On Friday, September 26, the end of a week in which thousands of copies of Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West -- the fear-mongering, anti-Muslim documentary being distributed by the millions in swing states via DVDs inserted in major newspapers and through the U.S. mail -- were distributed by mail in Ohio, a "chemical irritant" was sprayed through a window of the Islamic Society of Greater Dayton, where 300 people were gathered for a Ramadan prayer service. The room that the chemical was sprayed into was the room where babies and children were being kept while their mothers were engaged in prayers. This, apparently, is what the scare tactic political campaigning of John McCain's supporters has led to -- Americans perpetrating a terrorist attack against innocent children on American soil.
Please note how John McCain's ideology is the problem. The other political party and it's ideology is becoming more of a threat than our external enemies are. This war is going to become BIG before it is over. And it is heading this way.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Monday, September 29, 2008
Islam 101
Thanks for the comments! I will post all comments, even if I disagree, as long as they are not making personal attacks and are in good taste. Just because different viewpoints are held does not make them wrong, nor does it make the person who holds them a liar nor do they make him/her evil.
Bernard Lewis is an internationally respected historian on the Middle East. "For the majority of the fourteen hundred years of Islamic history, jihad has been most commonly interpreted as being armed struggle for the advancement or defense of Muslim power". "The presumption is that the duty of jihad will continue (interrupted only by truces) until the entire world adopts Islam or is subjected to Muslim rule".
This is not the view of a few ‘extremists’. This was commonly accepted for a VERY long time. I would expect ANY viewpoint that has been so strong for so long to be retained by a significant percentage of ANY population for at least a number of generations after it fell into general disfavor. And I am not certain that this is the case regarding Islam and jihad.
I must disagree with Omyma’s comments regarding three concepts:
1) "The version you're exposed to is extreme Islam." I have read numerous positive articles and books about Islam. They all deal with the life of Mohammed and what a wonderful prophet he was. Many good lessons. The negative viewpoints tend to deal with the Koran and Islamic law. In other words, how Islam is practiced and enforced. This does not appear to be a few ‘extreme’ individuals, but general practice.
2) "They are 100% Fake Islam." This comment is in reference to al-Qaeda. The problem I have here is that ‘Fake Islam’ is popular in the Middle East. I am not referring to al-Qaeda in particular. I am referring to many of the principals they stand for. In many places throughout the Middle East, groups like Hamas and Hezbollah command significant support. In a number of cases, they are the MAJORITY. Not some insignificant minority like in the western world. In other cases where the ‘Fake Islam’ is a significant minority, the population tends toward violence when ‘insulted’. This may be ‘Fake Islam’ from your and my viewpoint, but in a population of hundreds of millions of people, it is ‘Real Islam’. (I am including those ‘good Germans, good Japanese and good southerners who like those who will fight for ‘Fake’ Islam, fought for evil.)
3) "Islam is not totally at odds with our culture." Islamic scholars have issued rulings based upon the Koran for 1400 years, in a way similar to our U.S. Constitution and the Supreme Court. Many of the laws that are considered ‘authentic’ ARE directly in conflict with U.S. law and the U.S. Constitution. Much of the foreign policy that is specified in the Koran is hostile to our nation and our beliefs.
A classic example is ‘occupation’. By definition, all of the territory encompassed by the state of Israel is ‘occupied’ land. Once land is Muslim, it is ALWAYS seen in the eyes of Islam as being Muslim. (The penalty for leaving Islam is death) In 200 years, Israel (If it still exists) will still be sitting on ‘occupied’ land. Killing the ‘occupiers’ would be like Native Americans taking up arms against anyone who is not Native American because we are ‘occupiers’. In fact, we did take much of this land by force and we are ‘occupiers’. The problem is that sooner or later, it is in everyone’s best interest to accept fact and forget about the past. Islam has some mechanisms like jihad that prevents this and ensure that it grows and defends itself. Much like a nation-state.
Bernard Lewis is an internationally respected historian on the Middle East. "For the majority of the fourteen hundred years of Islamic history, jihad has been most commonly interpreted as being armed struggle for the advancement or defense of Muslim power". "The presumption is that the duty of jihad will continue (interrupted only by truces) until the entire world adopts Islam or is subjected to Muslim rule".
