Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Wahhabi Islam: A History Lesson
E-mail | Raymond Kraft

Posted on 03/23/2005 6:14:00 PM PST by ExSoldier

Should be required reading by all Americans, please pass it on to all the Patriots you know.

(About the Writer: Raymond Kraft is a lawyer and writer living and working in Northern California.  Raymond receives e-mail at rskraft@vfr.net.)

Sixty-three years ago, Nazi Germany had overrun almost all of Europe and hammered England to the verge of bankruptcy and defeat, and had sunk more than four hundred British ships in their convoys between England and America for food and war materials. 

Bushido Japan had overrun most of Asia, beginning in 1928, killing millions of civilians throughout China, and impressing millions more as slave labor. 

The United States was in an isolationist and pacifist mood, and most Americans and Congress wanted nothing to do with the European war, or the Asian war. 

Then along came Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, and in outrage Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day on Germany, which had not attacked us. 

It was a dicey thing.  We had few allies. 

France was not an ally, for the Vichy government of France aligned with its German occupiers.  Germany was not an ally, for it was an enemy, and Hitler intended to set up a Thousand-Year Reich in Europe.  Japan was not an ally, for it was intent on owning and controlling all of Asia.  Japan and Germany had long-term ideas of invading Canada and Mexico, and then the United States over the north and south borders, after they had settled control of Asia and Europe. 

America's allies then were England, Ireland, Scotland, Canada, Australia, and Russia, and that was about it.  There were no other countries of any size or military significance with the will and ability to contribute much of anything to the effort to defeat Hitler's Germany and Japan, and prevent the global dominance of Nazism.  And we had to send millions of tons of arms, munitions, and war supplies to Russia, England, and the Canadians, Aussies, Irish, and Scots, because none of them could produce all they needed for themselves. 

All of Europe, from Norway to Italy, except Russia in the east, was already under the Nazi heel. 

America was not prepared for war.  America had stood down most of its military after World War I and throughout the depression.  At the outbreak of World War II there were army soldiers training with broomsticks over their shoulders because they didn't have guns, and using cars with ''tank'' painted on the doors because they didn't have tanks.  And a big chunk of our navy had just been sunk and damaged at Pearl Harbor. 

Britain had already gone bankrupt, saved only by the donation of $600m given by Belgium to England to carry on the war when Belgium was overrun by Hitler.  Actually, Belgium surrendered one day, because it was unable to oppose the German invasion, and the Germans bombed Brussels into rubble the next day anyway, just to prove they could.  Britain had been holding out for two years already in the face of staggering shipping loses and the near-decimation of its air force in the Battle of Britain, and was saved from being overrun by Germany only because Hitler made the mistake of thinking the Brits were a relatively minor threat that could be dealt with later and turning his attention to Russia, at a time when England was on the verge of collapse in the late summer of 1940. 

Russia saved America's rear by putting up a desperate fight for two years until the United States got geared up to begin hammering away at Germany.  Russia lost something like 24 million people in the sieges of Stalingrad and Moscow (actually, it is estimated at about 22 million overall for the entire war), 90% of them from cold and starvation, mostly civilians, but also more than a million soldiers.  More than a million!  Had Russia surrendered, then, Hitler would have been able to focus his entire campaign against the Brits, then America, and the Nazis would have won that war. 

Had Hitler not made that mistake and invaded England in 1940 or 1941, instead, there would have been no England for the United States and the Brits to use as a staging ground to prepare an assault on Nazi Europe.  England would not have been able to run its North African campaign to help take a little pressure off Russia while America geared up for battle, and today Europe would very probably be run by the Nazis, the Third Reich, and, isolated and without any allies (not even the Brits).  The United States would very likely have had to cede Asia to the Japanese, who were basically Nazis by another name then, and the world we live in today would be very different and much worse. 

 

I say this to illustrate that turning points in history are often dicey things.  And we are now at another one. 

There is a very dangerous minority in Islam that either has or wants to have, and may soon have the ability to deliver small nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, almost anywhere in the world, unless it is prevented from doing so. 

France, Germany, and Russia, have been selling these Islamic nations weapons technology at least as recently as 2002, as have North Korea, Syria, and Pakistan, paid for with billions of dollars that Saddam Hussein skimmed from the "Oil For Food" program administered by the United Nations with the complicity of Kofi Annan and his son. 

The Jihadis, or the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in Kaffiyahs.  They believe that Islam, a radically conservative (definitely not liberal) form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle East first, then Europe and then the world.  All who do not bow to Allah should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated.  They want to finish the Holocaust, destroy Israel, and purge the world of Jews.  This is what they say. 

There is also a civil war raging in the Middle East for the most part not a hot war, but a war of ideas.  Islam is having its Inquisition and its Reformation today, but it is not yet known which will win the Inquisition, or the Reformation. 

