Has U.S. threatened to vaporize Mecca?

World Net Daily ^ | 1-7-05

[hope]

to vaporize Mecca?

This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=42272

Friday, January 7, 2005

---

---

Has U.S. threatened
to vaporize Mecca?
Intelligence expert says nuke option is reason bin Laden has been quiet

---

Posted: January 7, 2005
1:00 a.m. Eastern

---

© 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

Why hasn't Osama bin Laden's terror network executed an attack on U.S. soil since 9-11?

Simple, says Dr. Jack Wheeler, creator of an acclaimed intelligence website dubbed "the oasis for rational conservatives": The U.S. has threatened to nuke the Muslim holy city of Mecca should the terror leader strike America again.

On his website, To the Point, Wheeler explains how the Bush administration has identified the potential of wiping Mecca off the map as bin Laden's ultimate point of vulnerability – the Damoclean Sword hanging over his head.

"Israel … recognizes that the Aswan Dam is Egypt's Damoclean Sword," writes Wheeler. "There is no possibility whatever of Egypt's winning a war with Israel, for if Aswan is blown, all of inhabited Egypt is under 20 feet of water. Once the Israelis made this clear to the Egyptians, the possibility of any future Egyptian attack on Israel like that of 1948, 1967, and 1972 is gone."

Wheeler says talk of bin Laden's Damoclean Sword has infiltrated the Beltway.

Writes Wheeler in his members-only column: "There has been a rumor floating in the Washington ether for some time now that George Bush has figured out what Sword of Damocles is suspended over Osama bin Laden's head. It's whispered among Capitol Hill staffers on the intel and armed services committees; White House NSC (National Security Council) members clam up tight if you begin to hint at it; and State Department neo-cons love to give their liberal counterparts cardiac arrhythmia by elliptically conversing about it in their presence.

"The whispers and hints and ellipses are getting louder now because the rumor explains the inexplicable: Why hasn't there been a repeat of 9-11? How can it be that after this unimaginable tragedy and Osama's constant threats of another, we have gone over three years without a single terrorist attack on American soil?"

Available only to subscribers of To the Point, Wheeler ends his column by explaining the effectiveness of the Mecca threat.

"Completely obliterating the terrorists' holiest of holies, rendering what is for them the world's most sacred spot a radioactive hole in the ground is retribution of biblical proportions – and those are the only proportions that will do the job.

"Osama would have laughed off such a threat, given his view that Americans are wussies who cut and run after a few losses, such as Lebanon in 1983 and Somalia in 1993. Part of Bush's rationale for invading Afghanistan and Iraq – obviously never expressed publicly – was to convince Osama that his threat to nuke Mecca was real. Osama hates America just as much as ever, but he is laughing no more."

Wheeler says bin Laden is "playing poker with a Texas cowboy holding the nuclear aces," so there's nothing al-Qaida could do that could come remotely close to risking obliterating Mecca.

Writes Wheeler: "So far, Osama has decided not to see if GW is bluffing. Smart move."

---

Subscribe to Wheeler's To the Point intelligence website and read insightful, clear analysis every day.

---

[pointsal]

Bull! Probably the correct idea, but there is no hope of anyone (repeat anyone) in the U.S. government having the gumption to push the button on this topic.

[fastattacksailor]

The idea of nuking mecca is something that must be on the table simply by virtue of the fact it is something muslims would not expect us to do.

As for some saying it would unite the muslims against us---they already are.

[BayouCoyote]

~~~Man...your slipping.

~~~Man..I'm sleeping..

your= you're

Good grief...

[Howlin]

Exactly, this guy is waiting for the Mothership.

I bet he typed this in a running suit and black tennis shoes.

[TexanToTheCore]

Nuking Mecca has been a possibility for two countries,
the US and Israel.

If we felt the need to do it I believe that we would do it with little fanfare. Mecca and possibly Medinah would simply disappear.

Push the Jews into the sea? Sure you can, but only after all your other holy cities and sites become the bottom of craters.

And I would approve.

[Prost1]

Don't need to nuke Mecca. A 2,000 lb cruise would do the job. Another on Medina and a 500lb on Jerusalem. Remove the 3 holiest sites and destroy the basis for their faith!

I'm all for it!

Note: A nuke just reduces the number of American haters. That is not a bad solution, but without their basis for faith, they most likely will do what they do best --- Kill one another!

[camelcrossroads]

Webmaster: what happened to 171-174? Were they that good?? I dont see any bumps..... selling the ideas to Condi???

That stuff was up for a minute or two.... please give it back - it was a good followup to broadsword.....

now i am sorry i refreshed.... and that i trusted this blog to keep info posted...

[Hegewisch Dupa]

Has U.S. threatened to vaporize Mecca?

I wonder if that could actually make it smell worse?

[RaceBannon]

Nope, we need to keep Jerusalem in good condition so we can finally set up our embassy.

