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

To: Natty Bumppo@frontier.net

It's not really clear whether the Muslims have ever had a real civilization, or have merely conquered various other civilizations and built on them until they were destroyed by the essential barbarity of Islam.

But you don't need a civilization to conquer and destroy. The Arabs have been very good at that.

No, they won't defeat anyone by employing military force. But they will defeat them by exploiting their weakness and decadence.

I don't see demographic growth is weakening the Muslims. Far from it. Demographic shrinkage is weakening Europe and Japan, and to some extent the U.S. These countries are forced to take in Muslim immigrants or, in the case of Japan, to export more and more of their industrial production to other countries.

The Huns were not civilized or militarily sophisticated, but the overran the Roman Empire. The Mongols overran most of the world, and they were not exactly civilized either.

This article gives food for thought, but it's not persuasive.


7 posted on 09/04/2005 8:34:39 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: Cicero

Kind of like the Borg?


8 posted on 09/04/2005 8:36:03 PM PDT by neodad (Rule Number 1: Be Armed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero
"It's not really clear whether the Muslims have ever had a real civilization, or have merely conquered various other civilizations and built on them until they were destroyed by the essential barbarity of Islam.

But you don't need a civilization to conquer and destroy. The Arabs have been very good at that.

No, they won't defeat anyone by employing military force. But they will defeat them by exploiting their weakness and decadence.

I don't see demographic growth is weakening the Muslims. Far from it. Demographic shrinkage is weakening Europe and Japan, and to some extent the U.S. These countries are forced to take in Muslim immigrants or, in the case of Japan, to export more and more of their industrial production to other countries.

The Huns were not civilized or militarily sophisticated, but the overran the Roman Empire. The Mongols overran most of the world, and they were not exactly civilized either.

This article gives food for thought, but it's not persuasive."

I agree. It is an interesting and cogent article but it goes too far. Like it or not this is, at its base, a religious / cultural war. Cicero's comments are spot on.

32 posted on 09/04/2005 9:24:40 PM PDT by bluetone006 (Peace - or I guess war if given no other option)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero
The Huns and Mongols were militarily very efficient for their respective times. The Huns, particularly, had an extra advantage; the ongoing (for centuries) decay of Rome and Roman culture.

The Arabs, well -- ...

''I want to thank my fellow citizens and the Prime Minister who placed such confidence in me. I just did my duty. Of course, it helps if one can arrange to fight Arabs.'' -- General Moshe Dayan, at his commendation after the Yom Kippur and ''6 Days'' wars.

That about says it all, afaic. The Arabs are pffft; the danger is Islam, particularly Wahabbism. There are NO means of combating radical Islam w/in even a remotely democratic and reasonably tolerant society.

Therefore, and I should suggest right quickly, the West will have to make a decision; expulsion, ostracism if you like, or self-extinction. It will be interesting to see which path the West finally takes.

For the decision WILL be final, whether correct or not.

37 posted on 09/04/2005 10:01:39 PM PDT by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero

In terms of economics alone, it seems to me that if a true alternative to Arab oil is introduced, they are 100% screwed. Warfare is another matter, of course.


61 posted on 10/24/2005 5:41:57 PM PDT by ovrtaxt (You nonconformists are all the same.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero
"This article gives food for thought, but it's not persuasive."

This article is BS.

Only in a society slightly availed of knowledge would a 'youth bulge' create a movement against the established order (Cuba, in the late fifties, Iran under the Shah). In Arab culture the excess young are readily programmed to hate a convenient outsider and to act precisely as their managers direct (China in the late sixties). In today's world money talks and money means any damn weapon you want to add to the inventory (Iran today).

"Arab culture" does not exist, "culture" applies to civilized society, once it applied to Iran, once to Iraq, once to Egypt, and it is a fond memory in france.

"Arab" means ignorant nomad, fanatic xenophobe, and happy fascist. "Arab" means the tribes set in power by bad treaties and by western diplomats themselves ignorant of the fact that the 20th century would be somewhat different than the 18th and 19th.

"Islam" is a gutter belief system geared to such neer-do-well culture and historically foisted on others by the sword.

What in hell makes anyone think that these basic truths might have changed because of ...........what?

67 posted on 10/24/2005 6:32:36 PM PDT by norton (This is not about the DIA or the CIA. This is about CYA...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero

The Vikings were not a high civilization, either. OK, they got around in their longboats. But they were fierce and they wreaked havoc on Britain, which was a peaceful and ordered civilization. The veneer of civilization is thin and easily shattered; chaos merely destroys it -- that part is easy.


79 posted on 10/25/2005 6:34:53 AM PDT by bboop (Facts are your friend.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero; F14 Pilot; freedom44
It's not really clear whether the Muslims have ever had a real civilization, or have merely conquered various other civilizations and built on them until they were destroyed by the essential barbarity of Islam.

Case in point: Iran.

90 posted on 11/14/2005 11:21:42 PM PST by Clemenza (Save My Life I'm Going Down for the Last Time)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

To: Cicero
This article gives food for thought, but it's not persuasive.

I agree. Containment worked primarily because when all is said and done the Soviets were not suicidal. A strong threat could keep them at bay. Suicide murderers are not intimidated by threats of death. We have little to fear from any Arab government, unless that government allows it's country to be used as a base of operations for terrorist operations against the US. You can't build a wall around the US and the only way to make headway against these terrorists is to take the fight to them.

102 posted on 11/15/2005 4:01:39 AM PST by Casloy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies ]

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