Originally Posted by hound

'where are you coming up with this stuff??'

both read it and heard on tv, check items dating back to 9-11 and around and you will find it.........GWB was seriously considering the nuclear option and had to be talked out of it.

I wonder what would have been the US response if the 'liquid bomb' plans from UK flights would have been successful. It is also said that for another attack on 9-11 scale, US will take out both Mecca and Medina and leave the fanatics wishing they had listened to the cooler heads.

Sometimes I believe that 'subconciously' the Mullah Fanatic types have a wish to punish their own people and thus they commit acts that indirectly lead to their hidden desires. When they are not fighting with others they are fighting among themselves and that too with medivial brutality....look at Iraq these days. their mindsets have to be figured out and this might save billion$ in explosive weapons unleashed on the idiotheads.

Originally Posted by urmomma158

what BS is this!!!Saudi arbaia has the oil and if we attack them we lose it!!! Sure if we do that not only will we lsoe oil we will get nuked with a nuclear suitcase bombd (russian nukes are far from secure).not to mention an onslaught of terror attacks and violence. Is this US mil doctrine ???Most likely behind your fantasy cloak.been hittin the crack pipe 'gen haven cha????

Originally Posted by spittle8

After nuking Mecca and Medina, no one would dare suitcare nuke us... unless they wanted some dead Muslims. Dude. It would be open season on Damascus, Islamabad, Tehran...

But, yes, his suggestion is illogical. After doing that, the only way the world markets continue to get oil is if we threaten to nuke them off the Earth for their oil. Too much could go wrong. Nuclear Russia might back the Middle East.

Originally Posted by urmomma158

I think al qaeda will go to any lengths to kill us. they'll even commit suicide so i'm not so sure.I seriosuly wonder how the hell the came up with his imaginary doctrine.

Originally Posted by spittle8

I always wondered why, after 9/11, we didn't just fire bomb some Muslim cities. That would have sent them a VERY clear message. Most people I've shared this view with have considered me pyschotic.

Originally Posted by TopHatter

I can see why they'd consider you psychotic.

"fire bomb some Muslim cities"?

Like which ones for example? How would you decide? Just pull out a map, close your eyes and point?

Give me a break.

Originally Posted by hound

make it illegal for any person from islamic nations to step a foot on US or UK and other nations that opt for this doctrine.

Originally Posted by TopHatter

I can see why they'd consider you psychotic.

"fire bomb some Muslim cities"?

Like which ones for example? How would you decide? Just pull out a map, close your eyes and point?

Give me a break.

Originally Posted by Semper Fi

Let's say Pakistan nukes Israel as a farewell gift...Who does Israel nuke? If I am Israel and know "hell on earh" is gonna approach in my neck of the woods pretty soon, KSA, Iran, Syria, etc...go bye-bye.

I don't think a middle east would be left.

Originally Posted by spittle8

How else do you stop terrorist attacks? Moral issues aside, states are, by definition, selfish. You do what you must for your constituents. Which Muslim city is the most anti-U.S.? Which breeds the most terrorists? I don't think defending onesself is pyschotic at all. Considering that we're at war with ideas, religion, and people, how do we fight back? What comes to my mind is killing their base of support.

Originally Posted by urmomma158

You're insane. That would cause more terrorist attacks to happen and let me remind you Russian nukes are far from secure including Nuclear suitcase bombs.

Originally Posted by urmomma158

...including Nuclear suitcase bombs.

Originally Posted by highsea

That's more urban myth than actual threat...