Victor Davis Hanson Ping !
Posted on 09/10/2004 5:57:23 AM PDT by Tolik
Chechen Islamicists burn up Russian airliners and shoot schoolgirls — and say they are victims, deprived of the chance for their own autonomous theocracy. Beheaders in Iraq decapitate Americans, Pakistanis, Koreans, Japanese, and Nepalese — only to claim that these are infidels guilty of trying to build roads and bridges. Italian humanitarians and charity workers are kidnapped by Islamicists. In the "holy" city of Najaf, religious extremists bomb innocents, not only without gratitude for those who freed them from Saddam, but full of hatred for those who would bring them consensual government.
Islamic terrorists kidnap French journalists and threaten them with execution, demanding that a sovereign nation previously known for its appeasement of radical Middle Eastern rogue regimes overturn a law protecting secular life in its schools. Hamas "freedom fighters" blow up buses inside Israel and call the dead children Zionists who belong in the sea.
Islamic fascists incinerate dozens in Madrid, and claim they have a right to do so because of the Spanish role in ridding the world of the Hussein clan — or was the real rub the Reconquista? Australians in Bali are engulfed in flame by car bombers for the felony of being Western visitors in an Islamic enclave.
Meanwhile, back in the United States, as in the major capitals of Europe, Islamic terrorists are arrested periodically, seeking to trump the foul work of September 11. Theocrats blew apart General Massoud in Afghanistan, attempted to kill President Musharraf of Pakistan, and now claim that they plan to do the same to our own leaders here in the United States. A few thousand Islamic males made an entire nation take off their shoes at their airports and changed forever the daily routine of 300 million Americans — and promise they are not done yet.
Ask yourself: What do a Russian ten-year-old, a poor black farmer in Darfur, an elderly pensioner in Israel, a stockbroker in New York, and a U.N. aid worker in Afghanistan have in common? In the last three years, they have all died in similar ways: Unarmed and civilian, they were murdered by a common cowardly method fueled by a fascist ideology.
The recent slaughters in Russia were the proverbial straw that broke the camel's back of excusing or explaining away radical Islamic terror. If the Estonians can break away from post-Soviet oppression and free themselves from Russian authoritarianism without slaughtering schoolchildren and blowing up airplanes, then the Chechens can as well — but only if they wish to create democracy rather than an Islamic fascist state.
But there is something else going on here besides the cloak of so-called Chechen nationalism. The perversion not of religion per se, but of Islam; the singular method of suicide bombing rarely found elsewhere; the frequent resort to the unique grotesquery of beheading; the now-common display of abject incompetence on the battlefield coupled with craven slaughter of the noncombatant and civilian aid worker. At some point, the leaders of the Western world (if there are any left besides George W. Bush and Tony Blair) are going to look at all this madness worldwide and come to the bitter conclusion that there is a disgusting pattern: Not every Muslim is a fascist terrorist, but almost every fascist terrorist is a Muslim. Killers are not screaming "Hail Mary" when they machine gun children in the back, slit the throat of airline stewardesses, or blow pregnant women up on buses across the globe. And they are not the subjects of condemnatory fatwas in Iran or Saudi Arabia.
Their grievance is not really Russian imperialism, or the 5 to 10 percent of the West Bank under dispute, or black African encroachment on Arab land, or purported French insensitivity to legitimate Islamic pride, much less an American "crusade" to harm Muslims.
All these issues and the hundreds of others — from the right to build a reactor in Iran to the desire for a semi-autonomous Chechnya — in theory could be discussed, argued about, and adjudicated through democratic dialogue.
But that is impossible. For you see, the real problem is the democratic dialogue itself — unknown in the Arab Middle East and much of the Islamic world, and a hindrance to both sharia and the pan-Arabist thug with epaulettes and sunglasses. Yet consensual government alone is the key to ending failed statist economies, gender apartheid, religious intolerance, state-controlled media, and tribalism. It alone might stop the self-induced misery and with it the tedious scapegoating of "the Jews and America."
Much of the Islamic Middle East continues to blame others for its own induced catastrophe, apparently unaware — thanks to the lever of oil it didn't discover, doesn't know how to develop, and uses to intensify rather than alleviate its poverty — that its entire culture is becoming an international pariah. Islamic young men on European flights are looked at with distrust; they are not welcome in Russia. China wants none of them. They are wary of visiting India. Australia learned from Bali. The whole world is watching — in disgust.