[oldcomputerguy]

"Nuking Mecca won't accomplish anything, except alienate almost all the Muslims in the world"

A well placed neutron bomb would do wonders, creating a living radioactive signpost. As I recall all Muslims are supposed to visit Mecca once in their lives. We could even issue travel vouchers.

[mastercylinder]

If this story were true, Osama would call Bush's bluff.

There is nothing that would unite the Muslims against us more than nuking Mecca.

Uniting Muslims against us is what Osama has been trying to do all along.

Exactly: When they are united we can attack a single army not street thugs thats the point. Unite them then bomb there army.

[Prost1]

There is a little problem with the Arabs highjacking sites of other religions. The Al Aqsba temple where Mohammed alledgely departed needs to be leveled.

The Crusaders took it over and turned it into stables or something because it is thought to be part of Solomon's temple, they didn't raze it.
So, bulldoze it, burn it, wreck it, destroy it...
I don't care!

[A CA Guy]

Even if a rumor, the Middle East has always and ONLY respected and feared great power.

[I Gig Gar]

Can't we just be more understanding of our good and gentle "moderate" Muslim neighbors and citizens? Can't we just forget all the talk about genital mutilation, murder, mayhem, suicide bombings, beltway sniping, death threats, fatwas, misogyny, hijackings and all those unfortunate deaths on 9/11?

I've met a few moderate muslims and none of them condone these activities you've described. As a matter of fact, they've condemned the militant muslims who do condone such things.

There are 1.6 billion muslims world-wide. If they were all as you've described, we wouldn't be here discussing this issue.

[I Gig Gar]

I don't know if this is true or not, but I think it's a pretty good idea. We can't threaten the cities or countries of these militant animals because they don't have any and/or don't care about them. So we've got to threaten them someway. And this sounds about as good as anything.

But I've got to believe that if we've made this threat, we would have heard about it by now from whomever we delievered the threat too?

[Kiss Me Hardy]

And we shouldn't forget Medina......

[APFel]

I had no idea so many FReepers were so obtuse when it comes to geopolitical affairs. This thread has been a real eye opener.

The statement "nuke Mecca and Islam dies" is so brazenly false on so many levels. It falls within the non sequitur scale of "Capture OBL and Al Quida dies". If Mecca goes up in a mushroom cloud, the Muslims will bow and pray to the ash. We aren't playing a football game here, folks. There is no "touchdown" in the war against terror. Think of it more as a soccer match with no goals and no time limits.

Completely ignored throughout this entire thread (with the exception of ONE out of 253 responses) is how the other, non-Arab, non-muslim spheres of power will react to an unsolicited attack against a religious civilian target with absolutely no military tactical value whatsoever. You think Asia, Europe, South America and Australia would shrug off an unprovoked nuclear attack?

We may be the "shark amongst the crazy fishes", to paraphrase a response I received to my earlier post, but believe it or not, the shark needs an ocean to swim in. The "coalition of the willing" will cease to exist and we will lose our strongest allies in any future military endeavors. We would most likely be frozen out of the world market and our economy would stagnate. Not even the strongest disciple of Machiavelli would advocate something as foolish as annihilating a population center with no military value, no intent to occupy and govern the land, or a chance to gain financially from it. We are talking about nuking a city in a nation that we are not even at war with, people. A nuclear strike against a sovereign nation who we are officially allied with is geopolitical suicide. Why is this so complicated?

Another suggested that if some secondary power used nuclear weapons against one another, they would receive a "rap on the wrist". This may be the case if India and Pakistan engage in a conventional war followed by a limited tactical nuclear exchange, but if New Delhi gets nuked as a "surprise attack" in order to "liberate Kashmir" you had better believe that a "rap on the wrist" would be followed by a size 13 boot up the backside. A surprise nuclear assault against Taiwan would result in the destruction of China one way or another. Same thing would happen to the US, despite our status as "the SHARK".

A unprovoked nuclear attack against Mecca would go down as one of the vilest, evil acts ever foisted against mankind and would be told and retold for countless lifetimes. Our civilization as we know it would be condemned, vilified, and would be dead within a few generations from internal strife and external influences.

So knock this crap off and get real.

APf

[Modernman]

The US can survive whatever China throws at us and we got the fully armed and OPERATIONAL missile defense system. China would not survive what we can do to it though.

Well, we don't have a fully operation missile defense system.

Anyway, so what if we can wipe China off the map? Are you willing to role the nuclear dice with regards to North Korea knowing that one of the possible outcomes is 100 million or so dead Americans?

[free_life]

Nuking Mecca should have already happened, but better now than later. First messages should be sent to Iran's Mullahs, Syria, North Korea and the janitor at the Dome of the Rock - "YOU ARE NEXT"!

[Modernman]

it would accomplish GREAT things. Islam would be exposed as the LIE and a false religion. 100's of millions of islamists would lose faith and convert to Christianity or Judaism, as the remaining monotheistic religions of choice...

Please. Come back to the real world. In the real world, when you destroy someone's holiest religious site, they tend to turn against you, not convert to your religion.

Thankfully, the President and his advisors are smarter than the nucular cowboys on FR.