If the Inquisition wins, then the Wahhabis, or the Jihadis, will control the Middle East, and the OPEC oil, and the United States, European, and Asian economies the techno-industrial economies will be at the mercy of OPEC.  This is not an OPEC dominated by the well educated and rational Saudis of today, but an OPEC dominated by the Jihadis. 

You want gas in your car?  You want heating oil next winter?  You want jobs?  You want the dollar to be worth anything?  You better hope the Jihad, the Muslim Inquisition, loses, and the Islamic Reformation wins. 

If the Reformation movement wins, that is the moderate Muslims who believe that Islam can respect and tolerate other religions and live in peace with the rest of the world, move out of the 10th Century into the 21st Century.  Then the troubles in the Middle East will eventually fade away, and a moderate and prosperous Middle East will emerge. 

We have to help the Reformation win, and to do that we have to fight the Inquisition, i.e., the Wahhabi movement, the Jihad, Al Qaeda, the Islamic terrorist movements. 

We have to do it somewhere, we cannot do it just anywhere and we cannot do it everywhere at once. 

We have created a focal point for the battle now at the time and place of our choosing, in Iraq.  Not in New York, not in London, or Paris, or Berlin, but in Iraq, where we did and are doing two very important things:

(1)  We deposed Saddam Hussein and whether Saddam Hussein was directly involved in 9/11 or not the issue.  It is undisputed that Saddam has been actively supporting the terrorist movement for decades, Saddam is a terrorist.  Saddam is, or was, a weapon of mass destruction, which is responsible for the deaths of probably more than a million Iraqis and two million Iranians. 

(2)  We created a battle, a confrontation, a flash point, with Islamic terrorism in Iraq and we have focused the battle.  We are killing bad guys there, and the ones we get there we won't have to get here, or anywhere else.  We also have a good shot at creating a democratic, peaceful Iraq, which will be a catalyst for democratic change in the rest of the Middle East, and an outpost for a stabilizing American military presence in the Middle East for as long as it is needed. 

The Euros could have done this, but they didn't, and they won't.  We now know that rather than opposing the rise of the Jihad, the French, Germans, and Russians were selling them arms.  We have found more than a million tons of weapons and munitions in Iraq.  If Iraq was not a threat to anyone, why did Saddam need a million tons of weapons? 

Additionally, Iraq was paying for French, German, and Russian arms with money skimmed from the United Nations Oil for Food Program (supervised by U.N.  Secretary General Kofi Annan and his son) that was supposed to pay for food, medicine, and education, for Iraqi children. 

World War II, the war with the German and Japanese Nazis, really began with a ''whimper'' in 1928.  It did not begin with Pearl Harbor.  It began with the Japanese invasion of China.  It was at war for fourteen years before America joined in it.  It officially ended in 1945 a 17 year war and was followed by another decade of United States occupation in Germany and Japan to get those countries reconstructed and running on their own again a 27-year war.  World War II cost the United States an amount equal to approximately a full year's GNP adjusted for inflation, equal to about $12 trillion dollars.  World War II cost America more than 400,000 killed in action, and nearly 100,000 are still missing in action. 

The Iraq war has so far cost the United States about $120 billion, which is roughly what 9/11 cost New York.  It has also cost about 1,000 American lives, which is roughly 1/3 of the 3,000 lives that the Jihad snuffed on 9/11. 

But the cost of not fighting and winning World War II would have been unimaginably greater, a world that would now be dominated by German and Japanese Nazism. 

Americans have a short attention span, now, conditioned I suppose by 30 minute television shows and 2 hour movies in which everything comes out okay.  The real world is not like that.  It is messy, uncertain, and sometimes bloody and ugly.  It always has been, and probably always will be. 

If we do this thing in Iraq successfully, it is probable that the Reformation will ultimately prevail.  Many Muslims in the Middle East hope it will.  We will be there to support it.  It has begun in some countries, Libya, for instance also Dubai and Saudi Arabia.  If we fail, the Inquisition will probably prevail, and terrorism from Islam will be with us for all the foreseeable future, because the people of the Inquisition, or Jihad, believe that they are called by Allah to kill all the Infidels, and that death in Jihad is glorious. 

The bottom line here is that we will have to deal with Islamic terrorism until we defeat it, whenever that is.  It will not go away on its own.  It will not go away if we ignore it. 

If the United States can create a reasonably democratic and stable Iraq, then we have an ''England'' in the Middle East, a platform from which we can work to help modernize and moderate the Middle East.  The history of the world is the clash between the forces of relative civility and civilization, and the barbarians clamoring at the gates.  The Iraq war is merely another battle in this ancient and never-ending war.  And now, for the first time ever, the barbarians are about to get nuclear weapons unless we or somebody does prevent them. 

