Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Unspoken
The Belmont Club ^ | January 29, 2008 | Richard Fernandez

Posted on 01/29/2008 9:06:24 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4

-snip-

By implication the struggle between Hesher Islam and Coughlin is symptomatic of a far larger and unresolved debate, which might be summarized as being over whether or not "Islam is a religion of peace", an assumption which has undergirded the War On Terror From September 11 onwards.

-snip-

One of the implicit strategies of the War on Terror has been to fight Islamic terrorism in conjunction with the populations of Muslim countries. In Iraq, for example, the alliances between Coalition Forces and local groups have formed the basis for attacking and eventually destroying al-Qaeda.

-snip-

This strategy has many benefits, not in the least because it allows the West to form alliances with groups and populations who might otherwise set their faces against America if it openly declared itself against Islam. It would be hard to imagine how to proceed in either Iraq, Afghanistan or Pakistan if America were to openly declare that Islam was in fact an ideology as noxious as Nazism. But citing the advantages of a policy assumption doesn't answer the question of whether the assumption is true; it doesn't settle the question of whether Wilders -- or Coughlin -- are correct. I am agnostic on the point. Nor do I expect any answers soon.

There seems to be a bipartisan political consensus not to examine the subject of political Islam publicly. It is the most verboten of foreign policy subjects. But like other "open secrets", its exclusion from formal discussion doesn't banish it from public consciousness. It merely pushes it underground, like Barack Obama's middle name.

The key problem with subjecting the question of political Islam to debate is that every other conclusion except that of regarding it as a "religion of peace" implies consequences no one dares face. Concluding that Islam is a 'religion of war' would precipitate a revolution in diplomacy, energy policy and military strategy. It's a bottle of nitro nobody wants to shake; it's a can of worms nobody wants to open: not a Republican administration and most especially not a Democratic one.

Explosive questions such as this are as likely to be resolved by events as by debate. To a very great extent the West is genuinely hoping that Islam is a "religion of peace"; and I suspect many Muslims are too. Unfolding events will resolve the issue -- and perceptions -- one way or the other. Ten years from today we'll have a better understanding of the truth.


TOPICS: Military/Veterans; Religion
KEYWORDS: alqaeda; coughlin; dod; gwot; infowars
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last
I recommend you go over there and read the comments.
1 posted on 01/29/2008 9:06:24 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

The Religion of Peace has been fighting a war of conquest against the world for almost 1400 years. No reassessment or ducking of reality will alter the progression. The Islamic War will continue, with occasional hiatus when Jihad suffers a temporarily crippling setback, for so long as there are Moslems and infidels sharing the same universe.


2 posted on 01/29/2008 9:13:12 PM PST by arthurus (Better to fight them OVER THERE than to have to fight them OVER HERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: arthurus
Never in all those 1400 years has Western Christendom been so weak, and so doubtful of it's own worthiness.

Most will submit rather than have hundreds of millions killed and the planet irradiated.

3 posted on 01/29/2008 9:33:08 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: intenseracer; 2ndDivisionVet; Lurker; roaddog727; MizSterious; Tainan; AliVeritas; Liberty Wins; ...

ping


4 posted on 01/29/2008 9:36:02 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

Refusing to stand up and state the obvious for fear of what it implies is an act of cowardice.

The stench of fear permeates that article.


5 posted on 01/29/2008 9:43:27 PM PST by Grimmy (equivocation is but the first step along the road to capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

And ultimately it will get hundredsof millions killed and probably the planet irradiated, anyway.


6 posted on 01/29/2008 9:45:33 PM PST by arthurus (Better to fight them OVER THERE than to have to fight them OVER HERE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4; StarCMC; brityank; PGalt; freema; PurpleMan; george76
Stephen Coughlin ((((Ping))))! Good to see you around tonight, Cannoneer.
7 posted on 01/29/2008 9:55:07 PM PST by Chgogal (When you vote Democrat, you vote Al Qaeda! Ari Emanuel, Rahm's brother was agent to Moore's F9/11.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4; Chgogal; brityank

The Hidden Army Of Radical Islam

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7L05geznoI


8 posted on 01/29/2008 10:05:59 PM PST by george76 (Ward Churchill : Fake Indian, Fake Scholarship, and Fake Art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Whats your opinion of the following.
9 posted on 01/30/2008 12:51:36 AM PST by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Ten years from today we'll have a better understanding of the truth.

