Congressman "throws out idea" for possible nuclear retaliation..why not bomb mecca?

[Crazed Rabbit]

As some people apparently cannot get over how clever they are for taking my quote out of context, I feel it is necessary to show what I was originally responding to:

If it was from a fairly distributed terrorist group with no solid connection to a govt, then no...not after the first one at least. However, that is somewhat unlikely as a scenario. A nuke is not something a terrorist group is likely to get their hands on and be able to successfully detonate without the backing of a nuclear nation. So if it was tied directly to a specific nation, that nation would get nuked rather soon, and not in any small way. After all, you have to make them unable to strike again, and make an example of them at the same time.

A nuke attack would make it a survival issue for the U.S. At that point it becomes, "Do we stand here and let them kill us piecemeal, or do we kill ALL of those who back/support this attack?" You don't want to put a nuclear superpower into a corner like that.

Crazed Rabbit

[Louis VI the Fat]

We're just taking the piss

It's more aimed at people like that gun-toting 'let's nuke Mecca' congressmember.

[Crazed Rabbit]

Yes, but it gets old after a while.

Crazed Rabbit

[Idaho]

Yes, but it gets old after a while.

Crazed Rabbit

So does macho sounding bullsh*t spouted of the top of people's heads.

[Tribesman]

So does macho sounding bullsh*t spouted of the top of people's heads.
But Idaho , isn't your statement macho sounding bull spouted of the top of your head ?
Or did you put lots of thought into it and really mean it from the depths of your heart ?

[Papewaio]

Nuke the country of the nuker.

Therefore:

Iff Timothy McVeigh had used a nuke you would nuke the country he came from.

Or if the British Terrorists had used Nukes on London, the response from the UK government would be a nuclear strike on the UK. Now that would be taking the stiff upper lip to a whole new level.

[JimBob]

If it was from a fairly distributed terrorist group with no solid connection to a govt, then no...not after the first one at least. However, that is somewhat unlikely as a scenario. A nuke is not something a terrorist group is likely to get their hands on and be able to successfully detonate without the backing of a nuclear nation.

Actually there was a study a few years back where reaserchers built what experts believe would be an operable nuclear weapon using parts easily obtained, the only missing part was uranium. This is not a multi megaton weapon, but a weapon maybe half the size of the Hirosmima and Nagasaki bombs, but that is enough to do serious damage.
Then there are dirty bombs, chemical weapons, and bio weapons, these are considered the same for retalitory purposes and those weapons can be gotten by terrorists without nation state support.