# Mutually Assured Destruction?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mutually-assured-destruction/87329
**Category:** Great Debates
**Created:** [October 14, 2001, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mutually-assured-destruction/87329 "2001-10-14T04:07:03Z")
**Posts on this page:** 4
**Page:** 2
### Author:  [@Kalt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalt)
#### Post date: [October 14, 2001, 11:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mutually-assured-destruction/87329/21 "2001-10-14T23:46:46Z")
I never said nuke… although perhaps that may have been implied by my comparison to the nuclear MAD between the US and Russia during the cold war. No, I only meant destroy the “holy buildings” in Mecca with conventional bombs, not kill every single person living there. Simply level all the mosques, holy walls, holy rocks, etc.
News spreads fast. You saw the way people started to flee Afghanistan after Sept. 11 - they knew we were going to strike. So, I am fully confident that people would stay far away from the holy structures in Mecca immediately after a terrorist attack on the US.
Caiata, you bring up some good points, but I do not think my plan would be equivalent to terrorist action on the part of the US. There is a significant difference between saying “we will keep attacking you until you do X” (which is what the terrorists do) versus “if you attack us again, we will attack Y” (which is what my plan does). I do not believe the latter falls under the definition of terrorism, especially since it is predicated on “them” acting violently first. Nor is it trying to acheive a political, religious, or idealogical goal; the only goal the Mecca threat has is to prevent future anti-american terrorism.
A threat of violence to induce fear is wrong; but a threat of _meaningful_ responsive violence to create parity is not wrong.
Maybe once half of our country is dying of anthrax and smallpox, you’ll see things my way.
---
### Author:  [@MEBuckner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MEBuckner)
#### Post date: [October 15, 2001, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mutually-assured-destruction/87329/22 "2001-10-15T00:22:10Z")
> [@](#):
>
> I never said nuke… although perhaps that may have been implied by my comparison to the nuclear MAD between the US and Russia during the cold war.
You did originally say “destroy Mecca”, not just “destroy the ‘holy structures’ in Mecca”.
At any rate, this still doesn’t address the point that everyone else is making: this threat would convert millions of people who are our friends now into people who hate us with a fierce passion; millions of people who disapprove of some things about us but admire others into people who would regard us as utterly evil; millions of people who merely dislike or even hate us now into people who would be willing to do actual violence to us. It would create hundreds and hundreds of millions of enemies, and millions of people who would wage war on us, and vast numbers who would be willing to use terroristic tactics or be willing to die if they could hurt the United States or kill Americans in doing so. And we would have no allies left if we made a threat like that–none. I’m not just talking about Pakistan and Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The other NATO countries would disown us. Even the British and the Canadians would say “My God, the Americans have completely lost it, haven’t they?” And we would deserve to have no allies.
> [@](#):
>
> A threat of violence to induce fear is wrong; but a threat of _meaningful_ responsive violence to create parity is not wrong.
It’s not a meaningful threat of responsive violence. It’s a meaningless, mindless threat of violence against a sixth of the human race.
> [@](#):
>
> Maybe once half of our country is dying of anthrax and smallpox, you’ll see things my way.
No, we won’t. And quit inflating the prowess of these terrorists. Whoever has been behind these anthrax and “unknown white powder” incidents–and they’ve certainly been unsettling–has killed one person. It’s horrible that that one man died a nasty death, but that’s far from “half the country dying”. Really successful biological weapons–“Andromeda strain” stuff that can decimate continents–is the province of superpowers, not of people who live in caves in the mountains. Osama bin Laden is a cunning and ruthless man, but there’s no evidence that he possesses those sorts of capabilities.
---
### Author:  [@Monty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monty)
#### Post date: [October 15, 2001, 1:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mutually-assured-destruction/87329/23 "2001-10-15T01:20:50Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Kalt \*
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > \*Originally posted by Monty \*
> > Right now, it’s only a fanatic minority. Destroying, or threatening to destroy, one of the very Five Pillars of Islam is a certain recipe for disaster.
>
> Having an uncontrollable, violent “minority” (seems like a rather large minority when they show them all dancing in the streets burning US flags…) with the sole desire of destroying the US is a “recipe for disaster” in my opinion… especially when airplans are crashing into buildings and anthrax is being spread all over the place.
Two issues here for you, Kalt:
[list][li]There never was a “showing them all dancing the streets.” There was a small minority doing that. And those that were doing that did not have the destruction fo the US as their “sole desire.” The Israel/Palestine issue is far more complex than that. And it certainly is not “all desire our destruction.” The PLO chairman, at least, has come to the treaty table with us and with Israel.[/li][li]Do you have any proof yet that the anthrax was spread by any particular group? From what I’m given to understand, the US government does have evidence about who was behind the plane hijackings & crashings, but there is yet to be announced any evidence about the anthrax spread.[/li]
> [@](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > No, you are jumping to the conclusion that Mecca is “just another town.” It is not. The Pilgrimage is one of the Five Pillars of Islam. Try to get that into your head, please.
>
> Exactly - that’s what makes the mutually assured destruction concept feasible. If it were “just another town” I would not have started this thread.