In short, the suicide bomber, the improvised explosive device, the car bomb, the televised beheading, the wacko fatwa, the sleazy propaganda streamer on the Internet, the new cult of death — all cowardly and lethal phenomena — these are now the innovations that the world associates with the Middle East in lieu of gene research, car production, or computer breakthroughs. If you look for gender equity in the Middle East, you won't find it in Arab Olympic delegations, Saudi schools, or the Iranian government, but in the opportunity for young women to blow themselves up right beside men. Indeed, killing infidels is the nascent women's-liberation movement of the radical Muslim world.
It won't do to fault a few bad apples — as if when Ziad Jarrah in his red bandanna yelled out "Allah is the greatest" as he crashed United Flight 93 on September 11, he did so alone, to the horror and disgust of the Arab Street, and without a shared ideology.
Yet if we look for change from within, the Arab League offers instead the tired victimization from colonialism of some 50 years past or retro European-Zionist conspiracies of the 1940s. It remains mostly silent about past American efforts to free Kuwait, save Bosnians and Kosovars, topple murderers such as Saddam and the Taliban — and is completely mute about the ongoing Arab genocide of black Africans in Darfur.
The last three decades have taught Americans that extending aid or help to the Islamic world is almost as bad as warring with it, inasmuch as the Middle East apparently admires strength of any sort but despises magnanimity as decadence. Here at home there will always be a retired Clintonian diplomat or Council on Foreign Relations grandee to assure us that "the Bush foreign policy" is what stirred up the previously sober Middle East or alienated those once courageous French and Germans — as if the last decade did not lead logically to September 11.
But there is a problem here that makes our struggle more than just a war against the "terror" of newfound stealthy cells. Libya came clean not out of principle but out of fear. Saudi Arabia is not quite the Saudi Arabia of September 11, thanks to American pressure. There is a reason Dr. Khan was exposed and Pakistan is suddenly doing more to harm than help al Qaeda. The cause of all of this ongoing change is not fear of a windsurfing John Kerry as the next president threatening a more "sensitive" war.
True, this war can be lost if we fail to address the hearts and minds of the Arab people — if we fail to offer something better than the false choice between jihad and autocracy. Chechnya of the 1990s proves that perhaps. But it cannot be won by aid and diplomacy alone — any more than the Kaiser, Mussolini, Hitler, Tojo, and Stalin and his successors could be talked or bought out of their extremism.
The U.S. military — not NATO, the U.N., or the EU — shut down the al Qaeda sanctuary in Afghanistan and the nightmare of Saddam's Iraq. It is the only protector of the effort to jumpstart reform in Iraq. Appreciation of that power impressed both Pakistan and Libya. Threat of that force keeps terrorist killers in Lebanon, Syria, and Iran careful not to leave visible tracks among their compliant, but also apprehensive, hosts. India understands that; so does China. Russia also grasps that there is now no appeasement possible with Islamic killers. How the Arab-Islamic world managed to unite over 3 billion nuclear Anglo Americans, Indians, Chinese, and Russians in their suspicions of it will be a case-study in imbecility for diplomatic historians for decades to come.
Only the Europeans, in their fear and impotence, still pray that obsequiousness might fend off Islamofascism, as if a Madrid is an aberration rather than a harbinger of worse to come. Only the elite radical American Left is either too timid or too morally bankrupt to condemn the new fascism in the Middle East or the Arab genocide in Sudan, preferring instead to whine about Bush's "lies" and all the other non-issues that the most secure and leisured people on the planet protest about for an hour or two before calling it a day.
Some insist that this war is only against a few "crazy" extremists and that it cannot be won by force. That is half true. In fact, millions of young Middle Easterners are watching Islamic fascists to learn whether to applaud or condemn them — and that decision in places like Najaf, Fallujah, Kandahar, Madrid, Grozny, and Ramallah sadly hinges as much on resolute force as it does on "sensitive" understanding. There are millions we must help, but there are also thousands of wannabe Osama bin Ladens and Mohammed Attas who have neither minds nor hearts that anyone would want to win over.
In a war against such killers, it is the proverbial "Them or Us." Islamic fascists are not crazy — however crazy they sound — but evil, as their evil work confirms. We do not need more lectures about the impossibility of winning a postmodern conflict, about al Qaeda's not following the laws of Clausewitz or being immune to our way of war. In fact, we can and have defeated them. Keep doing that and the "hearts and minds" of others in the region, whom we are already helping, will mysteriously prove more open to dialogue.
