gabosaurus
08-15-2007, 12:08 AM
Now I realize why Tancredo is the only American politician on an Arab hit list. He will be lucky to last out the year.
A blog by a constituent of Congressman Tom Tancredo: Colorado's Sixth Congressional District Congressman-for-Life - and Futile Presidential Candidate
Monday, August 13, 2007
They all look alike to Tom
It seems sad and pathetic for Americans to have to be debating whether a presidential candidate's plan to bomb holy sites in reprisal for a terrorist attack is a good idea. Have we really become so immoral and cowardly?
But let's leave aside the moral issue. Let's assume that we are willing to sink to the terrorists' level in pursuit of a "Secure America." Would the goal behind the plan - ostensibly to deter another terrorist attack - even work?
No: any serious threat to destroy Mecca and Medina in order to deter a terrorist attack would be a miserable failure, according to this thoughtful piece in CounterPunch. In particular:
... Tancredo and those who share his view erroneously believe that al-Qaeda holds these cities in the same high esteem as the rest of Muslims do. They might be surprised to learn, for example, that the ultra-puritanical Wahabi sect to which al-Qaeda belongs actually finds the Prophet Muhammad's grave in Medina, attracting millions of Muslim pilgrims worldwide, an affront. This because they regard visiting the graves of holy personages akin to idolatry and polytheism. Incredibly, Wahabis attempted to destroy the Prophet's grave themselves as recently as the early part of the 20th century.
But don't bother Tancredo with such niceties such as "Who are we really fighting anyway." For Tancredo and his supporters, all Muslims look alike.
As usual, local Denver columnist Mike Littwin has Tancredo's "bomb Mecca" policy pegged for exatly what it is: irresponsible showboating from a man who is not a serious, responsible politician:
There used to be some kind of line that even Tancredo wouldn't cross. When he made his original comment about bombing Mecca, he said it was just a hypothetical - and implied we shouldn't take it too seriously. But this time, Tancredo was ready to make it the linchpin of his foreign policy. He threw in Medina for good measure - while explaining how the threat to bomb holy sites would deter the kinds of people who flew the planes on 9/11. He didn't mention what it might mean to the other 1 billion-plus nonterrorist Muslims.
As I've noted before, Tancredo is not a serious man. But I don't expect him to be. It's the 14 percent that worries me.
It's the 14 percent who said, "Oh, he wants to bomb Mecca. Let's vote to put this guy's finger on the nuclear button."
A blog by a constituent of Congressman Tom Tancredo: Colorado's Sixth Congressional District Congressman-for-Life - and Futile Presidential Candidate
Monday, August 13, 2007
They all look alike to Tom
It seems sad and pathetic for Americans to have to be debating whether a presidential candidate's plan to bomb holy sites in reprisal for a terrorist attack is a good idea. Have we really become so immoral and cowardly?
But let's leave aside the moral issue. Let's assume that we are willing to sink to the terrorists' level in pursuit of a "Secure America." Would the goal behind the plan - ostensibly to deter another terrorist attack - even work?
No: any serious threat to destroy Mecca and Medina in order to deter a terrorist attack would be a miserable failure, according to this thoughtful piece in CounterPunch. In particular:
... Tancredo and those who share his view erroneously believe that al-Qaeda holds these cities in the same high esteem as the rest of Muslims do. They might be surprised to learn, for example, that the ultra-puritanical Wahabi sect to which al-Qaeda belongs actually finds the Prophet Muhammad's grave in Medina, attracting millions of Muslim pilgrims worldwide, an affront. This because they regard visiting the graves of holy personages akin to idolatry and polytheism. Incredibly, Wahabis attempted to destroy the Prophet's grave themselves as recently as the early part of the 20th century.
But don't bother Tancredo with such niceties such as "Who are we really fighting anyway." For Tancredo and his supporters, all Muslims look alike.
As usual, local Denver columnist Mike Littwin has Tancredo's "bomb Mecca" policy pegged for exatly what it is: irresponsible showboating from a man who is not a serious, responsible politician:
There used to be some kind of line that even Tancredo wouldn't cross. When he made his original comment about bombing Mecca, he said it was just a hypothetical - and implied we shouldn't take it too seriously. But this time, Tancredo was ready to make it the linchpin of his foreign policy. He threw in Medina for good measure - while explaining how the threat to bomb holy sites would deter the kinds of people who flew the planes on 9/11. He didn't mention what it might mean to the other 1 billion-plus nonterrorist Muslims.
As I've noted before, Tancredo is not a serious man. But I don't expect him to be. It's the 14 percent that worries me.
It's the 14 percent who said, "Oh, he wants to bomb Mecca. Let's vote to put this guy's finger on the nuclear button."