This is not the view of a few ‘extremists’. This was commonly accepted for a VERY long time. I would expect ANY viewpoint that has been so strong for so long to be retained by a significant percentage of ANY population for at least a number of generations after it fell into general disfavor. And I am not certain that this is the case regarding Islam and jihad.
I must disagree with Omyma’s comments regarding three concepts:
1) "The version you're exposed to is extreme Islam." I have read numerous positive articles and books about Islam. They all deal with the life of Mohammed and what a wonderful prophet he was. Many good lessons. The negative viewpoints tend to deal with the Koran and Islamic law. In other words, how Islam is practiced and enforced. This does not appear to be a few ‘extreme’ individuals, but general practice.
2) "They are 100% Fake Islam." This comment is in reference to al-Qaeda. The problem I have here is that ‘Fake Islam’ is popular in the Middle East. I am not referring to al-Qaeda in particular. I am referring to many of the principals they stand for. In many places throughout the Middle East, groups like Hamas and Hezbollah command significant support. In a number of cases, they are the MAJORITY. Not some insignificant minority like in the western world. In other cases where the ‘Fake Islam’ is a significant minority, the population tends toward violence when ‘insulted’. This may be ‘Fake Islam’ from your and my viewpoint, but in a population of hundreds of millions of people, it is ‘Real Islam’. (I am including those ‘good Germans, good Japanese and good southerners who like those who will fight for ‘Fake’ Islam, fought for evil.)
3) "Islam is not totally at odds with our culture." Islamic scholars have issued rulings based upon the Koran for 1400 years, in a way similar to our U.S. Constitution and the Supreme Court. Many of the laws that are considered ‘authentic’ ARE directly in conflict with U.S. law and the U.S. Constitution. Much of the foreign policy that is specified in the Koran is hostile to our nation and our beliefs.
A classic example is ‘occupation’. By definition, all of the territory encompassed by the state of Israel is ‘occupied’ land. Once land is Muslim, it is ALWAYS seen in the eyes of Islam as being Muslim. (The penalty for leaving Islam is death) In 200 years, Israel (If it still exists) will still be sitting on ‘occupied’ land. Killing the ‘occupiers’ would be like Native Americans taking up arms against anyone who is not Native American because we are ‘occupiers’. In fact, we did take much of this land by force and we are ‘occupiers’. The problem is that sooner or later, it is in everyone’s best interest to accept fact and forget about the past. Islam has some mechanisms like jihad that prevents this and ensure that it grows and defends itself. Much like a nation-state.
Friday, September 26, 2008
New law would prohibit immigration from Islamic lands
A new law being proposed would prohibit Muslims who favor Sharia law from immigrating to the U.S. The sponsors claim that this would slow down the growth of "Radical" Muslims within our own country. Critics say that it discriminates against Muslims. This is true.
As a general rule, I do not favor this type of discrimination by our government. However, as I have posted many times in the past, Islam represents a real danger to the U.S. Constitution, legal system and culture. The term "Radical or extremist" Muslim is misleading. To our eyes, a "radical" or "extremist" is a very small percentage of our population. It is implied that this is true within Muslim countries. The problem is that what we consider to be "Radical or extremist" views are prevalent throughout the Muslim world. Islam is not just a religion, nor can Islam be considered a ‘moderate’ legal system. The majority of Muslims from Islamic countries believe in the legal system and culture they come from. (As do most people) One basic problem that I have is that these common beliefs are not moderate by our standards.
Because Islam is so hostile to our culture, our legal system and the U.S. Constitution, I am making an exception to my general rule. I am in favor of this bill and I hope it is passed into law. Islam has a number of basic issues that are causes for warfare and violence. These issues need to be resolved before they become part of us. The violence prevalent throughout the areas of the world where Muslim immigrants have grouped together should be and can be prevented from happening within the U.S.