Fail again like we did on September 11 — and the entire United States Treasury could not buy the good will of an Islamic Street once more gone mad with delight for having felled the Great Satan.
— Victor Davis Hanson is a visiting professor for the month of September and a fellow of Hillsdale College.
Their grievance is not really Russian imperialism, or the 5 to 10 percent of the West Bank under dispute, or black African encroachment on Arab land, or purported French insensitivity to legitimate Islamic pride, much less an American "crusade" to harm Muslims.
All these issues and the hundreds of others — from the right to build a reactor in Iran to the desire for a semi-autonomous Chechnya — in theory could be discussed, argued about, and adjudicated through democratic dialogue.
But that is impossible. For you see, the real problem is the democratic dialogue itself — unknown in the Arab Middle East and much of the Islamic world, and a hindrance to both sharia and the pan-Arabist thug with epaulettes and sunglasses. Yet consensual government alone is the key to ending failed statist economies, gender apartheid, religious intolerance, state-controlled media, and tribalism. It alone might stop the self-induced misery and with it the tedious scapegoating of "the Jews and America."
I am convinced that the only way to “address the hearts and minds” of the hordes of Islam is to utterly destroy any means they may have to do anything other than dig in the dirt. If we need their oil, we should take it from them, not enrich them. They have proven themselves to be antithetical to any civilized behavior, West or East, and are an egregious affront to any remaining semblance of Righteousness to be found in the hearts of modern man.
For you see, the real problem is the democratic dialogue itself — unknown in the Arab Middle East and much of the Islamic world,
And that's why we're in Iraq.
IRAQ THE MODEL
http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/
Thursday, September 02, 2004
Is it worth it?
Congratulations for the Iraqi people and to all freedom lovers in the world for the 1st meeting of the interim Iraqi national conference that was held yesterday.
The meeting was successful without any serious conflict and the members elected a president for the conference; Dr. Fuád Maásoom. Their was an agreement that the president should be a Kurd and the competition was between Dr Maásoom and Jalal Talibani, and although I like Talabani but I’m glad it was Maásoom who got elected as it’s certainly better now not to put too much power in one hand. And despite that I don’t like this distribution of responsibilities according to ethnicity and religion, as this is far from what can be called a democracy, but I think it’s better to accept this at the moment to reassure everyone that their rights and their share in authority will be preserved, hoping that with time and after fear and sensitivity get less and with more education to Iraqis and more explanations, we can abandon such methods and start making our choices according to efficiency and loyalty to Iraq.
With the 1st minutes of the meeting, the enemies of freedom showed their ugly face as was expected and they showed their determination to continue living in the past and in their own delusions through some mortar shells that were fired randomly in the direction of the area were the meeting took place.
They are saying it clearly that they are against plurality and freedom, but it has become obvious that such actions are becoming less and less effective as time passes. It’s impossible for such coward attacks carried by some mercenaries and fanatics to stop the march of a whole nation that suffered a lot towards achieving the dreams of millions in an honorable life and a better future. It was obvious that these attacks didn’t affect the meeting or scare the conference members, and one of the members even described these explosions as fireworks that scare no one.
He’s mistaken who thinks that there’s anything that can stop people’s lust for freedom and he’s mistaken who thinks that Iraqis are incapable of practicing democracy, as this maybe the only thing that almost all Iraqis have agreed on, including radical parties such as the communist party and the different Islamic parties, and anyone who says that these parties were forced to do so and that they don’t believe in democracy will further prove our point, as what will force such old and big parties to do that unless they found that it’s the will of the majority and that they can’t stand against it.
Here I would like to direct a question to those who opposed the change. Isn’t it a wonderful thing that a whole country transfers from a totalitarian state run by an oppressive regime to a free democratic country? The results may seem unclear now to some people but the near future will show what a great change was achieved through this war. As for us, the change and success started since the 9th of April and despite all the losses and difficulties, we are unbelievably happy with our freedom and we are full of hope and belief in our future, and I’m not speaking on behalf of all Iraqis, as there are certainly many among us who are not that happy but I’m sure that this too will change sooner or later.
