Nukes Are Good, Mmmmmkay?

Hmm, this sentiment sounds familiar:

Would it hinder Islamist terrorists if the U.S.'s declared policy in the event of a nuclear 9/11 was the immediate destruction of Mecca, Medina and the Iranian religious center of Qom? Would our deterrent be more or less effective if we deployed a range of weapons, such as the maligned "bunker buster," the use of which a potential adversary might think us capable? How would the deployment of a comprehensive anti-ballistic missile shield alter the composition of a credible deterrent? Does it make sense to adhere to the NPT regime when that regime is clearly broken?

One of my personal heroes, General Curtis E. LeMay, the man who made Strategic Air Command, was once asked why the U.S. needed more nukes, given we already had enough to reduce the world to ashes.

"I want to see the ashes DANCE!" he growled.

That's the kind of fighting general we used to produce in America, before the sissification of the Pentagon took root.