I suspect he's right about that, in ways I don't even want to think about. And I found this post by Rodney to be spot on:

A belief system which fails to renounce conversion by the sword is incompatible with Western Society. The resulting binary solution set is reform of the belief system, or the destruction/suppression of same.

10 posted on 01/30/2008 7:07:39 AM PST by StarCMC (http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com; http://starcmc.wordpress.com/ - The Enemedia is inside the gates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Ten years from today we'll have a better understanding of the truth.

We already know the truth. islam is wholly incompatible with Western civilization. It is a murderous political philosophy every bit as odious as Nazism.

It masquerades as a 'religion'. We should no more tolerate its continued existence than we did Nazi Germany.

L

11 posted on 01/30/2008 7:27:32 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
OK, let's grant your statement for the sake of argument.

The question is: what are you going to do about it?

As the author notes, "To a very great extent the West is genuinely hoping that Islam is a "religion of peace"; and I suspect many Muslims are too."

I suspect he's right about those "many Muslims." Can you suggest an approach that does not turn those Muslims into enemies just because of the circumstances of their birth?

12 posted on 01/30/2008 7:47:34 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Can you suggest an approach that does not turn those Muslims into enemies just because of the circumstances of their birth?

The premise of your question is invalid.

Assume it's 1943 and change just one word in your question: "Can you suggest an approach that does not turn those Germans into enemies just because of the circumstances of their birth?"

Now do you see how silly your question is?

L

13 posted on 01/30/2008 7:52:03 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Assume it's 1943...

It's a bit disingenuous to accuse me of "invalid premises," when your own assumptions are demonstrably false.

It's not 1943. If you want to use the Hitler analogy, today's circumstances are a lot more like 1935, except the Allies have already challenged and confronted Hitler, and the General Staff has not thrown in with Hitler. (This is, btw, supposedly what would have occurred had the Allies responded militarily to Hitler's early moves.)

The question is: do you want to declare the rest of Germany's population to be "the enemy," and thereby drag them into the war?

It is pointless to torture that particular analogy any further. Rather, it is more useful to assess the nature of the Muslim world, and the place of the Islamofascists within it.

One important facet of the Islamofascist strategy is to encourage a general sense of "Islam vs. the world." They want us to consider all Muslims as belonging to a homogeneous mass, all of whom are enemies. And they want Muslims to believe this, too. That way (so the reasoning goes), any small war involving the West vs. a faction of Muslims can be leveraged into a global holy war. This is apparently one of the key beliefs of Ahneedajihad's "12th Imam" sect.

The whole "Islam is naziism" approach actually plays directly into the hands of folks like bin Laden or the Iranian mullahs.

But the fact is, most Muslims are not Islamofascists, nor are they likely to become such. There is no need to fight a holy war against them, nor is there any rational reason to push them into corners where they believe that a holy war is the only possible response.

Gen. Petraeus has demonstrated that the key to defeating Islamofascism is to teach normal Muslims the value of living in a modern, civil society. And the Islamofascists have helped him along by their own actions.

14 posted on 01/30/2008 8:17:38 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
any small war involving the West vs. a faction of Muslims can be leveraged into a global holy war.

It already is. If you believe differently, you aren't paying attention.

But the fact is, most Muslims are not Islamofascists,

Incorrect. islam is fascist. Ergo followers of islam are by definition fascists. Your statement is akin to saying "not all Nazis are fascists." It's demonstrably false. They believe to the core of their beings in a fascist ideology.

There is no need to fight a holy war against them,

Why not? They're fighting one against us.

Gen. Petraeus has demonstrated that the key to defeating Islamofascism is to teach normal Muslims the value of living in a modern, civil society.

General Patraeus has demonstrated no such thing. islamofacism hasn't been 'defeated' in any sense of the word. It's been seriously degraded in two countries. That's it. While it wanes in Afghanistan and Iraq, it waxes in Iran, Pakistan, Chechnya, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, and those fetid ratholes mistakenly referred to as 'palestine'.

Go read their book. I have. Until you do that, you're talking without any real knowledge of their beliefs.

L

15 posted on 01/30/2008 8:25:33 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
It already is. If you believe differently, you aren't paying attention.

Bullshit.

16 posted on 01/30/2008 8:28:59 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

He said a bad word.


17 posted on 01/30/2008 8:33:09 AM PST by Deb (Beat him, strip him and bring him to my tent!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Bullshit.

Is that the best you can do?

L

18 posted on 01/30/2008 8:44:26 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

No need to waste words arguing against bullshit.


19 posted on 01/30/2008 8:47:26 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Deb; r9etb
He said a bad word.