As for the reactions in the Arab media, it wasn’t unusual that all what they have focused on yesterday, was the explosions around the building where the meeting took place, while the event itself; the meeting, the free discussions, the exchange of opinions and the plans for the future, were something they weren’t concerned about. Others focused on the fact that some members (around 10%) didn’t attend, showing this as some sort of a failure, as they are used to 100% attendance, 100% voting (yes) and 100% cheering. They (Arab media as well as some Arabs) stand confused at what’s happening in Iraq. They are looking at us as if we were aliens, wondering what happened to the obedient well behaved Iraqis. How can they revolt against their ancestors heritage? Why are they acting differently to their arab and Muslim brothers? Why did they accept the “west’s ideology” and betrayed their own leadership?
They found that all they could do is to ignore this victory hoping that other arabs and Muslims won’t notice the change and start wondering if what’s happening in Iraq can be actually good.
As I said we have answered the question or at least most of us have, and it will take time until our neighbors and others around the world understand why and for what all these sacrifices are.
-By Mohammed.
I am convinced that the only way to “address the hearts and minds” of the hordes of Islam is to utterly destroy any means they may have to do anything other than dig in the dirt. If we need their oil, we should take it from them, not enrich them.
Reason # 45,816 why the themesong from the 3 Stooges is played instead of Hail To The Chief when you enter a room.
VDH - right on again!
Goodness, that was mean! I guess that means that my intelligence has been impugned by someone who can’t even spell “theme song.”
Fortunately for you (and the rest of the world, I suspect), I am not the Commander in Chief or anything close to it. Growing up in the 50’s, I learned that making nice to a bully only invited further unpleasantness. A solid punch in the nose usually put an end to such behavior.
Four years in the Marine Corps only reinforced that mind-set, I must confess.
Should you come across a half-drowned viper, you don’t take it home and nurse it back to health as it will surely bite you. Islam threatens not only me, my country, my way of life and my sense of right and wrong, but more than anything, my children. So, yes, I want to fight back and I want to see to it that Islam is no more threat to me and mine than Hitler and Tojo were after WWII.
You may honorably disagree, and I will readily admit that anger fuels my attitude, but you don’t have to be rude.
Scary thought for everyone. This is deep sh!t and the sooner everyone realizes it, the better.
Does any sane observer think that it would make a difference to Iran if they had just one nuclear weapon?
"It is easy to fly into a passion--anybody can do that--but to be angry with the right person and at the right time and with the right object and in the right way--that is not easy, and it is not everyone who can do it."
-- Aristotle
"Any man who judges by the group is a peawit"
Sgt Killrain (the Killer Angels" Michael Shaara)
All true, but this passion is the result of a lifetime of experience, a study of history and decades of observation.
"Any man who judges by the group is a peawit"
OK, let’s see . . . henceforth, I shall look with an un-jaundiced view at democrats, communists, cannibals, illegal aliens, the Ku Klux Clan and the Mafia, just to name a few.
“He who does not recognize his enemy is destined for defeat.”
MountainPete
I was going to ping Chemist Geek to this thread to shill for CAIR, but I see you are already here doing that ...
shill for CAIR
Me? Not hardly.
Bwahahaha. You just don't understand freedom and personal responsibility.
Allahu Fubar Geek!!!
(As another child is blown up, another head is cut off, another woman is stoned to death, and on and on in the Muhammadan Jihadi Expansionist War which you shill for.)
In a war against such killers, it is the proverbial "Them or Us." Islamic fascists are not crazy — however crazy they sound — but evil, as their evil work confirms. We do not need more lectures about the impossibility of winning a postmodern conflict, about al Qaeda's not following the laws of Clausewitz or being immune to our way of war. In fact, we can and have defeated them. Keep doing that and the "hearts and minds" of others in the region, whom we are already helping, will mysteriously prove more open to dialogue.
You'd rather try to destroy the hearts and minds of others in the region, proving the Islamic extremists correct, and drive them into al Qaeda's army.
VDH BUMP!
Ping
You're probably a Muslim yourself. I hope so, because if you're not, you're a lower sub-human than they are. Do you people call them "Dhimis"? Is that the right word?
Made any babies drink urine this week? Or do you content yourself by shilling for them at every opportunity?
Get the feeling Dr. Hanson is talking about you? You know, the people who would make peace with the barbarians who want to kill us?
You're a despicable human being and not worthy of American citizenship.
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.