What if someone nukes Mecca?

[ichneumon]

Just kind of a response, feel free to delete it, BUT

1)How likely is this - what is the projected life expectancy of this city?
2)How would muslims respond?
3)Would Isreal do this is attack by nuclear weapons and in what situation?


1)about 20yrs
2)no idea
3)if most of isreal were destroyed, regardless of which nation did it, yes, they would.

[TheDifferenceEngine]

1) Depends.
2) Like they always do... well, like the young male muslims always do-
DEATH TO THE FREAK'IN WEST
3) Give them half a chance.

The thing is, the giant black block made of a "fallen star" that stands in the middle of mecca and I forgot the name of, if that survives then all of radical islam will see it as a sign of god's support for their war against the "infidel"

Which would be VERY bad.

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 08:01 PM
Just kind of a response, feel free to delete it, BUT

1)How likely is this - what is the projected life expectancy of this city?
2)How would muslims respond?
3)Would Isreal do this is attack by nuclear weapons and in what situation?


1)about 20yrs
2)no idea
3)if most of isreal were destroyed, regardless of which nation did it, yes, they would.
1> What does the question "what is the projected life expectancy of this city" have to do with the probability of its being nuked? Are you asking how long it would go on if it were nuked?

I'm guessing that given its importance in the Muslim world, it would go on just as Hiroshima and Nagasaki have.

It is highly improbable that Mecca will be nuked for any reason, since it has no real strategic value.

2> Probably with complete rage as they probably should. If it were Israel, the Muslim states would band together and invade. If it were a European nation or if it were us, they'd retaliate simply by eliminating oil exoprts and attacking anything American they could find within their own borders.

3> That question makes no sense at all. You seem to be asking if Israel would nuke Mecca if it were attacked itself. I doubt they would due to its lack of strategic importance. Tehran, Riyadh or Cairo would be more likely.

[Pirate Utopian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 09:28 PM
It is highly improbable that Mecca will be nuked for any reason, since it has no real strategic value.

You seem to be asking if Israel would nuke Mecca if it were attacked itself. I doubt they would due to its lack of strategic importance.
:huh: contradiction!

[t_wolves_fan]

Originally posted by Big Manifesto+Oct 6 2006, 08:30 PM--> (Big Manifesto @ Oct 6 2006, 08:30 PM)
[email protected] 6 2006, 09:28 PM
It is highly improbable that Mecca will be nuked for any reason, since it has no real strategic value.

You seem to be asking if Israel would nuke Mecca if it were attacked itself. I doubt they would due to its lack of strategic importance.
:huh: contradiction! [/b]
How? Both sentences say Mecca lacks strategic importance.

[colonelguppy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 03:01 PM
Just kind of a response, feel free to delete it, BUT

1)How likely is this - what is the projected life expectancy of this city?
2)How would muslims respond?
3)Would Isreal do this is attack by nuclear weapons and in what situation?


1)about 20yrs
2)no idea
3)if most of isreal were destroyed, regardless of which nation did it, yes, they would.
1) not at all, it'll last along time
2) depends on how militant they already are
3) theres no reason for them to nuke mecca it holds no strategic value.

[Blue Collar Bohemian]

Someone Nukes Mecca and we've got WWIII. Of that I have near no doubt.

[TheDifferenceEngine]

it has no strategic value, true- but it has MASSIVE morale value.

[ichneumon]

i really don't think isreal *cares* about strategic value - i'm suggesting what they might do if they lost jerusalem, haifa and tel aviv to either nuclear bombs or radioactive poisoning.

so, 4)How likely is it that Israel will be involved in a nuclear exchange in the next 20 yrs.?

[Free Left]

Originally posted by Blue Collar [email protected] 6 2006, 10:27 PM
Someone Nukes Mecca and we've got WWIII. Of that I have near no doubt.
Bullshit.


so, 4)How likely is it that Israel will be involved in a nuclear exchange in the next 20 yrs.?