When someone resorts to a profane one word response, you know you've won the argument.

L

20 posted on 01/30/2008 8:50:40 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Well, no.

Your position is still bull poopoo, and your thin skin about a perfect word choice simply shows that you know it.

21 posted on 01/30/2008 8:56:27 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
General Patraeus has demonstrated no such thing. islamofacism hasn't been 'defeated' in any sense of the word. It's been seriously degraded in two countries. That's it. While it wanes in Afghanistan and Iraq, it waxes in Iran, Pakistan, Chechnya, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt, and those fetid ratholes mistakenly referred to as 'palestine'.

Bull poo poo?

islam is fascist. Ergo followers of islam are by definition fascists. Your statement is akin to saying "not all Nazis are fascists." It's demonstrably false. They believe to the core of their beings in a fascist ideology.

Bull poo poo?

Enquiring minds want to know.

L

22 posted on 01/30/2008 9:00:57 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Bull poo poo?

Well, yes. Your problem is that you've made the mistake of equating "islamofascism" with "Muslim people." And as a result, you end up coming to silly conclusions. I have no time for such idiocy.

I'd point out, too, that in clumping together all Muslims as "enemies" -- which you have done, you're espousing a belief system that was rather successfully promulgated by a very famous fascist.

Perhaps you need to start thinking rationally about the noxious implications of your stated opinions.

23 posted on 01/30/2008 9:09:01 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
We already know the truth.

The Truth Will Not Always Set you Free

We want Muslim proxies to replace our trigger pullers. We want Muslim informants to rat out their murderous brothers. We don’t want to be too kinetic, because that loses us valuable tools allies, but if we aren’t kinetic enough nobody over there respects us and nobody in the rear can pump up support for a half-vast, politically correct, over-lawyered war. The Regular .gov strategic communicators don’t want to say that, and I don’t blame them. The “truth” has to be massaged, made palatable, less painful.

The painful truth is that neither the Ummah nor a significant segment of the population of America is worth the life of a single Mississippi paratrooper.

The painful truth is that there is no legal way to cull the American oxygen thieves, so our defenders defend the unworthy along with the rest of us, and there is no WMD that can rid us of 1.2 billion enemies, enemy sympathizers, enemy apologists, and enemy enablers without fouling our own nest, so we can’t kill near as many as need killing. The best we can do is kill the worst and reconcile the rest.

The painful truth is that Muslim activists in America want to provoke attacks on Muslims in America. They want video of burning mosques on al Jazeera. They want enraged American vigilantes to violate their First Amendment rights. They want the benefits of victimhood. They want to show the world that Americans aren’t the people we’re supposed to be.

The painful truth is that our leaders continue to shovel the Religion of Peace bullshit because neither they nor the American people have the balls to round them up and deport them or intern them like was done to the Nisei.

Here is another painful truth: Jacksonian solutions really do have more downsides when applied to 1.2 billion people than upsides. And I'm a Jacksonian who would dearly love to have bin Laden's head on a pike at Ground Zero and the entire world quaking in fear over what we might do next.

24 posted on 01/30/2008 9:12:35 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Your problem is that you've made the mistake of equating "islamofascism" with "Muslim people."

Some simple math for you:

islam = fascism.

islamists = fascists.

Perhaps you need to start thinking rationally about the noxious implications of your stated opinions.

I have. You're the one who's chosen to delude himself with this pap about islam being 'peaceful'. It isn't. The implications of my opinions are no more noxious than Gen. Curtis LeMay's or President Truman's were in WWII.

Neither of them worried about killing 'peaceful' Germans or Japanese at Dresden or Hiroshima. Neither should we.

Have you read the koran?

If you haven't, then you're speaking from a position of profound ignorance on the subject.

As Ibn Waqqid put it: "There may be moderate muslims, but there is no moderate islam."

L

25 posted on 01/30/2008 9:16:20 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
One of the persons following the Belmont Club discussion over whether it is necessary to confront political Islam as an anti-Western ideology is a Marine in Anbar province. His email to me has been reproduced in toto below. It is clear and eloquent. I am grateful for it, not in the least because it lends some substance to my hope that "because of the size of the stakes this whole question will be resolved, not by some politician but by the 'decision of crowds'." Here's his email in toto.

I was just perusing your site and caught the bit about the Hesher-Coughlin controversy.

I have been in a small city in Anbar province for four months now and it seems to me that the whole "is it a religion of peace or not" debate is largely misplaced. This is coming from a guy who once wrote, on his own blog, a post entitled "The Real Strategic Question" which I put as "Is Islam compatible with democracy?"


