US Presidential Hopeful wants to bomb Mecca

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.bigpond.com/news/breaking/co ... 997179.asp

(Emphasis added by moi)

Nuclear deterrence may work against an enemy country, but against a terrorist hydra, it is just imbecilic. And threatening Mecca will only cause more recruits to Islamic terrorism. What a ****ing idiot!

I think the State Department couldn't have summed up this guy's opinion better: "absolutely crazy."

Even in the realm of politics, where everybody's playing ridiculous games, this is really over the top.

Yeah, it's like hitting silver fulminate with your fist. You're likely to lose your fist and your life, in that approximate order.

They're already angry enough about us helping Israel and neutralizing Iraq. Why play around with the ant nest? Either leave them alone or complete the job.

This Tancredo guy will turn himself into another President Bush and become an embarassment to his own country, the United States. You protect your own country by providing your people free decent health care and education, NOT BOMBING RELIGIOUS REGIONS AROUND THE WORLD! If Tancredo bombs the Middle East, then there'll be another 9-11!! !! ! This republican jack@$$ cannot think right!! !! !! I wanna root a politician who will become a great US president and try to bring peace and health to this country and the world.

This guy makes Bush look like a saint, though.

I want to vote for Bill Richardson, because he looks like John Belushi. And he has a good track record.

Tim

actually he would have to say something like that just to get noticed in the throng that is the Republican presidential hopefuls.

I don't think Republicans are especially eager at this moment in history to back someone who sounds at all extremist. Much less someone who gives bad sound bites, to boot.

wow, I am just now watching the Republican Candidates Debate from DesMoines on CSPAN right now

gag me with a right handed ladle!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Tancredo

Ayiyiyiyiyi....

Best thing he did was in response to the Columbine Massacre. But his views....

Ah well, I should send a Dalek hit squad....

why not just fire up the barbie and get some fava beans and a nice Chianti?

As usual when someone is attacking Tancredo, they've either taken his words out of context, or blatantly misquoted him. This behavior pattern belies either suspicious motives, or extremely poor reading comprehension. Whatever the case; that they usually then posture as to having the intellectual high ground makes it down-right comical (Monte Python funny, even).

First off:

Tancredo's comment was in response to what he would do if, in the future, our country were to suffer a nuclear attack at the hands of islamic terrorists. People actually post-up that it would be 'imbecilic' to use response-in-kind as a deterrent?

Imbecilic?

It's incomprehensible and beyond excuse that our society has become self-hating and delusional to the point that members of it would welcome their own destruction rather than defend it. That, friends and neighbors, is 'imbecilic' thinking.

These islamic 'fundamentalists' claim a spiritual and moral impetus directly from the Almighty himself to convert, dominate, or kill us. Don't take my word for it though. Tear yourself away from the keyboard for a month or two, and read the Koran. So, these folks will just cease their efforts through wishful thinking on your part? Maybe they're just a little hot at us for helping Israel, or going into Iraq? To think that would be childishly naive, not-to-mention completely ignorant of a couple millenia-worth of history.

BTW:

Nothing bothers me more than blind regurgitation of propaganda. Before throwing around terms like "****ing idiot" in reference to someone the caliber of Tom Tancredo, why not indulge in some real intellectual autonomy? Have you ever met the guy? Read up on him a bit. He's been diligently serving the community he grew up in as an educator, and a true representative in government now for nearly four decades. He's also one of the few members of either house who got there there for some reason besides being born into a ridiculously wealthy family.

http://tancredo.house.gov/about_tom.html


Some food-for-thought for those posessing the urge to consume, and the constitutional ability to digest:

"To remain ignorant of history, is to remain forever a child... to be led by whoever sounds most pleasing."

~ Thomas Jefferson, paraphrasing the Roman, Cicero

"A vote is like a rifle: its usefulness depends upon the character of the user."

~ Theodore Roosevelt

Nuclear deterrence does not work against such a nebulous enemy. Destroying Mecca, even in retaliation from a terrorist nuclear strike, would incite a massive retaliation against all non-Muslims. Escalation upon escalation, until all that is left of Earth is a radioactive cinder. Thus, he is an imbecile to make such a statement. You are blind or blinkered if you cannot see that.

oh, goodie, we are quoting ancient dead people to our own advantage! I like this game!

Of all the varieties of virtues, liberalism is the most beloved. -- Aristotle

Yes, actually. Imagine if you will that the year is 1979. London is destroyed in a thermonuclear explosion, which later turns out to have been caused by some very technically advanced faction of the PIRA. Would it thus have been justified for the UK to have nuked Dublin in reply? You can try to argue that this isn't the same situation, but I have doubts that any such arguments can be very logical or coherent.

Or, how about this? If your brother happens to get shot next week by a fundamentalist Muslim, shall we then declare that it's justified for you to blow up the local mosque?

Can you seriously maintain that either of these situations represent a just response?

Thankfully he has about a 0% chance of winning anyhow.