Posted on 12/08/2015 8:54:29 PM PST by 2ndDivisionVet
Exclusive: Republican presidential campaign rhetoric is red-hot regarding Islamic terrorism, with Sen. Cruz suggesting the use of nuclear weapons to see “if sand can glow in the dark,†a threat even more troubling than Donald Trump’s call to temporarily bar Muslims from entering the U.S., writes Robert Parry.
As Republican presidential candidates lined up to one-up each other about how they would fight Islamic terrorism, many mainstream pundits questioned the hysteria and took particular aim at billionaire Donald Trump for seeking a moratorium on admitting Muslims to the United States, but Trump’s proposal was far from the most outrageous.
Getting much less attention was a statement by Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, who is considered by many a more likely GOP nominee than Trump. Cruz suggested that the United States should nuke the territory in Iraq and Syria controlled by Islamic State militants.
“I don’t know if sand can glow in the dark, but we’re going to find out,†Cruz told a Tea Party rally in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. In reference to Cruz’s comment, a New York Times editorial added, “whatever that means.†But the phrase “glow in the dark†popularly refers to the aftermath of a nuclear bomb detonation.
In other words, Cruz was making it clear to his audience that he would be prepared to drop a nuclear bomb on Islamic State targets. While the bombastic senator from Texas was probably engaging in hyperbole – as he also vowed to “carpet bomb them into oblivion†– the notion of a major candidate for President cavalierly suggesting a nuclear strike would normally be viewed as disqualifying, except perhaps in this election cycle.
While Cruz drew little attention for his “glow in the dark†remark, Trump came under intense criticism for his proposal to block the admission of Muslims into the United States until the nation’s leaders can “figure out what is going on†in the aftermath of the Dec. 2 terror attack by a Muslim husband-and-wife team in San Bernardino, California.
Across mainstream politics and media, Trump’s idea was decried as both…
Ask Japan about that.
Sounds like the “Some say” people.
Some say the only way to be sure is to nuke ‘em til they glow.
Sounds like the ‘unnamed sources’ :)
It’s been 70 years since Japan. What will it take beyond what’s happened since then for the US to drop a large-scale bomb?
There’s that word again, “disqualifyingâ€.
The LSM is just dreaming out loud again.
They hope to wake up tomorrow and the big bad boogeyman was all a bad dream.
Of course they live on the edge of reality and insanity.
100 megaton Cruz Missile!!!
Cool.
It’s time to take the kid gloves off.
Exactly my thoughts.
I’ve given this some thought, and I do not want to be the nation to introduce nuclear weapons as a weapon of retaliation for conventional terrorism, unless it’s in response to a cataclysmic event.
Even then, there needs to be a cause and effect.
X group did it. X group gets attacked and pays the price.
If we introduce nukes, we are in effect giving the green light for any entity to use them. Then when they are used against us, the world says, yes but you used them. What did you expect?
We have plenty of munitions we can make the bearded wonders pay with. No nukes... unless it is the only proportionate response.
Just think of all the tourists of the future paying good money to go see the glass dunes of the Middle East.
Miles and miles of beautiful glass dunes.
Courtesy of the US of A.
Okay then.
How about tons and tons of white phosphorus or some such.
Drop so much that an incredible firestorm is created.
Think Dresden or Tokyo of the desert.
Harry Potter’s JK Rowling piles on:
When it is decided that our casualties in a ground war would be too great to bear or as the only course of action that will end the current jihad against western civilization before we are conquered by a seventh century murdering death cult. It took two relatively small fission bombs to get Japan to finally surrender. Iran obtaining a nuclear weapon also changes the calculus about using thermonuclear weapons as a first strike.
You took “don’t go full retard” (the best I could do) and flawlessly, accurately expanded its meaning within the context. Brilliant.
One of the best lines by a candidate since Barry Goldwater said we “ought to lob one in the mens room at the Kremlin”
Good one! How many here will recognize it?
I do.
...and it’s very likely to be the proportionate response after they wipe out NYC, Chicago, Wash DC, and Boston. We have totally failed to stop Iran as well as A.Q. Khan in Pakistan. We are going to pay a dear price someday.
Eventually, someone in the ME will use nukes, and we will see if sand glows.
I doubt it will be us, since we have treaties for no first use, and we generally honor things like that. Putin, on the other hand, often has a short fuse. Or it could be any of the other wild cards in the ME that have nukes.
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.