As a general rule, I do not favor this type of discrimination by our government. However, as I have posted many times in the past, Islam represents a real danger to the U.S. Constitution, legal system and culture. The term "Radical or extremist" Muslim is misleading. To our eyes, a "radical" or "extremist" is a very small percentage of our population. It is implied that this is true within Muslim countries. The problem is that what we consider to be "Radical or extremist" views are prevalent throughout the Muslim world. Islam is not just a religion, nor can Islam be considered a ‘moderate’ legal system. The majority of Muslims from Islamic countries believe in the legal system and culture they come from. (As do most people) One basic problem that I have is that these common beliefs are not moderate by our standards.
Because Islam is so hostile to our culture, our legal system and the U.S. Constitution, I am making an exception to my general rule. I am in favor of this bill and I hope it is passed into law. Islam has a number of basic issues that are causes for warfare and violence. These issues need to be resolved before they become part of us. The violence prevalent throughout the areas of the world where Muslim immigrants have grouped together should be and can be prevented from happening within the U.S.
Wednesday, September 24, 2008
Strategy
The U.S. should attempt to focus upon areas that have environments better suited for our military than Afghanistan. We will not win the war there. However, Pakistan is such a threat that it demands our attention. Pakistan has nuclear weapons and the missile systems to deliver them. In order to keep this war from going nuclear we must contain Pakistan. Similar changes will need to occur in Pakistan as is necessary in the Middle East.
The war must be won in the Middle East. This is where Islam is the most aggressive and entrenched. This is the source of Islam and how it is interpreted. This is the epicenter of Islam and the change that MUST occur.
The large potential for warfare in Africa is one place to become more directly involved. This is a shooting war that is widespread. If we do not engage on a significant level of combat consistently, we will make it easier for the enemy to obtain WMD. By engaging in offensive combat, we will drain the enemy of valuable resources, in both material and manpower. The obvious targets of Syria and Iran should be the first to go. Ultimately, these governments will need to be changed. However, the West does not have the political will to begin a new conflict over these governments. In the meantime, we need other targets. While we probably lack the manpower for massive troops to be deployed, we should become more directly involved in the violence that is happening in Africa. Particular attention should be given to North Africa.
The war must be won in the Middle East. This is where Islam is the most aggressive and entrenched. This is the source of Islam and how it is interpreted. This is the epicenter of Islam and the change that MUST occur.
The large potential for warfare in Africa is one place to become more directly involved. This is a shooting war that is widespread. If we do not engage on a significant level of combat consistently, we will make it easier for the enemy to obtain WMD. By engaging in offensive combat, we will drain the enemy of valuable resources, in both material and manpower. The obvious targets of Syria and Iran should be the first to go. Ultimately, these governments will need to be changed. However, the West does not have the political will to begin a new conflict over these governments. In the meantime, we need other targets. While we probably lack the manpower for massive troops to be deployed, we should become more directly involved in the violence that is happening in Africa. Particular attention should be given to North Africa.
Monday, September 22, 2008
Reasons for war
Some of the issues that are reasons for the 'war on terror'.
1) The penalty for leaving Islam is death.
2) Jihad
3) Honor killings
4) Loyalty to Islam above government
5) Moral obligation to kill ‘occupiers’
Throughout the Muslim world, the current, most widespread interpretation of these issues is hostile to our constitution, our values and our way of life. In fact, the interpretation is hostile to EVERYONE that is not Muslim. Islam needs to be changed in a way that is acceptable to us and the rest of the world. These changes are of such a nature that organized warfare will result. Like slavery in the U.S., these issues will create new enemies in order to rid the world of them. Like getting rid of slavery, resistance to these changes will trigger organized warfare. Like getting rid of slavery, we MUST do this. And we cannot do this by fighting defensive warfare. We must attack.
1) The penalty for leaving Islam is death.
2) Jihad
3) Honor killings
4) Loyalty to Islam above government
5) Moral obligation to kill ‘occupiers’
Throughout the Muslim world, the current, most widespread interpretation of these issues is hostile to our constitution, our values and our way of life. In fact, the interpretation is hostile to EVERYONE that is not Muslim. Islam needs to be changed in a way that is acceptable to us and the rest of the world. These changes are of such a nature that organized warfare will result. Like slavery in the U.S., these issues will create new enemies in order to rid the world of them. Like getting rid of slavery, resistance to these changes will trigger organized warfare. Like getting rid of slavery, we MUST do this. And we cannot do this by fighting defensive warfare. We must attack.