The Iraqis in Anbar have completely rejected Al Qaeda. A while back I told the police chief in my town that I thought the reason the terrorists are weak is because their ideas have been rejected. He said,

"In 2002 and 2003, we thought Al Qaeda was just another Muslim group. Now, you can go far out into the desert and talk to even a shepherd, and he will tell you that he hates Al Qaeda. One hundred years from now, you will be able to go into the desert and talk to a shepherd and he will still tell you that he hates Al Qaeda."

So, having rejected extremism, what is left? They are still Muslim in my town, but I wouldn't call them devout -- they go to the mosque and pray, and mention God in everyday conversations -- as do I to them -- and granted, I certainly don't know or interact with all of them, but I don't think that "moderate Islam" fully captures who they are. In fact, religion is almost irrelevant in the conversations I have with local leaders.

The real text to turn to in understanding what comes next is not the Koran but the Leviathan. The Iraqis have lived in a state of nature for the past 5 years, and in a state of nature there is no law, no order, no justice or injustice, only survival, period. And so, their ability to care about each other is stunted a bit. Not only that, but the history of Saddam's regime is that of playing people off against each other and destroying the trust between them. These are the crucial issues today in my town in Iraq -- social trust, how to incubate it, and especially how it relates to good governance. Nepotism and corruption are part and parcel of life here, as I imagine they are in many parts of the developing world, Muslim or not. Advancing democracy in Iraq is not a question of Islam, it's a question of helping the Iraqis move past the concept of "me against my brother, me and my brother against my cousin, all three of us against everyone else." Perhaps it seems a gargantuan task, but so did defeating Al Qaeda in Anbar about a year ago.

That's how I see it from my neck of the woods. I recommend David Kilcullen's article "Countering Global Insurgency" and his advocated strategy of disaggregation -- which is really the opposite of trying to lump everything together as a "war on terror" or a "clash of civilizations". Perhaps other places are different. This is the other problem with trying to develop a unifying theme that sums everything up: each locality is dramatically different. I don't know if working with the tribes in Pakistan is going to work as well as in Anbar. In Anbar, many of the successful sheiks are semi-westernized, having studied in Europe at one point or another (like the one in my town) and Al Qaeda was essentially a foreign invention that wrapped itself into local grievances. In Pakistan, Al Qaeda has been there, really developing, for a long time. There is no one cookie-cutter solution.

I invite you to Google Kilcullen's "Countering Global Insurgency" and Raymond Millen's "The Hobbesian Notion of Self-Preservation Concerning Human Behavior During An Insurgency," and Art Chrenkoff's "Post-Totalitarian Stress Disorder". These are by far the best and most relevant works I have read for what I do on a day to day basis.

Well, feel free to use this, if you'd like, Richard. You can use my name too for this one. By the way, here's the city website, which still needs a lot of work: www.barwanah.com

Semper Fi,
-Josh Manchester


26 posted on 01/30/2008 9:23:03 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
"Simple" about sums up your analysis. You're not thinking like an adult.

Let us grant your point for the sake of argument. Which raises the fundamental question: Are all Muslims therefore "the enemy?"

If not all Muslims are "the enemy," then you really have no position at all.

And if all Muslims are "the enemy", what do you propose be done about all of those "enemies?"

27 posted on 01/30/2008 9:24:43 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
1. Marines never cease to impress me. Well-reasoned and well-written.

2. Mr. Manchester points out that the key to this mess lies in dealing with people as people, not as cardboard cutouts labeled "Islamic fascist."

28 posted on 01/30/2008 9:29:10 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
And if all Muslims are "the enemy", what do you propose be done about all of those "enemies?"

We don't need to kill all of them any more than we needed to kill every Nazi. We de-Nazified Germany and we can de-islamize the 'muslim' world.

So I propose a modified version of The Coulter Option. First we destroy Mecca utterly. Make it so no stone stands upon another. Then we trod the ruins under our infidel boots. That will remove the psychological underpinnings of their ideology. After all the koran says that Mecca can't be destroyed. Put the lie to that and their house of cards falls.

Then we destroy every single islamofascist government on the planet through a sustained campaign. Start with Pakistan, Syria, then Iran, then Saudi Arabia. Flatten the 'pali' territories on general principle and drive those wretched scum back into the countries they belong in.

Then we destroy their militaries and wipe out their leaders to a man.

Every single 'imam' who's ever preached violence in their mosques anywhere in the world gets a war crimes trial followed by a speedy hanging.