Unlikely.


i'm suggesting what they might do if they lost jerusalem, haifa and tel aviv to either nuclear bombs or radioactive poisoning.

Why would they nuke Mecca? They'd just cause more problems for themselves. They'd more likely nuke Cairo or Riyadh.

[colonelguppy]

Originally posted by [email protected] 7 2006, 12:46 PM
i really don't think isreal *cares* about strategic value
why not

[Free Left]

it has no strategic value, true- but it has MASSIVE morale value.

Yeah, but do you think Israelian morale can stand in the way of an almighty Jiad because of the destruction of the birthplace of Islam and the symbolic centre of the Islamic world.

Think of someone nuking the Vatican and Rome, then multiply that by a thousand and your not even fucking close to the outrage that it would cause.

[Alexander Hamilton]

Think of someone nuking the Vatican and Rome, then multiply that by a thousand and your not even fucking close to the outrage that it would cause.

I have noticed in these posts an overall attitude that destroying the symbolic center of Islam would cause FAR greater outrage than the same happening to the Christian or Jewish center, or nationalist centers such as Washington, D.C. or London or Paris.

The prejudice this contains is amazing.

Writers such as Free Left (not the only one, but the most recent) believe that if Musllims were attacked this way, they'd invade Europe and the US like we did in Normandy, or launch whatever they had at the west (what would they launch?), or simply run around the Middle East killing westerners.

This is total bullshit. Sure, westerners would pull out of the Middle East for safety, as would Muslims in western countries.

People seem to believe Americans and Europeans are incapable of "barbaric" acts, and that they would simply stand by and watch 5,000 decapitations on the internet and do nothing. Eventually, ANY American president would launch attacks, even nuclear ones at Middle East countries to stop the killings I mentioned. Who cares if we're condemed? Too late for that at that point.

Where do all of you (Free Left for example) get the idea we in the US would stand by and not retaliate, even if not precisely against the actual killers. If those 5,000 deaths occur, and we can't find the killers, and their's joy in Iran, we nuke Iran.

If we had no idea who bombed Pearl Harbor, but the Japanese were celibrating, we bomb Japan.

War, as you may have noticed, brings out the worst in humanity.

So come on those of you who wrote that attacking a major Middle East Arab city is WWIII, but attacking Chicago brings no response: What gives?


A. Hamilton

[TheDifferenceEngine]

Originally posted by Free [email protected] 7 2006, 09:27 PM

it has no strategic value, true- but it has MASSIVE morale value.

Yeah, but do you think Israelian morale can stand in the way of an almighty Jiad because of the destruction of the birthplace of Islam and the symbolic centre of the Islamic world.

Think of someone nuking the Vatican and Rome, then multiply that by a thousand and your not even fucking close to the outrage that it would cause.
Ahem, I was taling about muslim morale.

[Sir_No_Sir]

I'd say it's not prejudiced, but mainly because most Catholics are grown and complacent. Lazy assholes. Or the ones from the suburbs at least. So they would be pissed, but their may not be a response. But, Mecca really does hit close to home for most Muslims because of where it is geographically, and because to be honest with you Muslims are much more adherent to their religion then catholics are..

[Free Left]

Writers such as Free Left (not the only one, but the most recent) believe that if Musllims were attacked this way, they'd invade Europe and the US like we did in Normandy, or launch whatever they had at the west (what would they launch?), or simply run around the Middle East killing westerners.

WTF!?! Did I say that if "Musllims were attacked this way, they'd invade Europe and the US"? I am just saying that their whole culture is intertwined with their religion and the destructin of their most sacred place which unites the entire Islamic world.

If the Vatican was destroyed there would be outrage and a very anti-Isamic feeling would rise up (just look at 9/11), but the Vatican dosen't have the same cultural signifcance as Mecca.
If Washington was nuked there would be greater outrage around the western world equal to the destruction of Mecca.

So don't try to group me into a stereotype A. Hamilton you fuckwit.

[Alexander Hamilton]

If the Vatican was destroyed there would be outrage and a very anti-Isamic feeling would rise up (just look at 9/11), but the Vatican dosen't have the same cultural signifcance as Mecca.


