Skip to comments.
Hamad Mir - "Terrorists will Use Nukes in America if U.S. Bombs Iran!"
Terrorism Press COnference ^
| 4-28-06
| Bob J
Posted on 04/28/2006 9:03:39 AM PDT by Bob J
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 601-614 next last
To: sinkspur
How many times is this "smuggled nukes" nonsense going to be predicted? How many times is somebody going to have a book to sell or a website that needs more hits?
61
posted on
04/28/2006 9:30:55 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
To: lormand
Will they nuke San Fransisco, New York, Los Angeles and other terrorist friendly cities? Ithica? or Detroit?
62
posted on
04/28/2006 9:31:14 AM PDT
by
neodad
(USS Vincennes (CG-49) Freedom's Fortress)
To: Carry_Okie
"If a nuke makes it into the US via loose border control, the GOP is done politically."
In general, the one party system of the Republicrates in congress will be over because they will be in hiding from the mobs looking for them!
63
posted on
04/28/2006 9:31:24 AM PDT
by
Herakles
(Liberals are stone stupid and proud of it!)
To: Bob J
I'm sure there will be folks who drop into the thread to tell you how silly this whole nuke thing is--and of course, they're right: why, sneaking a nuke into this country and detonating it is every bit as outlandish a notion as flying planes into buildings.
64
posted on
04/28/2006 9:31:36 AM PDT
by
MizSterious
(Anonymous sources often means "the voices in my head told me.")
To: elchrio
If they had them, and that is a big if, to say they have the supplies to keep them up to spec is a stretch. They certainly possess some of our stingers left over from the russia/afghan conflict, yet they can't keep them up to spec, or they would have put down signifcant numbers of allied aircraft in the past few years. Nuclear weapons are infinitely more difficult to maintain, not just in terms of materials such as tritium(which is needed for the triggering mechanism, and has a relatively short half life), but more importantly in terms of the expertise needed to keep them operational.
65
posted on
04/28/2006 9:32:06 AM PDT
by
milwguy
To: Bob J
These people have to be completely erased from the face of this earth.
A security official on Fox yesterday said he advises his clients that there are over three hundred mosques across America with hardened terrorist who are waiting to take action against business executives.
He disclosed that he receives timely briefings from government officials who dispense the advice about the danger of the mosques to American businessmen.
He was referring to Muslims who have called on kidnapping and murdering heads of corporations such as Microsoft by embedded terrorist here in America.
66
posted on
04/28/2006 9:32:10 AM PDT
by
OKIEDOC
(There's nothing like hearing someone say thank you for your help.)
To: Bob J
67
posted on
04/28/2006 9:32:38 AM PDT
by
hattend
(Gotta turn up the heat on the damn melting pot. Some stuff looks like it doesn't want to melt.)
To: steve-b
How many times is somebody going to have a book to sell or a website that needs more hits? You get it. Nothing sells like nuclear fear.
68
posted on
04/28/2006 9:32:45 AM PDT
by
sinkspur
(Things are about to happen that will answer all your questions and solve all your problems.)
Comment #69 Removed by Moderator
To: Bob J
"Hamad Mir - 'Terrorists will Use Nukes in America if U.S. Bombs Iran!"' "Diplomatic brilliance defined /sarcasm
70
posted on
04/28/2006 9:34:32 AM PDT
by
cake_crumb
(Leftist Credo: One Wing to Rule them All and to the Darkside Bind them)
To: Phsstpok
Al Qaeda hates Saudi Arabia, they hate Egypt, they hate Jordan. Why wouldn't they make something happen that not only takes out the ruling regimes to usher in their own? Much of "street Islam" will cheer them.
71
posted on
04/28/2006 9:34:55 AM PDT
by
Bob J
(RIGHTALK.com...a conservative alternative to NPR!)
To: Phsstpok
You said -- "Nuke goes off in NY, or Dallas or New Orleans, etc., and I guarantee you that there will be nuclear retaliation against any identified source within 90 minutes, max."
I have no idea why you say that. It will never happen. The U.S. simply does not indiscriminately bomb places, no matter what the liberal media says. If you've joined the liberal media in that "chorus" then you must believe all that other liberal media garbage, too.
What the U.S. needs to do is elminate Islam as a viable religion in this country. They need to outlaw it, destroy all the mosques, deport all the clerics and then have an oath of allegiance to the U.S. for all the Muslims who want to remain in this country. Otherwise deport them.
And then, the U.S. needs to destroy the central symbols of the Islamic faith around the world. They need to destroy every last single one of them and jail all the clerics in the world.
Now, that's a *less drastic* step than nuking several countries. BUT -- even so -- I would be willing to bet that many people would say that we *cannot* take this less drastic step because it would be against people's right -- while at the same time -- be willing to take away people's right to life by nuking entire countries.
There is something wrong in people's minds who say this...
Regards,
Star Traveler
To: Neville72
"What is it with Muslim males and the need to bluster." The bigger the bluster, the smaller the peni.
To: repubzilla
Also thy have to follow Sahria Law. Thy must get essentially the "blessing" or the go ahead from a cleric or a number of clerics to OK the slaughter of innocent, non-combatives. Oh, yeah, that would delay them -- NOT. Nutjob "clerics" who will give their blessing to any harebrained scheme are a dime a dozen in Jihadistan.
74
posted on
04/28/2006 9:35:13 AM PDT
by
steve-b
(A desire not to butt into other people's business is eighty percent of all human wisdom)
To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
"Port security has a 3% of catching them." Why use the ports when they could bring them acroos our southern border with a 0% chance of us catching them.
75
posted on
04/28/2006 9:35:41 AM PDT
by
BubbaBobTX
(I wasn't born in Texas but I got here as fast as I could.)
To: Gordongekko909; Izzy Dunne
If they haven't used them yet, I find it difficult to believe that they actually have them right now.Or, if they threaten us with them now, I find it difficult to believe they won't use them as soon as they actually do get them.
Which means----preemption.
76
posted on
04/28/2006 9:36:51 AM PDT
by
sam_paine
(X .................................)
To: Bob J
Persians in Detriot?They considered that but decided no one would be able to tell the difference anyway.
77
posted on
04/28/2006 9:37:08 AM PDT
by
michigander
(The Constitution only guarantees the right to pursue happiness. You have to catch it yourself.)
To: Star Traveler
Agreed. If they were right we would have used nukes against the same targets they cite after 911. We didn't. We invaded Afghanistan and still couldn't get rid of them. Too many holes to hide in around the world.
78
posted on
04/28/2006 9:37:17 AM PDT
by
Bob J
(RIGHTALK.com...a conservative alternative to NPR!)
To: Pukin Dog
Heh!
tobton
This account has been banned or suspended.
79
posted on
04/28/2006 9:37:52 AM PDT
by
RandallFlagg
(Roll your own cigarettes! You'll save $$$ and smoke less!(Magnetic bumper stickers-click my name)
To: Carry_Okie
If a nuke makes it into the US via loose border control, the GOP is done politically.Or even if they don't.
80
posted on
04/28/2006 9:38:30 AM PDT
by
Protagoras
(The world is full of successful idiots and genius failures.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100 ... 601-614 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson