||If you did not get it
from my last article, I can understand: following me jumping from thought
to thought you need intuition and imagination.
The tittle of my last article was: "After
war: Where was Mecca?" I am not optimistic
about how the conflict with the Islamists
develop. With an approach as employed
this time still American soldiers have
and die. At home the American people
still under the threat of terrorist attacks.
strategy will take a long time and many
will die. What I suggested was to threaten
what is the most valuable to Islam. What
would Islam be without Mecca? Without
Kaaba? I am not suggesting to nuke that city with all its inhabitants.
They can have 24 hours to move out, 48 hours? I don't care, a week. One
more attack and that would be it! The prospect of the destruction of that
city and may be Medina and Riyadh as well, might give the "good"
Muslims enough reason to take care of the "bad" Islamists. Without those
three cities, their culture would be without anchor and to me not to big
a loss. The threat alone could be enough to avoid any more dead Americans.
Whether it is the President or Rumsfeld
Ashcroft or Reis, they all have promised
us more of the same as 9-11 and worse. The "bring them to justice" is taking
the long road. Talking softly and showing the big stick to the so called
friends in Riyadh might be the short cut necessary to solve the problem
without the continued bloodshed. A problem could be that they, the
Muslims don't buy, without sample.
That is not so much a problem as keeping
fighting and dying and in the end still
have to use the "big stick".
Why not knock-out in the second round,
than get beaten black and blue and wait
round fifteen. For the audience? Or the
betting? You see, I am not optimistic: I think it's inevitable: In the
end the big stick has to be used anyway.