Mike Lee wrote: > The truth is that sufficient violence ends violence.
That is true enough. But that only works when you can seal the outlines of the geographical area and flood the same with your troops. India proved that in Punjab. However, if the borders/outlines can't be sealed and if 'fresh blood' keeps pouring in, then excessive violence is the least practical route to take - it only increases the support for the fasadis. India proved that in Kashmir. > I prefer to give them a memory of a mushroom cloud over > Medina that will > make them remember that they shouldn't fuck with the adults. If you think that is the how they would react to it, then you need to take another look at the cultures of the places where Muslims live in significant numbers. > So, let's get serious here: If Islam does another 9/11, the > likelihood is > genocide. Why do you equate OBL and his fanatics with a billion muslims? And just how are you going to kill a billion muslims? Let's imagine that some US president is actually silly enough to nuke Medina. What do you think would happen? Do you *really* imagine the rest of the muslims would cower in their homes, emerging only to lick America's boots? Here's what I think would happen: A mushroom cloud over Medina would ensure that the majority of the surviving muslims would rival Laden in their hatred for the US. Today you have the lunatics in thousands or hundreds of thousands, then you would have them in millions and hundreds of millions. What would you do then? Let's say, you nuke the entire middle east when you nuke Medina [that would be the most sensible way of committing genocide after all - that US prez can't possibly be silly enough to just nuke Medina and leave the rest of the ME intact], what about the muslims of Southeast Asia and South Asia? What about Pakistan? They have nukes, y'know, and the national identity of the country is based on Islam. Would you nuke Pakistan? What about India? More muslims than Pakistan, after all....Then China, I guess... Do you think that the rest of the world would sit and silently watch you bomb one country after another, hoping that the next mass-murder would finally make you feel safe? Or do you see the possibility of a world-wide conflagration increasing? I see the latter - go around bombing enough countries and you'd push the rest of the world into declaring war on you too. Y'see, a lot of countries in the world suffer from Islamic terrorism but in each of these countries, only a small, lunatic fringe calls for genocide. I doubt that support for this particular path would suddenly increase just because the US is pushing the idea. > I'm doing everything I can to make it so that that Muslims > don't go extinct. > You're ensuring the end of the world as they know it by > indulging them. > > There are basically two ideas in play here: > > If we act nicer, Osama and the billion asshole march behind > him will give us > a big hug. Actually, what you propose, nuking Medina, is the only way a billion muslims would march behind Osama. And I'd like to say that I find your characterisation of an entire people as 'assholes' offensively ignorant. > If we go postal, Osama will go, ok, ok, you don't have to > yell at me! Truce! > > I choose option 2. If you go postal, Osama might yell what you think he would. However, that doesn't mean that the billion muslims would listen to him. They don't listen to him today and the only way they'd listen to him then is if he keeps on calling for America's destruction. > But mark my words, if the Muslims don't get a clue soon, and > they kill more > than 5000 Americans this year, tens of millions of Muslims > will die. That's > my objective prediction, not just my wish. Americans are slow > to anger and > terrible when eventually you really piss them off. Dresden, Hiroshima, > JDAMs. It's not just the Americans who are terrible when they are pissed off, Mike. That holds true for everyone. You might be able to bully cowards into shouting truce but these cowards do not form a majority in Muslims. You would merely be pushing the rest of the Muslims towards a rage so deep and visceral that tackling AQ would seem like a child's play in retrospect. > Fear, not understanding, is what is needed right now. The > Muslims and their > fellow travelers are acting like they're still in charge, and > it's going to > get all of them killed. Who are the fellow travelers of muslims? And how are they acting as if they are in charge? Ritu _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
