An atomic attack on Fortress America by pious men with beards isn't a matter of if but when.

LA Times via Houston Chronicle ^ | July 16, 2005, 8:24PM | PERVEZ HOODBHOY

[Gengis Khan]

ONE wonders what Osama bin Laden and his ilk learned from Hiroshima.

The decision to incinerate the Japanese city and another, Nagasaki, was not taken in anger. White men in gray business suits and military uniforms, after much deliberation, decided that the United States could not give the Japanese any warning, that although it could not concentrate on a civilian area, it should seek to make a profound psychological impression on as many inhabitants as possible. They argued that it would be cheaper in American lives to release the nuclear genie.

[Rummyfan]

I know this:

The Iranians must not be allowed to produce nuclear weapons!

Whether it's us or the Israelis or whomever, they must be stopped.

[Ajnin]

First off, I don't think that getting or making a nuke has gotten enough simpler to bring one into the US undetected. Of course, maybe I'm just out of the loop and there are nukes that fit into an IPOD that won't give off enough rad to kill and wilt ever living thing within sight.

[Kozak]

Fools. They can damage us. We can utterly obliterate them. They will go the way of Carthage.

" I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve...

Adm Yamamoto

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

If they bomb those cities on the list they will wipe out the elitist, globalist numbskulls who keep us vulnerable, with open borders and PC idiocy.

The rest of us would be then be free to eradicate them.
I support their plan.

Losing the CFR would be a small sacrifice.

[Tulane]

If they ever did nuke a US city, are grandchildren will someday ask, "Gandpa, what WAS a Muslim?"

[Ajnin]

Hey Ajnin, you think you're so smart. Don't you know that Bush created terrorist's that are using MS-13 guys to smuggle nukes into the country? And nobody can detect them because, ...well because it's all Bush's fault?

[Gengis Khan]

The Men in Beard wont be using Iranian nukes anyway, they will be using Paki nukes. Those are the ones you should be wary of.

[Ajnin]

This crappy nuke story is starting to ticking me off like a Dick Durbin Story.

[Little Ray]

Nope. Maybe 20 million out of 1.2 BILLION Muslims support the terrorists and radical Islam. The rest are supremely indifferent or even on our side. Even if we get nuked, we ain't nukin' nobody unless we can "absolutely, for certain" identify a state sponsor, at which point we MIGHT retaliate appropriately.
For certain we won't be nukin' Mecca and Medina.

Its a pity, actually. They don't really care what we do to them, and have little to fear in the way of retaliation. That's one reason we're likely to get nuked.

[Monterrosa-24]

"...The decision to incinerate the Japanese city and another, Nagasaki, was not taken in anger. White men in gray business suits and military uniforms, after much deliberation, decided that the United States could not give the Japanese any warning, that although it could not concentrate on a civilian area, it should seek to make a profound psychological impression on as many inhabitants as possible."

The above is a great example of a very poor sentence. The guy's prose proves he is no English teacher. But he seems to be trying to say that Americans were cold-hearted in fighting the Japanese. The facts are that the decision was made in a total war context and the Japanese started the total war and the Japanese fire-bombed civilian areas too. By bringing foreward such a quantum leap in technology, the atomic bomb gave the Japanese something of an "out" from their mindset against the dishonor of surrender.

[boris]

"This article originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times"

Which therefore holds the copyright and therefore publication in toto here is a violation of FR Rules.

--Boris

[Monterrosa-24]

"...For certain we won't be nukin' Mecca and Medina..."

Don't bet on it. The weenie State Department mentality will be out after a truly massive USA death toll. Mecca has to be on the table. Two of the five pillars of Islam are linked to Mecca and they do care.

[M. Dodge Thomas]

If they bomb those cities on the list they will wipe out the elitist, globalist numbskulls who keep us vulnerable, with open borders and PC idiocy.

The rest of us would be then be free to eradicate them. I support their plan.

Losing the CFR would be a small sacrifice.

Just heard from my wife that the young woman who designed her company's web sites is now confirmed as killed in the London bombings.

Then looked up at the screen and saw that - never though I'd see the day when someone here was supporting plans to use nuclear weapons against his own country - to me, that seems even sicker than the London bombers.

[Fishrrman]

Little Ray writes:
Maybe 20 million out of 1.2 BILLION Muslims support the terrorists and radical Islam. The rest are supremely indifferent or even on our side.

I'd like to believe this - but I don't.

- John

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

The people I'm talking about are far more a threat than a bunch of diaper heads.

[finnigan2]

"Even if we get nuked, we ain't nukin' nobody unless we can "absolutely, for certain" identify a state sponsor, at which point we MIGHT retaliate appropriately."

- In my opinion, the US should quietly use diplomatic back channels right now to tell the leaders of both Iran and North Korea that should a US city be nuked by anyone that, within 24 hours, every major city in their countries will be radioactive ash - proof or no proof, they will be assumed guilty of the attack or providing the weapons for the attack.

[Little Ray]

I'm quoting the Strategy Page, and it seems about right. They seem to think there are about twenty million supporters and a few hundred thousand terrorists and wannabes. I think they are probably about right. Remember, the vast majority are indifferent, which gives the terrorists and their supporters plenty of room to hide. The folks who ARE on our side have to deal with the indifferent who get outraged that they are prosecuting their (terrorist) co-religionists on behalf of infidels.

[A Balrog of Morgoth]

the United States could not give the Japanese any warning, that although it could not concentrate on a civilian area, it should seek to make a profound psychological impression on as many inhabitants as possible.

Last time I checked, the Japenese weren't sitting on a stockpile of thousands of nuclear warheads in 1945.

[AD from SpringBay]

I like how the excerpt of the article equates the American decision makers of 1945 with the Muslim terrorists of today. Very nice moral relativism there, very nice.

[Savage Beast]

I think this is a keen and intelligent analysis.

Unfortunately it offers no solutions that are likely to succeed.

He's right:

"Like a quarrelling group of monkeys on a leaky boat, armed with sticks of dynamite, we are embarked on an uncertain journey."

However, his conclusion that

"Humanity's best chance of survival lies in creating taboos against the manufacture of nuclear weapons — such as those that already exist for chemical and biological weapons — and to work rapidly toward their global elimination"

offers a solution as improbable as it is lofty.

Improbable but not impossible. If the Bolcheviks could be induced to reasonableness, perhaps anyone can. On the other hand, what, including surrender to their madness, could persuede a fanatic as deranged as those we're dealing with to listen to reason?

[nathanbedford]

Hiroshima signaled a failure of humankind, not just of the United States. The growth of technology has far outstripped our ability to use it wisely.

Hiroshima, a failure of the United States? Intone a lie often enough and even the millions on both sides who did not die in the invasion but survived because America did not shrink from righteously inflicting devastation upon its fanatical enemies, might someday come to believe it. Here is the truth of it:

America was right, Japan was wrong.

Japan was a war criminal nation, America was innocent.

Japan brought the carnage upon itself, America waged defensive war honorably.

The atomic bomb saved lives.

Humanity's best chance of survival lies in creating taboos against the manufacture of nuclear weapons

And those who break the taboo and manufacture those nasty weapons should be rebuked and strongly admonished and, if necessary, shunned.

[Little Ray]

Wishful thinking - I'd like that, too. But if we said that, how long would it be before every paper headline in the world reads "US THREATENS TO NUKE IRAN, NORTH KOREA!" Followed by condemnations from every nation from Albania to Zaire, UN sanctions, and of course the traitors in our country would go bonkers. Then our enemies would try to use this to form anti-US alliances (the Paris- Moscow - Beijing - Terhan - Pyongang Axis or something like that) to retaliate, and so on. Really ugly.

[Final Authority]

With respect to the CFR, during the month of August they are out on the Hamptons, Martha's Vineyard, Nantucket, Aspen or Vail, they aren't at their offices in the city. The bombing will have to wait until they clear out so the enemy within can survive to facilitate the eventual destruction of the USA with the aid of extreme Muslim element.

[steveyp]

Iran is a state sponsor of terrorism. And even if they weren't responsible for a nuke on our soil, they got next. Or Syria. Either would be fine with me.

[Little Ray]

IIRC, we DID give the Japanese warning about the nuclear attacks - leaflets and what not. If they didn't leave, that's their own fault.

The prototype A6M Zero was delivered to the airfield for testing in a ox-cart. This was because there was not a RR link between the factory and the airfield and the road between the factory and airfields was not metalled (paved), so aircraft delived in trucks were usually damaged in transit.
In the USA we would have called this a "clue."

[Little Ray]

So you're gonna nuke the folks who keep riskin' their lives protestin' the bearded morons along with bearded morons themselves? Or Syria which is currently tryin' to close its borders with Iraq and killin' quite few radical Islamacists on its own (fascists HATE competition!)? Even the Saudi b@stards are killing terrorists and their supporters.
Terrorists have managed to PO just about everybody but their own supporters. They're runnin' out of places to hide - Pakistan (the parts Islamabad doesn't control) and Iran are about the only place they aren't being actively hunted down.

I LIKE the nuclear option, but I don't think we'll use it.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

The enemy within will probably destroy us with or without the Islamicists.

It's become so hard to waken the sheeple and impossible to keep them awake.

All but a very few disseminators of information peddle the same agenda, even those who appear to violently disagree.

Savage and Jay Severin come to mind as among the few who aren't on the team.

The rest are worthless (h)vanity.

[BikerNYC]

An atomic attack on Fortress America by pious men with beards...

Damn righteous!

[skeeter]

I'd like to believe this - but I don't.

Neither do I. We have to assume all good muslims would support anything that would facilitate spreading Islam.

The only ones that wouldn't welcome violent measures to bring on global Islam would be those smart ones who believe the west will continue to self-destruct.

[rjp2005]

I think future attempts will be made on NY and European continent cities as well, which is why we must remain ever vigilant.

I dont think we would be willing to use nuclear weapons in retaliation however. Neither would Europe.

[M. Dodge Thomas]

You do realize that if your statement above had been made by an American Muslim, on one of the Islamisist boards, the FBI would likely be paying a visit to the Black Lagoon?

As I type this my wife is sitting in Sears Tower, a place that's likely been shortlisted by Islamic terrorists.

Personally, I don't think they need your encouragement or your "support" of their efforts, and I find your suggestion that terrorist attacks on people such as my wife and her co-workers area good idea because (as best I can understand what passes for your "logic") they would kill more liberal Democrats than conservative Republicans both astonsishignly stupid and highly offensive.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

I wasn't talking about democrats.

I was talking about some other criminal organization that is more dangerous than Islam.

[GladesGuru]

"And those who break the taboo and manufacture those nasty weapons should be rebuked and strongly admonished and, if necessary, shunned."

Then those who own such weapons will, as the Chinese like to say, "be deprived of existence".

Your line, quoted above, seems strongly, if not completely derived from Christian pacifists such as the Quakers and Amish.

Might I point out that until Christians came to power, many had a simple job description - martyr.

An earlier job description was lion food.

Our ancestors created a nation which became the most powerful in history and we must keep it that way.

[nathanbedford]

Glades: Turn your sarcasm detector on or replace batteries if the red light is blinking.

[RightWhale]

If they bomb those cities on the list they will wipe out the elitist, globalist numbskulls

The elitist globalist numbskulls live in the suburbs. The storeclerks, cabdrivers and clerk-typists would be wiped out in the city.

[William Terrell]

If a nuke comes in over the southern border, it will be Bush's fault.

[GOPJ]

BINGO:

Fools. They can damage us. We can utterly obliterate them.

" I fear we have awakened a sleeping giant and filled him with a terrible resolve...

[GOPJ]

I LIKE the nuclear option, but I don't think we'll use it.

If they nuke us, we'll nuke them. Count on it.

[A Jovial Cad]

I was hopeful, after 9/11, that if anything good could come out of that barbarous outrage it would be this: the United States would return to the 1945 way of waging war against our enemies.

We're not there yet. And, sadly, I don't think *EVEN* the detonation of a nuclear device on American soil would get us there: within hours of (God forbid) such an event, every DUmmy Dimocrat and even an uncomfortable number of FReepers, I fear, would be rushing around lecturing those of us who believe in using overwhelming, flattening force against those who want to kill us about how "unrealistic," "uncivilized," and "unwise" such a course of action would be.

And when it was pointed out that it sure seemed to work against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan, the howls of rage would really commence: that was "different," we'd be told; and besides that, such ways of waging war probably shouldn't have been used even back then; much blubbering about Dresden would break out, and faster than you can say "Enola Gay!" the debate would turn from how we should respond, to how we should not. Which is to say, it would go from discussing how to win the war, to how to avoid losing it.

I saw that pattern develop time and time and time again last year on the Fallujah, among other, threads. I doubt even a nuke blast in an American city would jar that "civilized" way of thinking loose long enough to let this reality in: our enemies don't care about being "civilized" and "responsible"; they care about winning by any means necessary.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

Then I'll have to talk them into bombing the Hamptons.

[dljordan]

"First off, I don't think that getting or making a nuke has gotten enough simpler to bring one into the US undetected. Of course, maybe I'm just out of the loop and there are nukes that fit into an IPOD that won't give off enough rad to kill and wilt ever living thing within sight."

People drive TRUCK loads of dope accross the border every day. You actually believe that our Southern border is protected?

[dljordan]

"If they bomb those cities on the list they will wipe out the elitist, globalist numbskulls who keep us vulnerable, with open borders and PC idiocy."

Then the Mexicans will attack from the south, the Chinese will attack from the west and the UN will bring in troops to "help" us get back on our feet. Maybe that's why they're trying so desperately trying to disarm us and destroy our culture through unlimited illegal-immigration and multiculturalism. Hell, we have globalist numbskulls on this very website who daily espouse the destruction of America.

[dljordan]

"This crappy nuke story is starting to ticking me off like a Dick Durbin Story."

You're just afraid it's true.

[dljordan]

"Then looked up at the screen and saw that - never though I'd see the day when someone here was supporting plans to use nuclear weapons against his own country - to me, that seems even sicker than the London bombers."

I really don't think he really meant it. It was just dark humor.

[theFIRMbss]

>Then the Mexicans will attack from the south, the Chinese will attack from the west and the UN will bring in troops to "help" us

Hey, man, you left out
Canada! They would push down
from the Great White North!

And there's Bermuda!
Those damn islanders would slam
the east coast so hard . . .

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

I was just geographically confused.

I'm now on record advocating the Hamptons.

[GladesGuru]

Oops!

The flashing red you see on the horizon is my face.

[M. Dodge Thomas]

I really don't think he really meant it. It was just dark humor.

I’m not so sure – I’m not seeing any “Take a chill pill, dude, and then adjust you irony meter message” in those posts, which I’d sure be sending along (or something kinder) if someone who’s spouse worked in the Sears Tower was misreading the tone of any such post of mine.

But I certainly hope so – they just released a few more details on the women from the London office of my wife’s company who died in the bombing; they were pretty sure she had been on the bus as she usually rode it with her fiancée, who was listed as injured. She was, and she was dead at the scene – pretty much blown to pieces, apparently.

We also got an update on his condition today, both his legs have now been amputated.

Pretty dark humor, losing that second leg and all.

But then, he’s got a lifetime to appreciate the joke.

Now, increase those casualties by a factor of perhaps ten thousand, and inflict them on an US in the form of a nuclear bomb detonated in a US city by Islamic terrorists:

If they bomb those cities on the list they will wipe out the elitist, globalist numbskulls who keep us vulnerable, with open borders and PC idiocy.

The rest of us would be then being free to eradicate them. I support their plan.

Losing the CFR would be a small sacrifice.

Very funny.

Fine, dark humor.

And I’m sure we would find it just as amusing if some one said the same over on Kos or DU about Dallas or Salt Lake City – “What a card! He wants to incinerate a hundred thousand Conservatives, to make it easier to eradicate the rest of us. Pretty dark humor, that!”

On second thought, somehow, I doubt it.

And somehow I suspect the if Osama bin Laden could read some to the stuff on FR and DU he’d be laughing his ass off at BOTH sides: the people on the left who believe that a conserative cable is in control and “it’s all about oil!” AND the people right who believe that a liberal cable is in control and they”want the terrorists to win.”

That he LOVES the fact that the infidels are busy fantasying about “eradicating” each other, while he systematically strategizes about how to eliminate both sides of the debate.

And it makes me sick to my stomach to see what this country has become – how easily we have been divided by both sides for short term political gain - while we steadily lose ground economically and diplomatically to places like China.

But then, I suppose, there’s a certain dark humor to the situation…