking an American city - at least in the immediate footage they produced, and nothing much of same kind was repaid for those. Some support for the Afghan rebels, and later an invasion of Iraq. And just listen to the unbelievable amount of we had to hear for even that small amount. But nothing from the department of sheer bloody payback was repaid. No Afghan or Middle Eastern population centers were bombed. No Islamic holy site touched. On the contrary; the first thing the American president did was enter a mosque and repeat the Religion of Peace line. Many Islamists still consider 9/11 an overwhelming success, precisely because the attacks garnered so much publicity for Islam – apparently the number of US conversions increased in the weeks and months following 9/11. Go figure.

No, I don’t think US would nuke Mecca - or anywhere else. They might invade some minor country like Syria or Yemen, do some targeted assassinations, perhaps they might stretch it to bomb some cities with conventional weapons – but not much beyond that. And I don’t think the Islamists seriously believe they would either. More the shame. A serious and believable threat could deter them. Reportedly Bin Laden had contemplated targeting nuclear plants in 9/11 – but decided not to, because he feared what the US would do in return. I don’t think that deters them anymore.

The west, including – if not to the same extend as Europe - the US, has become timid and effeminate. But this is a big fish small fish world, and no amount of happy dreaming is going to alter that. Unless the West finds its inner core of sheer bloody barbarism it won’t survive.

[MGB8]

We are not talking about fear for Mecca or Medina because of the lives lost. The Jihadists don't care. We are talking about fear for Mecca and Medina because of the role they play in Islam. Without Mecca, there is no Hajj. Without Mecca, there is no Kabaa. Without Mecca, there very well may be no Islam over time.

And, while I am not certain that the US would respond with a nuke, I think you would have to give it greater than 1/10 odds that it would, given popular opinion.

[savvy]

We are not talking about fear for Mecca or Medina because of the lives lost. The Jihadists don't care. We are talking about fear for Mecca and Medina because of the role they play in Islam. Without Mecca, there is no Hajj. Without Mecca, there is no Kabaa. Without Mecca, there very well may be no Islam over time.

Not a good idea, the Quran will still be around to spread it's poison, and these places can be rebuilt.