The Iraq war is expensive, and uncertain, yes.  But the consequences of not fighting it and winning it will be horrifically greater.  We have four options:

(1) We can defeat the Jihad now, before it gets nuclear weapons. 

(2) We can fight the Jihad later, after it gets nuclear weapons (which may be as early as next year, if Iran's progress on nuclear weapons is what Iran claims it is). 

(3) We can surrender to the Jihad and accept its dominance in the Middle East, now, in Europe in the next few years or decades, and ultimately in America. 

(4) Or we can stand down now, and pick up the fight later when the Jihad is more widespread and better armed, perhaps after the Jihad has dominated France and Germany and maybe most of the rest of Europe.  It will be more dangerous, more expensive, and much bloodier then. 

Yes, the Jihadis say that they look forward to an Islamic America.  If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today. 

We can be defeatist, as many Democrats and liberals, peace activists, and anti-war types seem to be, and concede or surrender to the Jihad or we can do whatever it takes to win this war against them. 

The history of the world is the history of civil clashes, or cultural clashes.  All wars are about ideas, ideas about what society and civilization should be like and the most determined always win.  Those who are willing to be the most ruthless always win.  The pacifists always lose, because the anti-pacifists kill them. 

In the 20th Century it was western democracy vs. communism, and before that western democracy vs. Nazism, and before that Western democracy vs. German imperialism.  Western democracy won, three times, but it wasn't cheap, fun, nice, easy, or quick.  Indeed, the wars against German Imperialism (World War I), Nazi Imperialism (World War II), and communist imperialism (the 40-year Cold War that included the Vietnam Battle, commonly called the Vietnam War, but itself a major battle in a larger war) covered almost the entire century. 

The first major war of the 21st Century is the war between Western Judeo/Christian Civilization and Wahhabi Islam.  It may last a few more years, or most of this century.  It will last until the Wahhabi branch of Islam fades away, or gives up its ambitions for regional and global dominance and Jihad, or until Western Civilization gives in to the Jihad. 

Remember, perspective is everything, and America's schools teach too little history.  The Cold War lasted from about 1947 to 1989 at least until the Berlin Wall came down in 1989.  Forty-two years.  Europe spent the first half of the 19th century fighting Napoleon, and from 1870 to 1945 fighting Germany.  World War II began in 1928, lasted 17 years, plus a ten year occupation and the United States still has troops in Germany and Japan.  World War II resulted in the death of more than 50 million people, maybe more than 100 million people, depending on which estimates you accept.  The United States has taken a little more than 1,000 Killed-in-Action (KIA) in Iraq.  The United States took more than 4,000 KIA on the morning of June 6, 1944, the first day of the Normandy Invasion to rid Europe of Nazi Imperialism.  In World War II the United States averaged 2,000 KIA a week for four years.  Most of the individual battles of World War II lost more Americans than the entire Iraq war has done so far. 

But the stakes are at least as high: a world dominated by representative governments with civil rights, human rights, and personal freedoms--or a world dominated by a radical Islamic Wahhabi movement, and by the Jihad, under the Mullahs and the Sharia. 

I do not understand why many Americans do not grasp this.  Too much television I guess. 

Many Americans profess to be in favor of human rights, civil rights, liberty, freedom, and all that.  But not for Iraqis, I guess.  In America, but nowhere else.  The 300,000 Iraqi bodies in mass graves in Iraq, not our problem.  The United States population is about twelve times that of Iraq, so let's multiply 300,000 by twelve.  What would you think if there were 3,600,000 American bodies in mass graves in America because of our president?  Would you not want another country to help liberate America? 

''Peace Activists'' always seem to demonstrate where it's safe and ineffective to do so: in America.  Why don't we see peace activists demonstrating in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, and North Korea; in the places in the world that really need peace activism the most? 

Are we not supposed to be in favor of human rights, civil rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc?  Well, if the Jihad wins and wherever the Jihad wins, it is the end of civil rights, human rights, democracy, multiculturalism, diversity, etc.  Americans who oppose the liberation of Iraq are coming down on the side of their own worst enemy.  If the Jihad wins, it is the death of ALL OTHER "ISMS"! 

Too many Americans JUST DON'T GET IT! 


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: islam; wahhabism
I got this as an e-mail FWD from somebody for whom I have a tremendous amount of respect. Speaking as an educator with 16 years experience, this subject is in my area of expertise and I fully agree with the assessments made herein, as well as the history.

Bold and italic emphasis are mine, however.

1 posted on 03/23/2005 6:14:01 PM PST by ExSoldier
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

Great Post!


2 posted on 03/23/2005 6:17:19 PM PST by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Godzilla; judicial meanz; Old Sarge; HipShot; Cindy; MamaDearest; jerseygirl; Domestic Church; ...
PING!!!!
3 posted on 03/23/2005 6:18:47 PM PST by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

I've had wahhabi before with my sushi. It's really good when mixed with soy sauce.


