Thread: Tom Tancredo Defends Bombing Mecca Comments
View Single Post
Old 08-09-2007, 09:56 AM   #4 (permalink)
hkbajwa
Council Member
 
hkbajwa's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Pakistan
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,179
Points: 5,047, Level: 45
Points: 5,047, Level: 45 Points: 5,047, Level: 45 Points: 5,047, Level: 45
Level up: 49%, 103 Points needed
Level up: 49% Level up: 49% Level up: 49%
Activity: 0%
Activity: 0% Activity: 0% Activity: 0%
hkbajwa is offline 		Reply With Quote
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by baloney_detector View Post
Of course, bombing Mecca would likely be the worst possible response the US could take regarding an asymetrical Al Qaeda nuclear attack on the US.

And I doubt that such a threat by the US would act as much of a deterent.

I wonder what, however, could be the best response the US could take to such an attack.

Surely, Al Qaeda and other such extremists surely don't represent the best interests of the Muslim world.

And I would think (perhaps, hope) that the "response" will come from the moderate Muslim world in the sense that they will very actively root out such extremists.

But the US would undoubtedly have to respond, at least in some way, to such an attack.

(I think it is likely that Israel would be attacked with a nukes at the same time as the US or even before the US.)
Well prevention is better than a cure.

Right now ANY response to a terrorist attack will seem heavy handed and imperialistic. The reason for that is that the US already has the blood of more than half a million lives on its hands ( Iraq). Combine that with various human rights violations (Gitmo & Abu Ghraib), unconditional support for Israel ( in spite of Israel's illegal settlements, its subjugation and slow destruction of palestinian territories, and its ridiculous war in lebanon) hypocritical support for some unconstitutional dictators, looting of Iraq through smaller "contractors", and an overall policy of hegemony and non-compliance with international law, and anything the US gets will be too good for them. I have always wondered how the death of 500,000 Iraqi civilians can be justified by 9/11. 500,000 Iraqis are roughly as much worth as 3000 americans. I know that you can't keep "score", but at present moment any terrorist attack against the US will only be viewed as its just dessert.

What the US SHOULD be doing is dealing with the hatred and ill will it creates the world over through its foreign policies. Until the muslim countries see some sort of objectivity vis'a'vis the ME conflict, until the muslim countries see some sort of respect for their sovereignty, until the WORLD sees that the US is leaving its "global bully" attitude behind, most of the world will consider any terrorist action deplorable but understandable.

I hate to say it man.. the innocent individuals who may get caught up in this certainly do NOT deserve to die ( that includes any american individuals also). But the US as a nation, as a sovereign entity, does deserve to pay for the destruction it has caused. Be that payment in remorse, restitution, regret or in blood, that is for the US to decide. But it certainly does owe the world.

I started this post thinking there would be some more suitable alternative.. but unfortunately in the global context, the US has no right to venegance. So IMHO you guys are damned if you do and damned if you don't.
Love for all, Hatred for none