Nuke option a go for Osama?

When the U.S. dropped the Bomb on two cities in Japan at the end of World War II, the decision was made by President Harry "The Buck Stops Here" Truman, who knew that succeed or fail the responsibility and the consequences would be his. Truman has been mostly praised and occasionally vilified over the years for this decision, but virtually all have agreed that as the political leader of the United States the decision was rightfully his to make. (We realize that some might argue that no one has the right to make that decision, but we'll defer that discussion for another day.)

What if President Truman (a Baptist) had called the president of the Southern Baptist Convention for spiritual approval to nuke Hiroshima, and announced in advance that the Rev. John Doe had studied the plans with a council of deacons, prayed over them, and given written permission?

Unthinkable, isn't it. We might pray for God's assistance in our war prosecutions but Americans generally agree with Abe Lincoln, another war-time commander-in-chief, who said the important thing was not whether God was on our side but whether we were on His. Wars and armed conflict cause a great deal of soul-searching for Christians in and out of government, and more so for those who provide Christian leadership.

So how are we supposed to react to this: Drudge is reporting that Michael Scheuer will tell 60 Minutes on Sunday that Osama bin Laden has sought and received permission from Islamic religious authorities to use a nuclear weapon to kill millions of Americans.

Even if bin Laden had a nuclear weapon, he probably wouldn't have used it for a lack of proper religious authority - authority he has now. "[Bin Laden] secured from a Saudi sheik ... a rather long treatise on the possibility of using nuclear weapons against the Americans," says Scheuer. "[The treatise] found that he was perfectly within his rights to use them. Muslims argue that the United States is responsible for millions of dead Muslims around the world, so reciprocity would mean you could kill millions of Americans," Scheuer tells (Steve) Kroft (of 60 Minutes).

Scheuer says bin Laden was criticized by some Muslims for the 9/11 attack because he killed so many people without enough warning and before offering to help convert them to Islam. But now bin Laden has addressed the American people and given fair warning.

"Their intention is to end the war as soon as they can and to ratchet up the pain for the Americans until we get out of their region....If they acquire the weapon, they will use it, whether it's chemical, biological or some sort of nuclear weapon," says Scheuer.
(***)
... And the threat posed by bin Laden is also underestimated, says Scheuer. "I think our leaders over the last decade have done the American people a disservice...continuing to characterize Osama bin Laden as a thug, as a gangster," he says. "Until we respect him, sir, we are going to die in numbers that are probably unnecessary, yes. He's a very, very talented man and a very worthy opponent," he tells Kroft.

We would dispute the part about "worthy opponent." Worf would say that "this man has no honor." We would amend that to include all those who call themselves Muslims who believe that there are no limits to responsible jihad, including nuclear, chemical or biological war. This is not a brand of religion with which we can agree to disagree. Toleration is no option. It is not some weird novelty cult that we can laugh away or ignore, for even as we do the other side is going about the business of winning the fight.

Thus we become the Apollo Creed to Osama's Rocky Balboa, with a voice shouting at us that "this chump doesn't know it's just a show. He thinks he can win."

Know thy enemy and gird thy loins accordingly.