4 posted on 03/23/2005 6:19:22 PM PST by JusPasenThru (http://giinthesky.blogspot.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee

Great POST

thanks

you get it!!!


5 posted on 03/23/2005 6:20:46 PM PST by CHICAGOFARMER (Concealed Carry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JusPasenThru

LMAO!


6 posted on 03/23/2005 6:21:49 PM PST by wagglebee ("We are ready for the greatest achievements in the history of freedom." -- President Bush, 1/20/05)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier
Thankyou. Excellent read.

But Islam in general is a religion of hate. Wahhibism is a more extreme form of this, yes, but in general Islam isn't the religion of peace and love.

There are two books, the Koran and the Hadith. I think (think not sure) Wahibism places more emphasis on the Hadith.

Anyway, I agree with Ann Coulter. Let's go in there and convert them all to Christianity =( to be PC I'd like to also add) or Buddism. I don't see any violent Buddists.
7 posted on 03/23/2005 6:23:51 PM PST by LauraleeBraswell ( CONSERVATIVE FIRST-Republican second.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier; F15Eagle; Happy2BMe
Ping

______________________

dhimmitude ....... live it or fight it

8 posted on 03/23/2005 6:26:48 PM PST by Tuba Guy (Imagine Hillareah in the White House and BJ in the UN.....they do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

Thank you Ex-Soldier for the ping.


9 posted on 03/23/2005 6:26:56 PM PST by Cindy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

At least back then we did have leaders attending Bund meetings and proclaiming Naziism as the Social Order of Peace

imo


10 posted on 03/23/2005 6:28:25 PM PST by joesnuffy (The generation that survived the depression and won WW2 proved poverty does not cause crime)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LauraleeBraswell
I don't see any violent Buddists.

Well, true. But when they get angry enough they just set themselves on fire.

11 posted on 03/23/2005 6:28:58 PM PST by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier
"I don't see any violent Buddists."

Sadly there are violent people that call themselves Buddhist in Sri Lanka , defending their nation from the Tamil Tigers.
However it is the person that practices the tenets of Buddhism
in their personal life that is a Buddhist , one is not born a Buddhist. So those who are violent and who kill without much regret are not Buddhists, no matter what their upbringing, ethnicity, or cultural/national origin.
12 posted on 03/23/2005 6:40:22 PM PST by injin ("sooner rather than later.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia; Velveeta; Donna Lee Nardo; SevenofNine; lacylu; WestCoastGal; TexasCowboy

Ping


13 posted on 03/23/2005 6:50:21 PM PST by nw_arizona_granny (The enemy within, will be found in the "Communist Manifesto 1963", you are living it today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier
A couple of minor points:

...Congress unanimously declared war on Japan, and the following day on Germany, which had not attacked us.

There was one "Nay" vote on the war declaration (by, if I recall correctly, the same woman who voted against the declaration to enter "The Great War").

Further, the declaration of war against Germany was only after they declared war on US.

14 posted on 03/23/2005 6:59:26 PM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring
A couple of minor points....

Freepers always like to quibble. Yes you are correct. However, I didn't write the essay and so I didn't feel as if I should correct the minor points of history especially where the main thrust of the piece is the dangers of Jihadism.

15 posted on 03/23/2005 7:02:32 PM PST by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

More minor points. Ireland was neutral. Northern Ireland (a part of the United Kingdom) was in the war. Spanish neutrality cannot be over emphasized. It permitted UK access to the Med which was a crucial.


16 posted on 03/23/2005 7:20:10 PM PST by Whispering Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier
Yup. We need to remember that the enemy is the Wahhabi sect of Islam, not Islam itself.
17 posted on 03/23/2005 7:28:13 PM PST by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier; Tuba Guy

I think the USA / GB would have been able to defeat Hitler, it would have just taken longer. And we would have been forced to use the nuclear option, probably multiple times. If indeed Hitler's experiments were intentionally delayed as history has stated, Hitler still would not have been able to deliver sufficient attacks on the CONUS. Not even close. Hitler, like Napoleon before, foolishly tried to take on the Russians, and in winter, to boot, making the same mistake. And trying to control the Russian population would have been a lot more difficult than France (all jokes aside, there were many brave souls in the French Resistance who gave their all).

Regarding the rest of the article, I think the best we will be able to do is delay the inevitable. Given the money the Saudis have, the word-of-mouth they can spread from people flying in every year to Mecca, their widespread influence, the perpetual war against Israel by any means, militarily, economically and politically, there will likely not be an end to this thing. I hate to say this, but in their basic teachings, these things are incompatible.