Wahabbi mosques are razed to the ground wherever they're located and the ground sown with salt.

That'll do for a start. In 20 years or so we'll have a pretty good knock on the problem.

L

29 posted on 01/30/2008 9:37:49 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Uh huh. My previous assessment stands: you’re talking like a fascist.


30 posted on 01/30/2008 9:55:22 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
My previous assessment stands: you’re talking like a fascist.

Were the Nuremburg trials fascist?

How about the Japanese War Crimes trials?

I'm willing to bet you couldn't define 'fascism' right now on your own if your life depended on it.

L

31 posted on 01/30/2008 9:57:21 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

You're talking like a fascist.

I'm done with you.

32 posted on 01/30/2008 9:59:56 AM PST by r9etb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: r9etb
Fascism: a political philosophy, movement, or regime (as that of the Fascisti) that exalts nation and often race above the individual and that stands for a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictatorial leader, severe economic and social regimentation, and forcible suppression of opposition.

When did I mention race? When did I elevate it over the individual? When did I advocate a centralized autocratic government headed by a dictator? When did I advocate social regimentation?

As I suspected, you're tossing the term 'fascist' around like the left uses the term 'racist'. It's a pathetic attempt to silence opposition you can't beat with logic or facts. Why not just call me a homophobe and complete your little trilogy?

I'm done with you.

I hope the women in your life don't mind burkhas because it's for damned sure you're more than willing to accept their dhimmitude.

L

33 posted on 01/30/2008 10:06:34 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Lurker
You're not living in the real world, Lurker. Your fellow Americans don't have the stomach for that. Even after a nuclear 9/11 on American soil, neither Hillary nor Obama will have the stomach for it, unless the death toll rises above a million, and even then they won't unless driven to it by people who believe as you do.

If you actually want the course of action you describe followed, you are going to have to analyze your target audience and persuade them to your way of thinking.

As it stands now what you describe is a revenge fantasy. Satisfying emotionally, but it doesn't resonate with the people you need on your side if you really mean it .

34 posted on 01/30/2008 10:38:35 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest; StarCMC
I'm not sure what to think about that. I'm not much of a theologian. What do you think, Star?
35 posted on 01/30/2008 10:58:58 AM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
My point is that all this was foretold. Muzzlems are a weapon God is using to punish us for not following His Commandments (keeping the Sabbath).
But the Muzzlems will be punished also.
36 posted on 01/30/2008 11:06:59 AM PST by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
You're not living in the real world, Lurker.

Sure I am. He asked me how I proposed to handle the problem. My solution is straightforward, relatively simple, and would be damned effective. It's not my fault that the majority of my fellow citizens have become slack jawed p******.

, unless the death toll rises above a million,

It will. You know it and I know it.

If you actually want the course of action you describe followed, you are going to have to analyze your target audience and persuade them to your way of thinking.

Just doing what I can with what I got.

As it stands now what you describe is a revenge fantasy.

The revenge part is merely a satisfying little side bonus to my plan. It would be damned effective if implemented. Once the 'muslim' world saw that whackjobs like Assad, Osama and Ahmadinijad bring them nothing but death and ruin the rest of them will fall into line PDQ.

it doesn't resonate with the people you need on your side if you really mean it .

Wasn't trying to 'resonate' with anyone. The man asked me a question and I answered it. Persuasion is for forums other than this one.

And once the first nuke, chemical, or bio-weapon goes off on American soil it'll be nearly impossible to prevent ANY Administration from reducing mecca to rubble.

L

37 posted on 01/30/2008 11:20:16 AM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest; Cannoneer No. 4
I do not disparage your words, Yosemitest. A lot of scripture has immediate meanings (in the time frame that it was written) as well as a prophetic meaning. I looked up the passage you referenced here and found this, specifically, about verse 15:

15. First "all the people of the land" engaged in the burying for seven months; then special men were employed, at the end of the seven months, to search for any still left unburied. The passers-by helped them by setting up a mark near any such bones, in order to keep others from being defiled by casually touching them, and that the buriers might come and remove them. Denoting the minute care to put away every relic of heathen pollution from the Holy Land.

Interesting.

38 posted on 01/30/2008 12:22:50 PM PST by StarCMC (http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com; http://starcmc.wordpress.com/ - The Enemedia is inside the gates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: StarCMC

And what of post #36?


39 posted on 01/30/2008 12:38:57 PM PST by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

Makes sense - especially if you look at the way God worked with the children of Israel throughout the OT. He is the same today.


