Can the West defeat the Islamist threat? Here are ten reasons why not

Times Online ^ | September 09, 2006 | David Selbourne

[Iris7]

LET US SUPPOSE, for the sake of argument, that the war declared by al-Qaeda and other Islamists is under way. Let us further suppose that thousands of “terrorist” attacks carried out in Islam’s name during the past decades form part of this war; and that conflicts that have spread to 50 countries and more, taking the lives of millions — including in inter-Muslim blood-shedding — are the outcome of what Osama bin Laden has called “conducting jihad for the sake of Allah”.

If such war is under way, there are ten good reasons why, as things stand, Islam will not be defeated in it.

1) The first is the extent of political division in the non-Muslim world about what is afoot. Some reject outright that there is a war at all; others agree with the assertion by the US President that “the war we fight is the decisive ideological struggle of the 21st century”. Divided counsels have also dictated everything from “dialogue” to the use of nuclear weapons, and from reliance on “public diplomacy” to “taking out Islamic sites”, Mecca included. Adding to this incoherence has been the gulf between those bristling to take the fight to the “terrorist” and those who would impede such a fight, whether from domestic civil libertarian concerns or from rivalrous geopolitical calculation.

[Iris7]

This Selbourne fellow writing is a Brit. The situation over there is really quite bad. "Theodore Dalrymple" writes good stuff on it. If you haven't read him you are in for a treat.A tid-bit

There are a lot of very poor Americans around these days. I still meet many of the old breed. The "old breed" is of the heart and the mind not in where you were born or who your father and mother were. You sound like one of the old breed yourself.

Yes, we will win. I simply prefer small timely wars to huge brutal kill fests. Unless we are darned lucky we are headed for the second sort of war.

[Iris7]

I most actively and completely agree with you.

It could be that the President will surprise us yet. There are possibilities.

In any case there is a huge sewer to clean out.

[stainlessbanner]

bttt

[unsycophant]

According to his bio, he is British but lives in Italy, and in past has advised David Willetts, the shadow works and pensions secretary, on future Tory strategy. He claimed publishers would not publish his book because it didn't jibe with their views of Islam.

For some reason, Mr. Selbourne seems to believe that the Unites States is solely responsible for identifying and solving the Islamist problem, yet he clearly understands it is a global issue that affects many.

[Iris7]

Been thinking about Robert Edward Lee some these days. A gentleman indeed.

Still prefer Bedford Forrest most of the time!

[stainlessbanner]

The great leaders of the South are always close at heart, my friend.

On that note, did you see author Burke Davis just died? I'm sure you have read a few of his books.

Thanks for posting the 10-reasons thread, many valid points have been made here.

[Iris7]

Interesting.

The "he is British but lives in Italy" business makes me wonder if we are looking at someone at least a bit on the cultural Leftist side? A little bit of the would be elite snob? A bit petulant when crossed? Annoyed with the vulgar? And then perhaps he sees the American cultural left as vulgar? Well, if he does, he is dead right!!

Perhaps a bit of jealousy here (heh, heh). Sure would like to see the Basilica of San Vitale in Ravenna.

[unsycophant]

Controversy comes naturally to Selbourne, a veteran of ideological and cultural wars. He used to teach at Ruskin College, Oxford, the trade union college, and was assumed to be a man of the left until he began writing about the breakdown of civil society and morality in essays and books such as The Principle of Duty.

He is wary of libertarianism and the cult of the individual and considers Milton Friedman, apostle of the free market, to be the “evil genius of our age”. With such views, he was always going to be at odds with the Thatcherite right. Yet his arguments against loosening the bonds of family and community led him to be labelled a reactionary sell-out by the post-Sixties left.

Selbourne’s holiday home in Italy became his refuge and, eventually, his permanent base: “I needed a cordon sanitaire between me and the seething world of competitive English intellectuals.” From there he remains engaged in the war of ideas in the English-speaking world, eagerly scanning British and American newspapers and magazines on the internet and fighting every ideological battle as if the barbarians were at his gate.

“I consider myself to be highly progressive,” he says with a touch of indignation and weariness. “I consider it highly progressive to be against fascism and there are elements of Islamic society which are fascist. People are cowed, and it has to be resisted.”


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2092-1631924,00.html

[Iris7]

I missed the news about Mr. Davis. I recollect him from the days I read about Thomas Jonathan Jackson. I believe I still have my copy of "They Called Him Stonewall". An accurate and accessible piece of work.

Just checked, can't find it, but I see my old copy of Robertson's "Stonewall Jackson" and Tanner's semi-technical story of the the first half of '62. First book I bought on Jackson, was astounded to see one truly remarkable piece of manuever after the other. Of course the General would agree that genius is 99% perspiration. But, boy, was he ever talented. Was going to do a real map study on those months one of these days but never did get get around to it. Ah, retirement looms!

Nice to hear from you, and do pray you and yours are doing well.

[Iris7]

Thanks again.

Sort of a Byronesque Progressive Tory would be if he were from Doctor Johnson's era and hostile to Whiggish industrialization. (Ain't that a hoot of a metaphor?) Likely a bit dissolute in his younger days and feeling guilty about it. Probably has some Latin. (Wish I did.) Italian probably quite good but with an accent. Middling French. Poor mathematics, maybe?

Now I'm really far out on an imaginary limb!!

That's it, signing off. Goodnight.

[Lewite]

A good article on Islime can be found at:

yourarmstoisrael.org
select "sermon notes"
pull up "The Final End Time Beast"
Print and save for future reference.

[PGalt]

Outstanding. Thanks for posting.

[fml]

I really believe the only force powerful enough to defeat the corrosive power of Islam is Christianity.

I think so too

In the end, the best man will win. Will it be Mohammed...or Jesus? (purely rhetorical question so don't flame.)

The man that is the son of God would be my pick.

[osideplanner]

Thanx for the info

[A. Pole]

The seventh reason lies in the moral poverty of the West’s, and especially America’s, own value system. Doctrines of market freedom, free choice and competition — or “freedom ’n’ liberty” — are no match for the ethics of Islam and Sharia, like them or not. Yet in the “battle for hearts and minds” the US First Cavalry Division saw fit to set up “Operation Adam Smith” in Iraq to teach marketing skills, among other things, to local entrepreneurs. There can be no victory here. Or, as Sheikh Mohammed al-Tabatabi told thousands of worshippers in Baghdad in May 2003: “The West calls for freedom and liberty. Islam rejects such liberty. True liberty is obedience to Allah.”

Western civilization became the leader not because of "gay pride parades" but thanks to the Christian religion. And Muslims do not need to learn marketing, they are quite good at that already.

[F.J. Mitchell]

"Chuckle". Just in case some here haven't heard of Arnold's latest slip of the lip, you need to keep your asbestos suit handy.

[Iris7]

I don't agree with much that Sherbourne has written and personally believe we can resolve this thing without mass slaughter. I mean we can do this with death at the retail and not have to go to the wholesale level.

Looking at your question "You mean the one that teaches adherents that lying to any non-muslim is fine so long as it serves Islam's general purpose? You mean the belief system that protects and assists mass murderers in the name of their bloodlusting god, allah?", personally I think this problem can be dealt with. Again, I am talking death at the retail level, hundreds of thousands and not hundreds of millions.

The big problem with defusing the coming major killing is that Leftists here in the USA intend to refuse us the option of following the current plan, which, in my opinion, is well conceived and executing nicely. In this sense the problem we have is not so much nihilist kill crazy moslems as it is a problem with the American Left.

[Iris7]

The American Left is the problem here. They insist that we must surrender and run away immediately. This will inevitably lead to a major war, a war avoidable if those creatures would just knock it off.

Most of those people are fools and some of them are extremely evil people.

"Our leaders", as you put it, want to avoid not getting re-elected. The same thing happened when Hitler invaded the Rhineland. Chamberlain was immensely popular. Kept us out of war, don't you know. Winston Churchill saw what this policy was to bring. He tried to smarten up the idiots. They never really did smarten up. They just got scared of the Germans.

[MHGinTN]

On that you have 100% agreement from me ... I've witnessed the leftist liberal politicians and their lying, anti-American, societal engineering ways for decades. And I know damn well their planb to talk the terrorist murderers to death is their typical foolishness that we cannot afford if we don't accept tens of thousands of American citizens slaughtered by terrorists during the democrats' 'diplomacy dance'. Not only do the leftist liberals not understand the nature of the enemy, they refuse to learn. THAT is a deadly combination America is about to discover aids and abets an insidious enemy.

[dcwusmc]

PING