I don't say this because I want to. Simply put, this thing has the capacity to be much larger than WWII and it's guerilla warfare, but with much higher stakes. Eventually Musharraf, a moderate at best, will no longer be in charge of Pakistan's nukes, either by death (natural or otherwise) and God only knows who will emerge as leader (even if they try to restore a civilian gov't it would likely be unable to deal with internal militants). Whereas MAD was sufficient to keep the USA-USSR from stepping over the line (although there were unintentional mistakes on both sides that caused significant alerts) MAD is *exactly* what these groups live (die) for. Very, very complex problem.


18 posted on 03/23/2005 7:35:18 PM PST by F15Eagle (If FReepers FReeped like Imam's fatwa'd against their own, there'd be 1 post on FR every 5 to 10 yrs)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: F15Eagle
The last religious cult (aka the Japs) had to be multiple Nuked into submission.
History has a way of........

ABC CBS NBC CNN its all the SAME, Propoganda.
Might as well call them all AmeriJazerra.
Show them how much Gravitas Hugh Bris has. Vote with your remote! Shut down the Alphabet channels.

He's Got A Plan
Zippo Hero
Seven Dead Monkeys Page O Tunes

19 posted on 03/23/2005 8:32:40 PM PST by rawcatslyentist (Man, You should have seen them, kickin Edgar Allen Poe! Koo Koo Kachoo)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6
We need to remember that the enemy is the Wahhabi sect of Islam, not Islam itself.

OTOH, let's not forget that from it's very inception around 586 AD (speaking as a teacher of World History), Islam was spread by force. Believe or DIE! This simple strategy worked in the short term for beaten adversaries and in the longer term as children were raised in the religion. Let's also not forget that the failed crusades (all three) were in direct response to the armed incursions of Islam across the face of the earth.

Finally, let's not forget that while not all the terrorists of the world are muslim, all of the ones who have directly attacked our country in the last dozen years....are. Further, while I don't hold the muslim kids I teach accountable for 911...I do believe that there are terrorists currently hiding among the law abiding (in the loosest sense) Arab-American communities and that Arab-Americans know who they are and what their mission is and are doing nothing.

20 posted on 03/23/2005 8:54:55 PM PST by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6

i'm chiming in with ExSoldier here. thanks for posting the article!

Islam is the enemy and most muslims are just as much victims as the west will be if we don't wake up.
Wahhabi is just one of the many virulent sects.

As an arab linguist/MENA expert for years, it still amazes me how our top guys are so in the pockets of the Saud tribe that they're willing to ignore reality.
shades of Hezekiah (look it up).

There are few Islamic sects outside of the main Sunni/Shia mass that shun the violence that Mohammad advocated from Medina (when in Mecca, before getting power, he played the nice guy... afterwards, forget it) such as the Bektashi group in Eastern Europe that are really syncretic movements with pagan, Christian and Islamic origins.

If you want to peruse an authority, read Dr. Mark Gabriel's book on Islam & Terrorism. The FBI, Pentagon, etc. have had him up to teach - he used to be Dr. Mustafa (before a name change) and was one of the head professors on Islamic history at Al Azhar University in Cairo.

Prior to any change to a different religion, he started asking thoughtful questions about the historical Mohammad's focus on violence and what Quran taught about it. The Mukhabbarat came and tortured him for asking...
and that's your mild form of wonderful Egyptian Islam.

Dr. Gabriel explains what they are taught in order to deceive non-Muslims while in a weak position. Or you can learn lugat ilArabiya the hard way (by submitting).


21 posted on 03/23/2005 11:18:18 PM PST by ColdWarNavyVet_dirsup (it wasn't cold...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

That's why I said "minor" point...


22 posted on 03/24/2005 4:10:21 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

Good posts, too few realize what the challenge is, and the strength of the opponent. I hear many thinking we can just take Islam out overnight if we chose.

They wont' fight a war in a set piece battle, but it doesn't mean they are helpless. The muslim civilization is producing large numbers of young, so it has grown especially over the last few decades in sheer numbers. The muslim takeover of west Europe over hte last few years has started to become noticeable.


23 posted on 03/24/2005 4:26:42 AM PST by ran15
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: ColdWarNavyVet_dirsup
Read Bernard Lewis's The Crisis of Islam. Turning this into a war against all Islam is a huge mistake.
24 posted on 03/24/2005 5:37:00 AM PST by Fenris6 (3 Purple Hearts in 4 months w/o missing a day of work? He's either John Rambo or a Fraud)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: injin

Ever read "Sho-gun?"

Lots of violent Bhuddists there; they believed that they would come back as another life.


25 posted on 03/24/2005 5:41:23 AM PST by Loud Mime (Liberals want good things to happen - - - to the right people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier
France, Germany, and Russia, have been selling these Islamic nations weapons technology at least as recently as 2002

The United States is still selling weapons to these Islamic nations.

26 posted on 03/24/2005 5:50:58 AM PST by Doe Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

Ireland was not an ally during the Second World War.


