I wrote this last November.
Tet, Take Two: Islam’s 2016 European Offensive
http://gatesofvienna.net/2015/11/tet-take-two-islams-2016-european-offensive/
L’offensive islamique en Europe: un Têt numéro 2?
http://gatesofvienna.net/2016/02/loffensive-islamique-en-europe-un-tet-numero-2/
Tet, Klappe Zwei: Die europäische Offensive des Islam im Jahr 2016
http://gatesofvienna.net/2016/03/tet-klappe-zwei-die-europaische-offensive-des-islam-im-jahr-2016/
I remember that, some good and timely stuff there.
I guess that Klein just read your article. :>)
A quibble....but I don’t think the IRA forced the British to the bargaining table. I think the IRA ran out of steam b/c the British turned all of the top IRA brass into British agents, and those cleansed the organization from within. When it was all said and done, you ended up with a peace deal which was pretty much what Thatcher proposed so long ago (but of course with a European overlay).
But like I said...that is only a quibble. The point that a relatively small but determined group can cause even large countries to expend considerable resources and change policies is spot on.
I have drawn my own conclusions about the appliability of The Troubles to the current Islamic problem...and that is this: that the citizens of the European countries most affected need to organize a paramilitary response to immediately strike back, tit for tat, just like the IRA, et al., and the UVF, et al., did back then in N. Ireland. The leaders of both of these groups were forever on the run, and strangely, I think that the paramilitaries served the purpose of not letting The Troubles become an actual civil war that engulfed the entire country. Perhaps I am wrong about that. But you have to be in awe of how ruthless and efficient they were in responding when the other side did something. I don’t see how a French resistance along these lines would be anything other than a net gain for the people of France. Bc clearly the state is not going to protect the people.