Friday, September 19, 2008
Redeployment of the enemy
Now that combat has died down in Iraq, irregular warfare is on the rise in Afghanistan. I would expect irregular warfare to expand into new areas. For our enemy, Iraq was a real losing situation with high loss rates. Now that the losses they have been taking have dropped off, they can deploy new effort into areas that are more tactically sound.
The only way to stop the spread of these attacks is to engage them in the open. We need a new front. It must not be a defensive one. We must place more troops into Afghanistan, but a major effort there will not win the war. Governments within the Middle East must be changed, by force. Syria and Iran would be the next obvious move. This is very unlikely at this point. The problem here is political will is not able to allow us to do this. Africa offers additional chances for conflict but like Afghanistan, the war will not be won there. Africa offers opportunity to drain our enemy of valuable resources and support. It is a place where an expanding enemy ideology can be stopped or reversed. Political will for conflict in Africa may be available. Once again, the problem is that time is not on our side.
The populations that support the ideology of our enemy is so large that this war will not end within the foreseeable future. The cultural changes that are required to end this war are to large. This process will take generations and will not end without serious escalation. A nuclear attack will most likely be the next large escalation. This can only be a matter of time.
The only way to stop the spread of these attacks is to engage them in the open. We need a new front. It must not be a defensive one. We must place more troops into Afghanistan, but a major effort there will not win the war. Governments within the Middle East must be changed, by force. Syria and Iran would be the next obvious move. This is very unlikely at this point. The problem here is political will is not able to allow us to do this. Africa offers additional chances for conflict but like Afghanistan, the war will not be won there. Africa offers opportunity to drain our enemy of valuable resources and support. It is a place where an expanding enemy ideology can be stopped or reversed. Political will for conflict in Africa may be available. Once again, the problem is that time is not on our side.
The populations that support the ideology of our enemy is so large that this war will not end within the foreseeable future. The cultural changes that are required to end this war are to large. This process will take generations and will not end without serious escalation. A nuclear attack will most likely be the next large escalation. This can only be a matter of time.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Loyal to Islam
Democrats are correct in that the U.S. should not trust the Iraqi government. Change is occurring there in a relatively safe, positive way, but many of the issues that are worth waging war over are only being indirectly addressed through cultural change.
Chicago Tribune, 9/15/08 Section 1, Page 11. Title: "Israel visit could spur changes". 3rd paragraph: "Alusi is the only Iraqi politician in recent years to publicly visit Israel, a country declared an enemy of the state by Iraqi law".
The Iraqi government is considering charges against this representative. We have problems like this during wartime as well, with a solid argument for prosecution for treason. The only problem here is that Israel and the U.S. are allies. Time and time again, within the Muslim world, Islam has proven to be the greater loyalty over any other sovereignty. Turkey is the most secular Islamic government. Turkey aided Iraq when the U.S. invaded, and not just a little bit. True loyality shows up when the shooting starts.
Change like what is occurring in Iraq is slow. The populations impacted are so large that it dwarfs World War II. We are winning, but time is NOT on our side.
Chicago Tribune, 9/15/08 Section 1, Page 11. Title: "Israel visit could spur changes". 3rd paragraph: "Alusi is the only Iraqi politician in recent years to publicly visit Israel, a country declared an enemy of the state by Iraqi law".
The Iraqi government is considering charges against this representative. We have problems like this during wartime as well, with a solid argument for prosecution for treason. The only problem here is that Israel and the U.S. are allies. Time and time again, within the Muslim world, Islam has proven to be the greater loyalty over any other sovereignty. Turkey is the most secular Islamic government. Turkey aided Iraq when the U.S. invaded, and not just a little bit. True loyality shows up when the shooting starts.
Change like what is occurring in Iraq is slow. The populations impacted are so large that it dwarfs World War II. We are winning, but time is NOT on our side.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