Free Left,
You have once again demonstrated your ignorance, prejudice and base stupidity. That's fine if you keep on making the same mistake, but your use of profanity toward me and general disrespect, when I merely argued your thinking was flawed, will not be tolorated.

I have no interest in a further discussion with you along these lines, or any other.


A. Hamilton

[Lenin's Law]

Originally posted by [email protected] 6 2006, 08:01 PM
1)How likely is this - what is the projected life expectancy of this city?
2)How would muslims respond?
3)Would Isreal do this is attack by nuclear weapons and in what situation?


1. Not very likely.
2. How do you think? Rage, anger, furious hatred etc. Osama would love it, it would increase Al-Queda's recruiment even more than the current Bush administration is doing.
3. "would Israel do this is attack by nuclear weapons.." Huh?

In essence, an insane decision to "nuke" Mecca would have the same result for world politics as in pouring gasoline on a forest fire.

[Free Left]

Originally posted by Alexander [email protected] 8 2006, 05:07 PM

If the Vatican was destroyed there would be outrage and a very anti-Isamic feeling would rise up (just look at 9/11), but the Vatican dosen't have the same cultural signifcance as Mecca.


Free Left,
You have once again demonstrated your ignorance, prejudice and base stupidity. That's fine if you keep on making the same mistake, but your use of profanity toward me and general disrespect, when I merely argued your thinking was flawed, will not be tolorated.

I have no interest in a further discussion with you along these lines, or any other.


A. Hamilton
My Base Stupidity? You have just siad that I am a biased, Islam-hating, dumbass yet you give no evidence of this so stop making statements that you can't back up.


but your use of profanity toward me and general disrespect, when I merely argued your thinking was flawed, will not be tolorated.

Disrespect?! Why should I show you any respect when you are trying to catorgorize me into some neo-conservative branch.
Which, I am not and you would have noticed if you had READ MY POSTS properly!!!!!!


I have no interest in a further discussion with you along these lines, or any other.

Likewise, I don't associate with people who can't have a debate without attacking the person's character rather thean THEIR FUCKING ARGUMENT and who sign their name and the end of their posts FOR NO REASON!!!!


will not be tolorated.

By who? You!? Christ stop talking like a 4th Grade teacher and get a decent argument!!!!

[theraven]

Originally posted by Free [email protected] 8 2006, 04:57 PM

Writers such as Free Left (not the only one, but the most recent) believe that if Musllims were attacked this way, they'd invade Europe and the US like we did in Normandy, or launch whatever they had at the west (what would they launch?), or simply run around the Middle East killing westerners.

WTF!?! Did I say that if "Musllims were attacked this way, they'd invade Europe and the US"? I am just saying that their whole culture is intertwined with their religion and the destructin of their most sacred place which unites the entire Islamic world.

If the Vatican was destroyed there would be outrage and a very anti-Isamic feeling would rise up (just look at 9/11), but the Vatican dosen't have the same cultural signifcance as Mecca.
If Washington was nuked there would be greater outrage around the western world equal to the destruction of Mecca.

So don't try to group me into a stereotype A. Hamilton you fuckwit.
free left i think you underestiamte catholics. just because they don't riot over pisschrists or virgin mary's covered in dung doesnt mean that if the vatican is nuked their just gona shrug it off. if it happens ret assured there would be very very very harsh reperucisosins

[Free Left]

free left i think you underestiamte catholics. just because they don't riot over pisschrists or virgin mary's covered in dung doesnt mean that if the vatican is nuked their just gona shrug it off. if it happens ret assured there would be very very very harsh reperucisosins

I come from a strong Catholic background and I know that if the Vatican was destroyed there would be hell to pay but Catholic zeal and faith is declining all over the world, wheras Islam remains strong.

The epicentre of Western culture has moved away from Rome and the Vatican to London, Paris or New York/Washington wherasMecca is still the cultural and spiritual centreof the Islamic world.