27 posted on 03/24/2005 5:53:51 AM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

self ping


28 posted on 03/24/2005 6:40:04 AM PST by IncPen ( The Liberal's reward is self-disgust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Loud Mime
wrong again , maybe some Japanese monks are Buddhists , but the sword wielders could not have been. A Buddhist is only one who follows the tenets of Buddhism closely. Non-killing is the first Precept . Now people can be Buddhist inspired , still
engaged in all sorts of defilements while aspiring to Buddhist
principles. These people might be termed Buddhism aspirants, but there is still a big difference. In all reality there are probably very few true , genuine Buddhists in this world
and lots of aspirants.
29 posted on 03/24/2005 10:35:36 AM PST by injin ("sooner rather than later.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: injin

It isn't what a person calls themselves, but how they act?


30 posted on 03/24/2005 10:52:20 AM PST by Loud Mime (Liberals want good things to happen - - - to the right people)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Fenris6

"Turning this into a war against all Islam"

That is a huge statement! I feel it is an incredible logic leap from what I posted before.

I used to translate Arabic, having learned it circa 1980.
With a number of Muslim friends, Sunni, Shia, Bektashi, etc. my intent is not to make "war against all Islam".

Although perusing your quotes of Mr Lewis may give one a feeling that - yes, the West has greviously misjudged not only Islam, but most other cultures around the world (probably because we're myopically focused on American Idol, Survivor or Trump's show) - for those of us who are informed, versed in both Arabic and Near Eastern culture, being aware of what the core tenants of Islam are is critical for our own survival.

Forget the western pundits - there are a multitude of historical and current examples. Take Lebanon and what has happened there over the last 50 years. It was normative Islam that drove out what used to be a majority Christian population and turned it into an Islamic country (by violent and terroristic means).

While not wanting to "take on all Islam" - it would be an enormous mistake for the west not to realize (peaceful muslim people notwithstanding) that the core of Islam is both terroristically hegemonistic and an historical bloodbath.

regards


31 posted on 03/24/2005 8:47:50 PM PST by ColdWarNavyVet_dirsup (it wasn't cold... if we don't protect the innocent... we will have none!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: LauraleeBraswell

I disagree... I am not a muslim, nor am I a protestant, catholic or anything else. In fact, I am not relgious because I believe that all religions cause hatred and are in many aspects based on evil against others that stand on the outside. Just consider what caused the 30 year war in Europe. It was a fight between Catholics and Protestants. Who was the evil then? Thus, Islam is not more or less evil than other religions. We have to consider, however, that all relgions created one good thing; that is the moral standards by which we live today. If we want to convert all muslims to Christianity or some other relgion, it does not make us any better from those that want to impose their believes on us. We live in a country that promotes freedom of religion... Freedom being a part of our democratic rights... If we want to promote democracy and liberty, we should not do it by forcing other people to believe in something they do not. That, by far, breaches their inalienable rights.


32 posted on 05/14/2005 2:58:32 PM PDT by eurostudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier
I also got this from a friend for whom I have tremendous respect. However, when one reads this through, and view it from a very scholarly point of view, it is filled with general statements that lacks support. There are no citations, no foot notes, no references etc. This piece is both opinion based, but also includes a whole lot of information. Because this information is not cited, nor referenced, the piece overall lacks tremendous credibility. I will also here maintain my earlier statements, that we cannot blame Islam for being a religion based on evil and hatred. As I have mentioned in an earlier posting: I am not a Muslim, nor am I a Protestant, Buddhist, Catholic etc. In fact, I am not religious because I believe religions in general have a tendency to cause war. consider the 30 year war in Europe, which was fought between Protestants and Catholics, my question remains, who was the evil then? Religion brought us the morals we live by today: don't cheat, don't steal etc. But, they are facilitated by all religions (not Christianity alone). The West should, at no point, attempt to convert or blame Islam for anything. Instead our goals should be to bring peace, democracy and freedom to those parts of the worlds that are most in need of it. This should be done without force, as forcing our own beliefs on other nationalities breaches the freedom that we are supposed to promote. In conclusion, I hope to see this piece again somewhere with a complete set of citations so that it brings more credibility to the public that it addresses.
33 posted on 05/14/2005 3:31:57 PM PDT by eurostudent
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eurostudent
Well neither am I. I don't adhere to any organized religion either.

But when you look at Europe- well let's take England for example. You had a state church, or the Church of England. They were inseparable. Governing officials were church officials. The fight between Protestants and Catholics was actually a political struggle. England separated from the Catholic church because at that time the Pope was almost like the King of Europe.

That's why we have the establishment clause that prevents Congress from making a Church of the United States. Religion is a private thing.

As for religion causing hatred, well did you know in every inner city area in the US there's always a Catholic school.

