As I mentioned the other day I had dinner with a friend last week.  He commented on the insanity of Bush's State of the Union speech if you read between the lines.  I got a comment on that post defending Bush which I didn't bother to respond to in public.  I am in close agreement with Bush on the issue and it coming from this particular friend of mine it shouldn't really be considered as disagreement with the “Bush Doctrine“.  My friend is well aware that he cannot claim any high ground on the issue of sanity.  His solution for winning the war on terror is a case in point:

1. We tell the residents of Medina we are going to nuke the city in two weeks.  Anyone that believes Allah will save them or prevent it should stay.
2. Medina is converted to glass on schedule.
3. We tell the world that if so much as a US pizza restaurant is bombed we will nuke a city in response.  As soon as we find a piece of a turban or a scrap of their beard another city will be converted to glass ASAP and without warning.

We had enough nukes to deal with Russia so we sure as hell have enough to deal with the Arabs.

I suggested perhaps the Muslim extremist psychology might not respond in the same way that he expected.  His response was:

Their psychology has been adequate for them to survive for the last thousand years.  This is about their survival.  They will figure it out or they will cease to exist, either way we win.

His solution for dealing with the existence of Osama bin Laden is similar in that it is simple, ruthless, and nuclear.