Congressman: 'Take out' holy sites If terrorists nuke U.S.




 
--
 
July 18th, 2005  
Duty Honor Country
 
 

Topic: Congressman: 'Take out' holy sites If terrorists nuke U.S.


This guy actually spoke what a lot of people are thinking in this situation.

Congressman: Destroying sites option if U.S. attacked

DENVER (AP) 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 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."

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% 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.

USATODAY
July 18th, 2005  
KC72
 
 
My gran would be livid.
July 18th, 2005  
Italian Guy
 
 
Definitely a wrong idea.
--
July 21st, 2005  
Boobies
 
 

Topic: hehehe...


this guy is a nut ball alright. Some freaks creating some problems in my country, and we should destroy the civilization. hahhaha. Good one.
July 22nd, 2005  
Rabs
 
 
Unless Islam straightens themselves out and starts cracking down on radicals, yes we need to take radical steps of our own. these might include internment and sezeing of oil feilds. We gave them that oil, they were rolling around in the sand tradeing camels before we showed them how to drill.
July 22nd, 2005  
Whispering Death
 
 
Oh yeah, if the US is nuked by islamicists? I'd be all in favor of nuking Mecca.

Once the US is nuked that's it, that is the peak of the escallation, it doesn't matter who else we piss off from that point on, there are no more restrictions.
July 22nd, 2005  
Damien435
 
 
Well, IF terrorists were to nuke several US cities they would most likely be on the eastern seaboard, definetly New York City, probably Boston and the Baltimore/Washington area, most likely leaving approx. 10,000,000 people dead? That is probably a little high because I doubt that the terrorists could get a hold of a high yield weapon(s) but it would be more than enough to make America so pissed off that we would have no problem with help Israel to tear down the Dome of the Rock, destroying the (Karballah?), and putting a stop to the pilgramage to Mecca for at least 15 years, help India in destroying Pakistan, turn a blind eye towards whatever Russia wants to do in Chechnya (Muslim rebels). Basically, punish all Muslims because it is the governments in the middle east who refuse to crack down on terror cells in their country that would ultimately be responsible.
July 22nd, 2005  
Locke
 
 
re the article
nothing shows more ignorance, arrogance or lack of respect for others than that comment. i mean, seriously, who do they think they are to destroy major religious targets because a handful of extremist keep slipping attacks through theri defense.

so basically damien, what you are proposing is a religiuos genocide of sorts, with the purpose of making it near impossible for ordinary decent people to practice thier religion freely, as is thier birth right as a human. nice. you are almost as bad as the terrorists. there is more to the world that simple wrong and right.
July 22nd, 2005  
Damien435
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
so basically damien, what you are proposing is a religiuos genocide of sorts, with the purpose of making it near impossible for ordinary decent people to practice thier religion freely, as is thier birth right as a human. nice. you are almost as bad as the terrorists. there is more to the world that simple wrong and right.
Well, it is something that almost every country would want to do in the situation, for that matter most of the countries of the world would be completely destroyed in such an attack, but very few countries in the world could in fact pull something like this off. Only a few come to mind, China, Russia and America most notably.

Then I shall turn this question around. How would New Zealand respond to such an attack? Russia? China? France, Germany Italy or the UK? India or Pakistan? Egypt? Brazil? Ireland?
July 22nd, 2005  
Redleg
 
 
Great idea....

Quote:
Well, it is something that almost every country would want to do in the situation, for
I certainly hope not, and I don't think (hope) the US would do that either...

By doing that you are guaranteed to get WW3, and Einsteins famous quote would most probably be proved correct..

Quote:
"I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV
will be fought with sticks and stones."
http://www.military-quotes.com/albert-einstein.htm