Tancredo: Threaten to bomb Muslim holy sites in retaliation

[almaty 19]

WASHINGTON (CNN) — Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo’s campaign stood by his assertion that bombing holy Muslim sites would serve as a good “deterrent” to prevent Islamic fundamentalists from attacking the United States, his spokeswoman said Friday.

“This shows that we mean business,” said Bay Buchanan, a senior Tancredo adviser. “There’s no more effective deterrent than that. But he is open-minded and willing to embrace other options. This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.”

On Tuesday, Tancredo warned a group of Iowans that another terrorist attack would “cause a worldwide economic collapse.” IowaPolitics.com recorded his comments.

“If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina,” Tancredo said. “That is the only thing I can think of that might deter somebody from doing what they would otherwise do. If I am wrong, fine, tell me, and I would be happy to do something else. But you had better find a deterrent, or you will find an attack.”

Be like Britian bombing Vatican City, in response to the IRA...(past history)....

also, it would not be detrimental to the terrorist...as this would bring the world community of Muslims into their fold

[Jenn! 918]

I've also heard that poking a stick into a bees' nest is a good way to show the bees you mean business.

Edited August 3, 2007 by jenn3539

[Dr_LHA 3]

Random bombing to scare people into doing what you want. Sounds a lot like terrorism to me.

[mawilson 2,133]

This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.

Deter? Hardly.

However, bombing holy Muslim sites would be a good response to something on the scale of 9/11.

Edited August 3, 2007 by mawilson

[almaty 19]

This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.

Deter? Hardly.

However, bombing holy Muslim sites would be a good response to something on the scale of 9/11.

Brother MA, you are a person opinion i value, but come on, that would increase world-wide hatered and terrorism on a scale never known.you are talking about pissing on our allies....and causing terrorism to go into a global war this time, with millions and millions of participants as well as, countries...

Edited August 3, 2007 by almaty

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Tancredo has a long list of 'way out there' ideas. It's amazing that people even voted for him.

[mawilson 2,133]

This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.

Deter? Hardly.

However, bombing holy Muslim sites would be a good response to something on the scale of 9/11.

Brother MA, you are a person opinion i value, but come on, that would increase world-wide hatered and terrorism on a scale never known.you are tlaking about pissing on our allies....and causing terrorism to go into a global war this time, with millions and millions of participants as well as, countries...

Brother almaty - you misunderstood. I'm not saying we should bomb the holy sites.

All I'm saying is that it's not a bad thing to let the terrorists know that we are prepared

to do so if they attempt another 9/11. Mutual restraint.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.

Deter? Hardly.

However, bombing holy Muslim sites would be a good response to something on the scale of 9/11.

Brother MA, you are a person opinion i value, but come on, that would increase world-wide hatered and terrorism on a scale never known.you are tlaking about pissing on our allies....and causing terrorism to go into a global war this time, with millions and millions of participants as well as, countries...

Brother almaty - you misunderstood. I'm not saying we should bomb the holy sites.

All I'm saying is that it's not a bad thing to let the terrorists know that we are prepared

to do so if they attempt another 9/11. Mutual restraint.

BS. Just the threat of doing such an outrageous act would bring sympathizers to their cause more than any 'fear' you are trying to instill in them. They are fanatics who thrive on victimization...you'd just be feeding that.

[Hilarious Clinton 452]

This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.

Deter? Hardly.

However, bombing holy Muslim sites would be a good response to something on the scale of 9/11.

Brother MA, you are a person opinion i value, but come on, that would increase world-wide hatered and terrorism on a scale never known.you are talking about pissing on our allies....and causing terrorism to go into a global war this time, with millions and millions of participants as well as, countries...

Can their hatred towards the west increase? I don't think so. Bombing their holy sites isn't the answer but neither is talking to them. They are animals.

[Dan J 277]

This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.

Deter? Hardly.

However, bombing holy Muslim sites would be a good response to something on the scale of 9/11.

Brother MA, you are a person opinion i value, but come on, that would increase world-wide hatered and terrorism on a scale never known.you are talking about pissing on our allies....and causing terrorism to go into a global war this time, with millions and millions of participants as well as, countries...

Can their hatred towards the west increase? I don't think so. Bombing their holy sites isn't the answer but neither is talking to them. They are animals.

Their recruitment can. Making them much harder to control. Look at how many people joined the military after 9/11.

[mawilson 2,133]

BS. Just the threat of doing such an outrageous act would bring sympathizers to their cause more than any 'fear' you are trying to instill in them. They are fanatics who thrive on victimization...you'd just be feeding that.

At least it'll be out in the open. Battle of civilizations, war on militant Islam, crusades and all that.

Our main religion is consumerism, and the World Trade Center was a holy site.

[almaty 19]

This is just a means to deter them from attacking us.

Deter? Hardly.

However, bombing holy Muslim sites would be a good response to something on the scale of 9/11.

Brother MA, you are a person opinion i value, but come on, that would increase world-wide hatered and terrorism on a scale never known.you are talking about pissing on our allies....and causing terrorism to go into a global war this time, with millions and millions of participants as well as, countries...

Can their hatred towards the west increase? I don't think so. Bombing their holy sites isn't the answer but neither is talking to them. They are animals.

brother rich, you would be wrong..most muslims like the West..and are friends of the West...and have no conflict..there are some hotspots where chopf##k terrorist have support..

but to do this, would be the ultimate insult and bring choas on a massive scale..embargo on all trade to america would be the 1st action..plus, the rest of the world would sanction the USA

BS. Just the threat of doing such an outrageous act would bring sympathizers to their cause more than any 'fear' you are trying to instill in them. They are fanatics who thrive on victimization...you'd just be feeding that.

At least it'll be out in the open. Battle of civilizations, war on militant Islam, crusades and all that.

Our main religion is consumerism, and the World Trade Center was a holy site.

and our main addiction is oil..and there would be none from a variety of countries

Edited August 3, 2007 by almaty

[mawilson 2,133]

and our main addiction is oil..and there would be none from a variety of countries

Sadly that's very true.

[almaty 19]

and our main addiction is oil..and there would be none from a variety of countries

Sadly that's very true.

i think it is best to make a threat to blow up their seats of government, if needed

[isleta521 5]

and our main addiction is oil..and there would be none from a variety of countries

Sadly that's very true.

i think it is best to make a threat to blow up their seats of government, if needed

Or just blow up their seats