Saturday, February 23, 2008

Size of the war

It continues to amaze me how small the war is. By ‘the’ war, I am referring to the civil war that is taking place within Islam. This includes far more than the warfare that is taking place within Iraq and Afghanistan. I have repeatedly written about some of the ‘authentic’ laws of Islam and how they are contributing to the Civil war and the constant violence wherever Islam is making intimate contact with other cultures. The war is irregular and widespread. However, considering the size of the populations involved, remarkably small.

Not all Muslims are strict followers of the Islamic legal system. Like other religions and cultures, Islam has its share of ‘moderates’. However, Islam discourages moderation. Moderation is very difficult because of the precise nature of the ‘laws’. It is hard to moderate ‘the penalty for leaving Islam is death’. You either enforce the law, or you do not. As a result, the percentage of so-called ‘moderates‘ within the population can be expected to be smaller than in other cultures than encourage moderation. The ‘extremists’ that we hear so much about are people who want to enforce most, if not all of the ‘authentic’ laws. The term ‘extremist’ implies that only a small percentage desires this. Due to the general inflexibility of these ‘authentic’ Islamic laws, this percentage can be expected to be higher in this culture than what we would see in other, more moderate environments. Top this off with the fact that Islam numbers 1.1 BILLION people. Even a very small percentage, say 1% would number 11 million ‘extremists’. By itself, this is a large pool for an army. Evidence indicates a much higher percentage of Muslims favor efforts to implement more ‘authentic’ Islam. This is evident throughout the world, even in places where Islam is a very small minority. In places where Islam is making contact with other cultures, riots and violence are commonplace. Generally, some ‘insult’ of Mohammed or some ruling where Islamic law is ignored triggers the riots. These tend to be in areas where Islam is not an overwhelming percentage of the population. The problems are not so much the ‘religion’ as the legal systems each are based upon.

The authentic Islamic laws that I have pointed out (And many more that I have not) are in direct conflict with our own legal system. Many are hostile to all infidels, which is to say the rest of the world. In a way that is similar to slavery, these conflicting laws have no political solution. History has shown time and again that in order to resolve these types of issues, warfare is inevitable. An additional problem today is that we don’t have a great deal of time.
Sooner or later, a terrorist organization will obtain and deploy an effective weapon of mass destruction.

This potential makes the war today look puny by comparison. Is it not worth waging conventional war to prevent? What if multiple WMD were deployed? The war could conceivably become World War III. If half a dozen of our cities were destroyed, would we not retaliate? The public outcry for retaliation would be unstoppable. Even if we did not know who or what to hit, we would have to find something. Weapons of mass destruction are the ultimate punitive weapon. They kill everyone and everything without discrimination. Massive conventional warfare is desirable over this type of warfare. Granted, the possibility of this event is slender. Most likely, the initial WMD will be a singular event. Escalation in the use of WMD is possible, although most likely, a conventional war would be the following event. Where that would lead is anyone’s guess. Unless significant progress is made within the next few years, this is an almost certain event.

No comments:

Post a Comment