Tancredo: Threaten to bomb Muslim holy sites in retaliation

I like this kind of thinking. It will never happen because Saudi Arabia is an 'ally' (wink wink). But attacking Mecca and Medina is exactly the kind of response needed if we're attacked again. It would also be the end of Saudi oil and gas could reach $4-5 dollars a gallon. Thoughts?

Bomb Mecca and Medina

 

It worked when Reagan did it with Russia. I agree with it, point our missles at their "Holy Sites" and Offer this warning: If ANY of Our cities fall prey to a terriost attack when will not heistate to destroy them. If your are an innocent and do not want to see your holy sites destroyed, then come forward and offer any help you can in bringing terrorist to justice.

And then just sit back and wait!

 

Hey we threatend to kill millions of innocent civilians in a "once" allied country because of the fear of communism.

And if they are willing hidng these terrorist does that not make them innocent? If you hide an escaped convict in your house do you not get in trouble?

Sometimes to defeat an enmey you must allow yourself to come down to their level failure to do so will ultimately lead to your defeat!

Did we come under attack from Russia. no because they KNEW if they launched on us we would launch on them. So we basically fought a war on a chess board.

I would gladly take that result then the presnt course of action.

 

This is a stupid idea meant to illicit "hell-yeahs" from the uninformed. If we are attacked by an unknown terrorist group, and then turn around and bomb two cities in Saudi Arabia, including the holiest site of the religion of 1 billion people, it will be open season on Americas allies, with nuclear powers like Pakistan and Iran suddenly having no reason not to nuke Israel or any American bases within reach. Muslims sitting the fence or currently passive to the global Jihad will no longer have any reason to join into the holy war, abroad or in the US.

So here you go: Im a terrorist leader operating from Syria. I want to increase my numbers, my finances, and my effectiveness. I know about President Tancredos policies. So I launch a major attack against the US that gets the desired Mecca-Medina bombing response. Oh wow, now I have the popular support of almost every single of the 1 billion Muslims in the world, as well as the manpower and money that comes along with it. Oh, and most other nations in the world are now sympathetic to my cause. Governments that used to cooperate with the US like Pakistan are no longer persecuting me. Thanks, Tom!

 

nobody can question the value of diamonds. even the muslims would probably calm down if they could turn mecca from a religious dump into diamonds. i will call my junior senator from new york, mrs. clinton, and tell her of this plan.

 

OR

You spin it to seem that it is the governments of these countries are the cause of the attack because of their lack imtrest in bringing these terrorist to justice and possible sway the supposed good muslims to pressure their leaders to give up these terrorist for the greater good of their religion.

Its not the act itself that will work, its the thought of the act. Just like in torture if you reach the point where you have to use acts of torture on a person, it will become pointless because anyone willing to allow the first act to happen instead of talking is going to be willing to die instead of talking.

Like I said did Russia EVER attack us? No because the THOUGHTS of the actions we would have followed through with scaried the crap out of them.

And you dont have to start with Mecca, start with say that mountain range.

Does anyone here disagree with dropping the bomb on Japan?

And thats only if it gets that far.

I think the mere thought of the act would be enough for these governments to start handing people over.

Everyone may have hated us for being the watchdog of the world, but when we were we got alittle more respect across the board.

 

Islamic terrorists could care less if we bomb muslim holy sites. In fact, they would probably enjoy it, knowing it would help them recruit more terrorists. Unlike the old Soviet Union, we're fighting an enemy that has no loyalty to any country. This is a dumb idea.

 

You mean, it's not already? The exact scenario you described could happen if we took out the tribal regions of Pakistan, where Al Qaeda is re-grouping. Should we not defend ourselves their too because we're SCARED of the possible repercussions?

In all fairness to the man, he did say that if it wasn't a good idea, tell him why. Some of you bring up good points, but I'm not buying the 'fear of how they might respond if we did' argument.

 

Unfortunately there are no civilians in the battle against terrorists. Remember those in the twin towers were not a military force. As allied with us as some of the middle eastern countries seem to be they are indeed not and have been proven time and again to have supported and aided the terrorists. These are the sickest of sick, targeting innocent women and children, you will not defeat them by bombing a military base. There are no good options, ones that separates military combatants from innocent civilian. We have tried repeatedly to win a conventional war with little collateral damage and are losing the battle. Maybe it has very unfortunately become time to fight the battle on their terms and conditions. If it's a choice between their wives and kids or mine that's the easiest decision I would ever have to make. JMO