Tancredo: If attacked, bomb Mecca!

[Hadesspirit]

No this isnt the right action.People living in Mecca or Medina are innocent people.If you are a big country and claim that you are the most powerful on earth with your actions,so you should find the guilties (not innocent) and punish them.
Droping a bomb on Mecca shows how weak a country is,as we see their examples in history.

 

[Patroklos]

So when Rome sacked Carthage and salted its fields they were being weak? Interesting...

 

[Hadesspirit]

So when Rome sacked Carthage and salted its fields they were being weak? Interesting...

and also you claim that droping a bomb on innocent people is the right thing.Klling them is natural.
İnteresting

 

[Cato the Elder]

Fine, let me rephrase it then. It's amusing that people like Tom Tancredo and Dennis Kucinich are considered equally extremist.

 

[Patroklos]

and also you claim that droping a bomb on innocent people is the right thing.Klling them is natural.
İnteresting

No, the interesting thing is that you seem to think that I claim that despite there being no text in this thread even remotely suggesting it.

You made a stupid statement, and I will point that out no matter what my position is.

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

I was happy to see this thread fall by the wayside.

So when Rome sacked Carthage and salted its fields they were being weak? Interesting...

Well the Romans didn't salt the fields, that's a myth. Salt was incredibly vaulable in ancient times (soldiers were paid with it, hence the word "salary"), and the amount required to undertake such a task would be inconcieveably huge.

But then, the sack of Carthage was sort of payback, for Hannibal having rampaged around Italy for about five years, and the mess he left there. I'm by no means justifying the slaying of innocent people, but I am saying that the Romans had a clear motive for such an action.

 

[Chazumi]

I think we ought to do it preemptively (you never know what those terrists are up to).

Agreed. Once we have an acceptable nuclear defense system in place, I say we nuke everyone. Give it about 100 years for the radiation to dissipate and then move in to their former countries.

 

[Patroklos]

Well the Romans didn't salt the fields, that's a myth. Salt was incredibly vaulable in ancient times (soldiers were paid with it, hence the word "salary"), and the amount required to undertake such a task would be inconcieveably huge.

Its just a saying, you don't have to use salt per say to "salt" the fields, any material that ruins them will do. Though some do think salt actually was used, as per the link. Other think it was just a modern invention.

http://www.tomorrowlands.org/misc/salt.html

But then, the sack of Carthage was sort of payback, for Hannibal having rampaged around Italy for about five years, and the mess he left there. I'm by no means justifying the slaying of innocent people, but I am saying that the Romans had a clear motive for such an action.

I should have been more clear, I meant razed. The Romans sacked a lot of cities but that isn't a good comparison because we are talking about nuking Mecca, which in my mind is closer to razing in rather than sacking it. Hannibal was the Second Punic war which ended in 201 BC, Carthage wasn't razed until the end of the Thrid Punic War in 146BC.

 

[dutchfire]

Oh noes, it's alive!

 

[Cheezy the Wiz]

Its just a saying, you don't have to use salt per say to "salt" the fields, any material that ruins them will do. Though some do think salt actually was used, as per the link. Other think it was just a modern invention.

http://www.tomorrowlands.org/misc/salt.html

Well it's true that the production of Africa Province fell, but it remained the breadbasket of the Empire until the Vandal conquest in the 5th Century. Even after the Caliphate incorprated it as Ifriqiyya Province, it was still a huge center of grain production. What contributed to Tunisia's downfall agricuturally was overfarming, resulting in deterioration of the soil, and thus desertification.

I should have been more clear, I meant razed. The Romans sacked a lot of cities but that isn't a good comparison because we are talking about nuking Mecca, which in my mind is closer to razing in rather than sacking it.

I see.

Hannibal was the Second Punic war which ended in 201 BC, Carthage wasn't razed until the end of the Thrid Punic War in 146BC.

If the French can keep a grudge for 50 years, why not the Romans?