40 posted on 01/30/2008 1:09:42 PM PST by StarCMC (http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com; http://starcmc.wordpress.com/ - The Enemedia is inside the gates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: StarCMC

Thank you.


41 posted on 01/30/2008 1:11:02 PM PST by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Yosemitest

The one question I have for you though - it seems that if your model is to hold completely, you would be equating US with “God’s chosen people.” The way I understand scripture, God’s chosen people is, was, and ever shall be the nation of Israel.


42 posted on 01/30/2008 1:14:30 PM PST by StarCMC (http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com; http://starcmc.wordpress.com/ - The Enemedia is inside the gates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: StarCMC
"you would be equating US with “God’s chosen people.”"

Absolutely.

It's a long process and requires a lot of reading, but it's well worth your time.

I recommend the following:


43 posted on 01/30/2008 1:38:22 PM PST by Yosemitest (It's simple, fight or die.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Why is persuasion for forums other than this one?


44 posted on 01/30/2008 2:17:40 PM PST by Cannoneer No. 4 (Civilian Irregular Information Defense Group http://cannoneerno4.wordpress.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
Why is persuasion for forums other than this one?

Because this place has ceased to be about persuasion. It's now about supporting the War as it's currently being run. No deviation from that line seems to be permitted any longer.

Criticism of the Administration in other areas is alright, but anything smacking of criticism of the way this war is being fought is met with bannings and suspensions.

Besides, the poster I was speaking to isn't going to be convinced of anything. He obviously believes that islam is 'peaceful' in spite of the mountains of evidence to the contrary.

He's parroting the lines of Condi Rice and her boss, nothing more. Trying to convince him of anything would be like trying to 'convince' a ventriloquists dummy.

L

45 posted on 01/30/2008 2:24:12 PM PST by Lurker (Pimping my blog: http://lurkerslair-lurker.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal; Cannoneer No. 4

Thanks for the link. Thanks for posting The Belmont Club, C #4. Interesting comments.

We are witnessing the greatest anti-truth, anti-freedom, anti-individual, anti-life collective in the history of civilization.

Possible solutions here...

http://www.islam-watch.org/NoSharia/PreventEuropeIslamization6.htm

Many thanks to NoSharia.

Many thanks to Maj. Steve Coughlin


46 posted on 01/30/2008 8:49:32 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal

OOPS! Thanks very, very much for the ping Chgogal.


47 posted on 01/30/2008 8:50:34 PM PST by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Lurker, you’re right about the greater general threat of islam writ large. There is a necessary confrontation coming between islam and the west.

But you’re wrong about a supposed strategy to openly throw down the gauntlet to ~all~ of them, right now. There’s a ~billion~ of them. You’re talking suicide.

We may need to fight them all, but we don’t have to do it all at once.


48 posted on 01/30/2008 9:22:07 PM PST by Ramius (Personally, I give us... one chance in three. More tea?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4
The painful truth is that neither the Ummah nor a significant segment of the population of America is worth the life of a single Mississippi paratrooper.

It is a painful truth.

I think it is important for the West, in particular academia, the Media and Governments to challenge Islam on all fronts, political, social and religious. In particular I would like to see Western governments demand that for every Saudi Mosque that pops up in the West, a church be built in Saudi Arabia. If Muslims demand foot baths here we demand prayer rooms in Saudi Arabia. Every time the Arabian Media prints/shows “hate” verbiage/cartoons/films, Western Media calls them on it. Every time a Muslim government demands that non-Muslim women wear the hijab in a Muslim country, the West forbids the wearing of the hijab in the West.
That is why I think what Wilders is doing with his 10 minute film is important. And yes, I do understand why our Military is upset with him for upsetting the apple cart. But we have to demand our right to exist in this world as Western citizens. We cannot submit.

Unfortunately, our leaders in academia, the Media and most Western Governments fear Islam and will not stand up for Western Civilization. And we the Citizens do not demand it. Shame on us!

49 posted on 01/30/2008 10:30:07 PM PST by Chgogal (When you vote Democrat, you vote Al Qaeda! Ari Emanuel, Rahm's brother was agent to Moore's F9/11.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Cannoneer No. 4

On the other hand, it provides proof positive to the angelic domain that no authority or power which acts, wills, or thinks independently of faith through Him, actually succeeds in providing righteous and just results in their governance. He controls all history and He is faithful.


50 posted on 01/30/2008 10:35:02 PM PST by Cvengr (Fear sees the problem emotion never solves. Faith sees & accepts the solution, problem solved.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson