I think that's true. It's like in a criminal conspiracy case: as soon as they take steps toward the commission of the crime (getting the components for explosives, drawing up a detailed map, etc.) they must be stopped by force. They've already started their "course of action": you don't have to wait until they actually complete it.
"The only way to protect the innocents is to make him incapable of harming them."
Again correct. Your whole strategic plan is to make the aggressors themselves incapable of action. Target their fighters and crush them to the ground.
"That's why we have prisons for people and war for cultures."
Yes, with this clarification: "culture" is too broad a term. It includes all the humans of a group, and their entire way of life: families, food, music, homes, land, law, literature, etc. etc., the good and the bad, all mixed together. We don't make war on cultures. We make war on something more limited: the aggressors and their military assets.
"The core instructions are in the Decalogue: thou shalt commit no murder. That does not mean that, if provoked or threatened, you may not kill."
That's also true. The absolute prohibition is: you do not, in a directly intended manner, slay noncombatants or--- another way to put it --- those who are not deliberate accomplices in acts of aggression. The Bible calls this "shedding innocent blood" and the Lord declares that He "hates" this, and says it is an "abomination to My soul". Here in this literal Bible translation (Link) He says it a dozen-plus times. God apparently thinks this point requires ongoing and insistent reinforcement. You can see why.
And that's the Old Testament. This gets even stronger in the New Testament.
"Is it moral to eradicate a culture that attacks you?...In fact, it is immoral not to eradicate them."
Once again, you are required to use physical force, even lethal force, to stop a determined physical aggressor. As for an aggressor culture, it's more complex. If the culture has hell-bent features, you can attack those features via other means, for example by legal suppression of its financers and enablers, by argument, education and media campaigns, by exposing its elements of ugliness, evil, and futility, or by appealing to conversion to a better standard of love and reason.
That goes for toxic elements of our own culture, too; not to digress, but we are among the world's major cultural exporters of filth, e.g. sodomy, pornography, and child-murder.
I hate the despotic and Christ-defying system that is fully-developed politically-empowered Islam.
As for Muslim people: I think God wants us to treat them discerningly as fellow human beings. Some are perpetrators, most are victims.
Yes, with this clarification: "culture" is too broad a term. It includes all the humans of a group, and their entire way of life: families, food, music, homes, land, law, literature, etc. etc., the good and the bad, all mixed together. We don't make war on cultures. We make war on something more limited: the aggressors and their military assets.
The problem with islam is that every moslem is an aggressor. The koran commands it. The only way to end the war is to end islam. the war ends when the last moslem dies.
That's also true. The absolute prohibition is: you do not, in a directly intended manner, slay noncombatants or--- another way to put it --- those who are not deliberate accomplices in acts of aggression.
Every moslem supports islam. Every moslem supports jihad. They must if they are to follow the koran.
The Bible calls this "shedding innocent blood" and the Lord declares that He "hates" this, and says it is an "abomination to My soul".
Is a person who supports the political/religious system that is designed and commanded to fight against, slave and kill all people's not under that system innocent? I don't think so.
"Is it moral to eradicate a culture that attacks you?...In fact, it is immoral not to eradicate them."
Once again, you are required to use physical force, even lethal force, to stop a determined physical aggressor. As for an aggressor culture, it's more complex. If the culture has hell-bent features, you can attack those features via other means, for example by legal suppression of its financers and enablers, by argument, education and media campaigns, by exposing its elements of ugliness, evil, and futility, or by appealing to conversion to a better standard of love and reason.
This is true. After pacification of the more aggressive components you can eradicate the culture by a long program of supression and conversion. That is, every copy of the koran must be destroyed, every mosque must be razed, no moslem should be allowed to practice islam. All should be converted to Christianity and once their children or grandchildren are proven to have no knowledge of the koran then when that first generation of converts dies off, the war will be over. Unfortunately a moslem can never be trusted even if he says he converted since islam allows them, nay commands them, to lie if they can gain advantage from it.
The war ends with the death of the last moslem.