Colorado lawmaker: U.S. could ‘take out’ Mecca

Status
Not open for further replies.

Riesstiu IV

Deity
Joined
Oct 2, 2003
Messages
4,229
Location
USA
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8616677/

Congressman is asked to speculate on retaliation for terrorist nuke attack

DENVER - A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could “take out” Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons.

Rep. Tom Tancredo made his remarks Friday on WFLA-AM in Orlando, Fla. His spokesman stressed he was only speaking hypothetically.

Talk show host Pat Campbell asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.

“Well, what if you said something like — if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites,” Tancredo answered.

“You’re talking about bombing Mecca,” Campbell said.

“Yeah,” Tancredo responded.

The congressman later said he was “just throwing out some ideas” and that an “ultimate threat” might have to be met with an “ultimate response.”

‘No uniform, no state’
Spokesman Will Adams said Sunday the four-term congressman doesn’t support threatening holy Islamic sites but that Tancredo was grappling with the hypothetical situation of a terrorist strike deadlier than the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

“We have an enemy with no uniform, no state, who looks like you and me and only emerges right before an attack. How do we go after someone like that?” Adams said.

“What is near and dear to them? 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.

Tancredo is known in the House for his tough stand on immigration and had a 100 percent rating last year from the American Conservative Union his votes and positions on issues.

Mohammad Noorzai, coordinator of the Colorado Muslim Council and a native of Afghanistan, said Tancredo’s remarks were radical and unrepresentative but that people in Tancredo’s position need to watch their words when it comes to sacred religious sites and texts.
 
Scary thing is he is just trying to please his constituents...
 
This congressman is ill suited to politics. Attempting to intimidate terrorists will only attract their attention and cause them to try proving him wrong.
 
Michael Savage! Get out of Tom Tancredo's body right this minute! I told you no hijacking people to talk about nuking the Eiddle East! No dessert for you young man!
 
That has to be the single most dumb idea I've heard this week, someone congratulate him then kick him out of office :D
 
Well that explains the "Nucyaler Buddy" comic in the other thread. It still doesn't make any sense, though.

Anyways, some no-name, attention-starved politican said something ******ed on radio. Yawn.
 
His approach is a cold war strategy that uses threats to get those people who may be supporting terrorism to use their self interest and power to stop it.

If muslim terrorists detonate a nuke on US soil, we will retaliate against them through Islamic holy sites. The message is two fold. To the terrorists, you will be responsible for the destruction of Mecca etc. if you set off nukes in the US. And second, to the leaders of muslim countries, if you support or encourage such acts you will also pay a price.

To use such a strategy, you have to be willing to carry it out (or get Israel to ;)). If so, then I would suggest that once the nuke takes out NY or DC, we give Saudi Arabia time to evacuate mecca before we take it out. The goal should be to eliminate it as a holy site and not to kill muslims.

It's a game of chicken. And you shouldn't play unless you are up to establishing clear rules in advance and then playing by them. They game was played in 1962 over Cuba and the clear rules worked in the world's favor.
 
It's a game of chicken. And you shouldn't play unless you are up to establishing clear rules in advance and then playing by them. They game was played in 1962 over Cuba and the clear rules worked in the world's favor.

I agree the world came within an inch of all out nuclear war. It was both good luck and leadership which prevented it.

It was a lesson to both superpowers in the reality of MAD, after that a kind of understanding (and horror at what had nearly happened) had occured Thus paving the way for detenent
 
So the question might be: "Is there a clearly identifiable deterent that can be used against terrorists?" Tancredo thinks he has one in Mecca.
 
If anything using nuclear weapons against Muslim holy sites would just stir up the hornet's nest. Islamic terrorist organizations would love it because it would make them mainstream overnight. Imagine it millions of angry youth watching their most important regions destroyed instantly, and all rushing to their nearest recruiter. Bombing Mecca would just prove we are the Great Satan.

On the otherhand muslim terrorists attacking the US with a nuclear weapon would just harden the anger and resolve of Americans. A terrorist would have to be utterly mad to do such a thing.
 
Riesstiu IV said:
On the otherhand muslim terrorists attacking the US with a nuclear weapon would just harden the anger and resolve of Americans. A terrorist would have to be utterly mad to do such a thing.
They already have nothing to lose and many are mad already. If they do so, what should/would an appropriate response be? There are two questions: Is there any deterent that would stop such an attack? and should that fail, what is the appropriate response when one takes place? As a nation we need to plan for such things now.
 
That's not a bad idea to threaten to do that to prevent another attack. Whether we should actually do it in retaliation is debateable.
 
just nuke iran, america dont like them and there islamic i mean what a better target (if you want to hit islam)
 
This is ridiculous. His comment will only attract more terrorist attacks.
 
Im sure the Terrorist will be now thinking, bring it on !!

seriously, this guy is a ****** and those that would be pleased by this idea.

Any attack on Mecca will instantly make all muslim in the world Totally against the USA and its allies for generation to come. Pro USA gov with a muslim population will find themselves under seige immediaately and brought down if the population is large and all muslim majority country will instantly wage war on USA.
 
I don't think we would attack just Mecca, but Abha, Al-Khobar, Buraydah, Dammam, Dhahran, Hafr Al Batin, Hail, Jeddah, Jubayl, Medina, Riyadh, Tabuk, Taif, & Yanbu. Also the major Muslim cities in the neighboring countries as well.
 
Fan-tastic. He just wrapped up a nice little propaganda present for the terrorists to use against us.
 
Nobody said:
just nuke iran, america dont like them and there islamic i mean what a better target (if you want to hit islam)


Why attack a country run by Shia when it is Sunnis that are causing the USA the problems at present. In this recent "War on Terror" it could just as easily be defined as a War on Sunni Extremism be it in Egypt, Saudi, Iraq or Pakistan.
 
Tank_Guy#3 said:
I don't think we would attack just Mecca, but Abha, Al-Khobar, Buraydah, Dammam, Dhahran, Hafr Al Batin, Hail, Jeddah, Jubayl, Medina, Riyadh, Tabuk, Taif, & Yanbu. Also the major Muslim cities in the neighboring countries as well.

how about jakarta, Kuala lumpur, Singapore, islambad, Tehran, Baghdad, damacus and all other majo muslim cities ? Else im sure they will sneak into a plane and right into ur doorstep anything soon. oh yeah remember to nuke dubai too, coz they got a fleet of 747 and airbus just for u ppl ;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom