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.

[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.