Now, I'm not a Christian. Try as I might I just can't believe in Jesus. But Christianity in itself civilized Europe. You look at the Jews, they were some of the most civilized people in the world. But you had to be born a Jew. And Jesus in a secular view, created a form of Judaism that included anyone and everyone.
34 posted on 05/14/2005 4:28:14 PM PDT by LauraleeBraswell (Where were you when Tom Delay demanded justice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: eurostudent
Also, if you look at the Pagans of Ireland before Christianity. We like to look at Paganism as this sort of love mother nature religion. It wasn't. Look at Africa, you have tribal-pagan religions that dictate the practice of human sacrifice, mutilation of women's genitals, witch burnings. Well, Ireland was the same way. Only Ireland was exposed to Christianity, Africa wasn't.
And if you look at Islam, because I've studied it, it's a horrible religion. Compare Jesus to Mohammad. Jesus was a celibate Jew who preached love and peace. That's the core of Christianity. As for Mohammad he had I think over 9 wives. One was 6 years old, he consummated that marriage when she was nine. He also said it was alright for men to beat their wives.
35 posted on 05/14/2005 4:36:11 PM PDT by LauraleeBraswell (Where were you when Tom Delay demanded justice!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: eurostudent
The West should, at no point, attempt to convert or blame Islam for anything.

And why not pray tell?

Not 9-11 ?

Not the coming bio war on our cities?

Not a nuclear devastation that kills millions? Interesting that we can be blamed for the rumor of desicration of a koran but not the other way round. Some day, in the not too distant future, Americans will have had all they're going to take, and as they say, "Payback is a Beotch!"
36 posted on 05/14/2005 4:42:45 PM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier; LauraleeBraswell
"I don't see any violent Buddists.

I HAVE

"Well, true. But when they get angry enough they just set themselves on fire."

I'VE ALSO SEEN THIS -- UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL

While stationed in Saigon, in 1966, I was driving to the Commissary in one of our jeeps one afternoon.

I turned a corner and found myself almost on top of a Buddhist Monk who had just "lit himself off."

It was like a big "whoosh" and then the flames settled down and I could actually see him.

I was close enough (probably 15 feet) that I could also smell the burning flesh--not something a person soon forgets.

All of this happened in the course of about a minute and then I noticed, "The Crowd."

There were probably about 150 onlookers/supporters/what have you.

Even though I was dressed in civies (I was covert mil intelligence) and driving a non-military jeep, it was obvious that I was an American and the look on some of their faces was not that of "peace and love."

I put the jeep in 1st gear and made a u-turn as best I could and nearly ran over several people (and at that point, I didn't care as I was scared "sh*tless") as a perhaps 40 or 50 Vietnamese gave chase.

I was armed, but with only a .38 revolver and against that size of a mob, bent on, I don't know what, was about as useless as t*ts on a bull.

I don't know if these people giving chase were Buddhist or not, (as I was not concentrating on whether any of them had robes on, but rather on making a hasty withdrawal) but they were obviously sympathetic to the Monk's cause and not at all favorable towards this "round-eye-yanki."

Just another day in Nam and a few more gray hairs were added to a 23 year old young man--growing up very fast!

37 posted on 05/14/2005 4:47:21 PM PDT by An American Patriot ("GIVE ME LIBERTY OR GIVE ME"-- the opportunity to get the Hell out of here! Bye Bye VT- Hello, VA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: eurostudent; Oorang; Godzilla; Travis McGee
Religion brought us the morals we live by today: don't cheat, don't steal etc. But, they are facilitated by all religions (not Christianity alone). The West should, at no point, attempt to convert or blame Islam for anything. Instead our goals should be to bring peace, democracy and freedom to those parts of the worlds that are most in need of it. This should be done without force, as forcing our own beliefs on other nationalities breaches the freedom that we are supposed to promote.

eurostudent: May 14th 2005.

You stink of TROLL and I think my friends will agree. I think there is a ZOT in your future. Why did you ping ME to this? I don't know you.

38 posted on 05/14/2005 6:43:08 PM PDT by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: eurostudent
Why did you ping ME to this? I don't know you.

Well DUH! I totally forgot I POSTED this thread. That's a big OOOOPS! Okay that explains that. You still stink of troll.

39 posted on 05/14/2005 6:50:15 PM PDT by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Loud Mime
Ever read "Sho-gun?" Lots of violent Bhuddists there...

Sho-gun was written about Japan and the primary religion of Japan is Shintoism NOT Buddhism. Anyway the Samurai class regarded the Emperor as a Diety...for whom they killed or gladly be killed.

40 posted on 05/14/2005 6:56:32 PM PDT by ExSoldier (Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on dinner. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier

b for l


41 posted on 05/14/2005 7:02:51 PM PDT by beebuster2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExSoldier
Why don't we see peace activists demonstrating in Iran, Syria, Iraq, Sudan, and North Korea; in the places in the world that really need peace activism the most?