The fact that Mecca is not just another town is exactly what makes your plan infeasible. I tell you again that one of the five key elements of Islam is that all Muslims are required to make a pilgrimage to that city, **IF ABLE** , and perform a particular set of rituals, none of which they would be able to do if the city were razed.
> [@](#):
>
> You know what? I care about the “pillars of islam” about as much as Osama Bin Laden cares about the safety of New Yorkers.
But, then, you’re not one of the ONE BILLION Muslims who would be outraged by that act, now are you? Remember also, that there are SIX MILLION Muslims who are United States citizens. That’s something like ONE MILLION more Muslims in the US than there are members of my church.
> [@](#):
>
> There are plenty of muslims who never make the Haj to Mecca who still think they are going to heaven.
The Quran requires them to make the Hajj if they are able. Unlike some other religions, if it’s not the person’s fault, they’re not punished for it. You know, kind of like you’re calling for punishing every single person in Mecca for something they did not do.
> [@](#):
>
> Religions adapt to changing times.
I would say that whatever form that adaptation were to take is up to the practitioners of the religion itself. It certainly is not for the poster, Kalt, to decide that one of the Five Pillars is no longer valid and to hell with it, let’s raze the city because we’re pissed off at some other people.
> [@](#):
>
> If Islam is as strong of a religion as you probably think it is, then Islam would adapt to Four Pillars and life would go on.
I recognize the obvious fact that dar al-Islam (the House of Islam) is a very strong religion as evidenced by (a) its age, (b) the huge number of adherents to it, and © its geographic spread, from the Arabian Peninsula into part of Europe and also into parts of Asia.
> [@](#):
>
> Surely every Muslim would not go to hell if there were no Mecca to visit.
Again, that is not for you to decide.
> [@](#):
>
> And if they would all go to hell - that just bolsters the power of the mutually assured destruction warning. “If you attack america, you will go to hell.” Sounds great to me.
What’s so great about pissing off one billion people by destroying, on purpose, one of the key elements of their religion? Besides getting Muslims from around the world justifiably angry at us, you would (1) destroy the coalition the current Administration has forged for the express purpose of exacting justice int he case of the attacks on 9/11, and (2) completely divide the populace of the United States into Muslims and non-Muslims and very likely have yet another Civil War on your hands.
Sounds mighty silly to me, to say the least.
> [@](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > Bullshit. A fanatical minority hates the US, and very many of those, when pressed, no doubt can not elucidate why they hate us other than that they have been taught by other fanatics to hate us.
>
> Good, so it’s only that small fanatical minority we need to get our “if you attack america, say goodbye to Mecca” message out to.
To get that message out, though, you have to tell everyone that you plan to destroy one of the very key parts of a rather large, world-wide religion. Do you seriously expect them to sit still while we do that?
> [@](#):
>
> That makes it easier, especially if a lot of them don’t really know why they hate the US.
You may not know this, but I’m 42 years old (I’ll be 43 next month on the 20th). I also grew up in the Deep South. I did not like the exgtreme prejudice non-Whites suffered back in the 1960s and 1970s, and I still don’t like the prejudices non-Whites suffer there to this day. One of the many reasons I live in California instead.
Now, plenty of those prejudiced people there had exactly zero knowledge of why they hated Blacks, Asians, and others. That did not negate the fact that they did hate them and did commit certain crimes against them.
> [@](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > Bullshit. There are Muslims serving in the US Armed Forces, and even a couple of military Chaplains are Muslims.
>
> There were Russian-American citizens during the cold war who didn’t seem to mind our nukes pointed at Moscow.
But Moscow was not a Holy City like Mecca is, now was it?
> [@](#):
>
> Anyway, Americanized Muslims don’t take the Koran as literally as the Muslims living over in Muslim World.
Got news for you: Muslims in America are part of the Muslim world. Their religion is just as valid to them as yours probably is to you. Many people may not take the so-called historical episodes in the Quran literally but the requirements to perform the Pilgrimage are still one of the Five Pillars and there American Muslims every year making the Pilgrimage.
> [@](#):
>
> I would imagine it is a very small percentage of 2nd/3rd/4th generation American Muslims who make the Haj to Mecca.
Are you unaware of the meaning of the expression: “If one is able”? If one is able, then the Hajj is a required action. If one is not able, then one is considered by Allah to have had the desire but not the opportunity and thus there is no sin.
> [@](#):
>
> They probably have a Mecca Haj video/DVD at Blockbuster that you can rent and watch to cross of that “Pillar.”
Could you possibly be any more insulting than that to someone else’s religion?
> [@](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > Bullshit. Only a fanatical minority have issued fatwas against the United States. Most Muslim scholars consider those to be invalid anyway.
>
> You mean the Islamic Scholars who live here in america and drive their lexuses and eat mcdonalds and watch The Simpsons? Yeah, I’m sure they can find a line in the Koran that says the Muslim World’s jihads are invalid.
No, I mean both the Islamic scholars in the United States and very many Islamic scholars throughout the world.
> [@](#):
>
> Jerry Falwell could find a line in the bible that “says” peanut butter and strawberry jelly sandwiches are the tool of the devil.