Obviously because they're liars and cowards who's real agenda is full of hatred and greed.

42 posted on 05/14/2005 7:09:22 PM PDT by Bullish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eurostudent
I am not relgious because I believe that all religions cause hatred

Gee, you signed up today just to expose yourself as an atheist and a liberal?

43 posted on 05/14/2005 7:30:06 PM PDT by Bullish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: ColdWarNavyVet_dirsup
While not wanting to "take on all Islam" - it would be an enormous mistake for the west not to realize (peaceful muslim people notwithstanding) that the core of Islam is both terroristically hegemonistic and an historical bloodbath.

I draw a distinction between Islam (the religious ideology) and Muslims ( human beings who currently follow Islam ). Islam is inherently evil. Its core embraces murder, robbery, and conquest. For Western civilization to endure, it must be defeated, just like National Socialism and Communism. This does not mean that all human individuals currently caught up in the ideology are evil beyond repair

The radical mullahs, and the wealthy ones who finance them, must go. After removing them from the environment, perhaps the rest can be redeemed

44 posted on 05/15/2005 6:34:17 AM PDT by SauronOfMordor (What does the wolf care how many sheep there be?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: eurostudent; ExSoldier
Eurostudent, you requested citations, foot notes and references in order to give the authors view any credibility. Perhaps the following will suffice. The quotes in italics are from Raymond Kraft, the author of the article posted at the beginning of this thread. The links following each quote are for your edification.

The Jihadis, or the militant Muslims, are basically Nazis in Kaffiyahs. They believe that Islam, a radically conservative (definitely not liberal) form of Wahhabi Islam, should own and control the Middle East first, then Europe and then the world. All who do not bow to Allah should be killed, enslaved, or subjugated. They want to finish the Holocaust, destroy Israel, and purge the world of Jews. This is what they say.

[Islam] A rare look at secretive Brotherhood in America

The Islamic States of America?

Ayman al-Zawahiri - THE MAN BEHIND BIN LADEN

Abdullah Azzam 'The Godfather of Jihad'

Yes, the Jihadis say that they look forward to an Islamic America. If you oppose this war, I hope you like the idea that your children, or grandchildren, may live in an Islamic America under the Mullahs and the Sharia, an America that resembles Iran today

American Jihad

Jihad in Islam

Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders - World Islamic Front Statement

Muhammad, Islam, and Terrorism

AMERICA, ISLAM, JIHAD, AND TERRORISM

Eurostudent, you stated that you do not follow any particular religion. Fine by me, that is your choice. But what is religion, any religion? It is a philosophy, a set of beliefs and values that individuals choose to believe and follow.

More than one religion has a variety of sects. For example, within Christianity, you have Baptists, Methodists, Catholics, etc. The same holds true with the religion, or philosophy, of Islam. You have Sunni, Shia, Whabbi, etc. They all have varying tenets based on the core philosophy set down by Muhammad. As in all religions, some sects of Islam are more extreme than others. It is the most extreme of these that the terrorists embrace and hide behind.

In your post you said "that we cannot blame Islam for being a religion based on evil and hatred."

You have every right to believe that just as I have every right to disagree with your statement. There are many sects of Islam (referenced in the above links) that are based on evil and hatred. I blame the people, the individual Muslims, who have chosen this particular path, this philosophy, as there creed in life. They have chosen evil and hatred. Yes, many wars have been waged in the name of religion. But, again it was people who made the choices to wage these wars.

You also stated, "The West should, at no point, attempt to convert or blame Islam for anything.

I am at a loss to find where a western government has stated their goal is to convert Islam. If you could provide a link I would appreciate it. As for blaming Islam, as I already stated, the blame lies with the individual people and the choices they make.

Again, from your post, "Instead our goals should be to bring peace, democracy and freedom to those parts of the worlds that are most in need of it. This should be done without force, as forcing our own beliefs on other nationalities breaches the freedom that we are supposed to promote.

I would like to join you in hoping we can reach these goals of peace, democracy and freedom. I believe most western people do want such. As far as obtaining these goals without force I'm going to choose reality over idealism.

Reality is that America, and American facilities in other countries, have been repeating attacked for the last 25 years by radical Muslims. These Muslims have made the choice to provoke us to finally defend our freedom. Defending our citizens is not forcing our beliefs on anyone. How many times should we be attacked, how many lives should be lost, before we stand up and say enough? War is a very ugly thing, but, in my opinion, so is weakness. I am very glad that America is not showing weakness and is finally standing up to the terrorists, who at this time in history, happen to be Islamic Muslims.

45 posted on 05/15/2005 5:38:54 PM PDT by Oorang ( The original point and click interface was a Smith and Wesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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