That is still irrelevant to the fact that the Muslim is required, if able, to perform the Hajj.
> [@](#):
>
> If people are willing to believe it (and die for it!) then it is true as far as religious interpretations go.
So what? Does that give you license to kill approximately one million people who had nothing to do with the attacks last month? Does that give you license to intentionally destroy any opportunity for approximately one billion people to carry out one of the key elements of their faith?
> [@](#):
>
> Religion means what religious leaders say it means. Whether this jihad or that jihad is “Islamically Valid” is quite moot when people are killing under its authority.
So back when folks from Europe were carrying out the Crusades, it would’ve been justifiable for an Islamic power, if they had been able, to completely level Beijing?
> [@](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > Bullshit. Those who attacked the United States last month were not representative of the entirety of Islam, but of a very small fanatical minority.
>
> Yeah, that’s the politically correct thing to say.
No, it’s the factually correct thing to say.
> [@](#):
>
> Aside from the 2nd+ generation liberalized pseudo-muslims living here in America, I don’t see too much sympathy from Islam.
Well, you at least answered my query above. You have managed to be more insulting to that religion than you were earlier.
You don’t see too much sympathy? What would you call the support from the coalition members?
> [@](#):
>
> I see a lot of partying in the streets and burning of american flags, though.
Heck, I saw that in Monterey two weeks ago. So, are you going to advocate razing Monterey, California because some folks did just that? Oh, and those doing that were not Muslims but good ol’ white-bread Christian-type Americans (I saw the crucifix one of the flag-burners was wearing).
> [@](#):
>
> The muslim world (i.e. the islamic nations of the middle east) DOES NOT LIKE AMERICA.
No. Certain individuals in the Middle-East do not like America. Last I checked, Malaysia was predominantly Muslim & had a Muslim King and a Muslim Prime Minister. And they seem to have pretty darn good relations with the United States.
> [@](#):
>
> That is a fact, not a politically incorrect statement.
Actually, it’s a proven false assertion.
> [@](#):
>
> I realize not every muslim over there would have the inclination or the balls to come over here and commit a suicide attack, but that doesn’t mean they disapprove of it when it happens.
Nor does it mean that because some fanatics do, all the rest of the Muslims on the planet feel that way.
> [@](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > Good God, man! Are you completely incapable of learning?!?! The “they” you keep yammering about is not the entirety of Islam, but just a fanatical minority. Also, the Quran requires Muslims to make a pilgrimage at least once in their lifetime to Mecca.
>
> “Requires” is such a harsh word. With all the debate over what the Koran “really means” surely someone will figure out that “requires” doesn’t really mean “you have to or you go to hell” in that section of the Koran. People are really proficient at making their religious texts adapt to their present reality.
And you are attempting to be really good at making excuses for your rather immoral suggestion in the OP. And failing at that.
> [@](#):
>
> Why would a Muslim commit an act that they know would result in all other muslims being damned to hell? Maybe I give Muslims more credit than you do.
Why would the entirety of the Muslim population not stop us, in any manner available, from doing so if we even threaten to do that?
> [@](#):
>
> Anyway, if “all of Islam” would speak up and get rid of the terrorists, that would be great. If my mutually assured destruction plan would not only give the “fanatical minority” a reason not to attack the US, but also gives a reason for the “non-fanatical majority” to keep their terrorists at bay, then that’s yet another plus.
Sheesh. It’s not “their terrorists” any more than that guy from the “godhatesfags” church is “my terrorist” because I am also Christian.
> [@](#):
>
> > [@](#):
> >
> > The Quran is a very fascinating book. Take some time away from your irrational hatred of Islam and read it, please. You may then come to an understanding of what some of us have been trying to tell you in this thread.
>
> I’ve skimmed it.
Good start. Now go back and read the parts you missed.
> [@](#):
>
> I was shocked - it was the only book I’ve come across which I found to be more violent than the Bible.
I’m given to understand that the Bible stories were written in violent times and the Quran was also written in violent times for its area. Why would you expect it to be a “touch-feely” document?
> [@](#):
>
> I had nightmares of my feet and hands being cut off on opposing sides of my body. _shiver_
Why? Are you habitually a thief? That’s for whom that punishment, AS A MAXIMUM punishment, is reserved for.
---
### Author:  [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)
#### Post date: [October 15, 2001, 1:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mutually-assured-destruction/87329/24 "2001-10-15T01:35:28Z")
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by elucidator \*
> \*\*Emergency message for Kalt!! Emergency!
>
> ADJUST YOUR MEDICATION IMMEDIATLY!\*\*
elucidator, I don’t think they make medicine powerful enough to be helpful here, although I wish they did!
> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Kant \*
> Maybe once half of our country is dying of anthrax and smallpox, you’ll see things my way.
No…maybe when we followed your advice and this or worse was the result you would see it our way.
I guess the best thing that we can say is that we should say a prayer to every diety or whatever we might believe in thanking Him or Her that noone like Kalt is anywhere near the reigns of power (besides perhaps a certain congressman from Louisiana).
I’m outta this thread…There are some people who it is really not worth wasting time trying to argue with.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mutually-assured-destruction/87329.md?page=1)