U.S. military officers taught that Islam is the enemy

WASHINGTON - A course for U.S. military officers has been teaching that America's enemy is Islam in general, not just terrorists, and suggested that the country might ultimately have to obliterate the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina without regard for civilian deaths, following World War II precedents of the nuclear attack on Hiroshima or the allied firebombing of Dresden.

The Pentagon suspended the course in late April when a student objected to the material. The FBI also changed some agent training last year after discovering that it, too, was critical of Islam.

This appears to be a military post-grad school for — I’m guessing — field grade officers who are considered candidates for a staff position in a Joint Service command. I checked the schools website and it doesn’t say what the student selection criteria are.
What we likely have here is a kool-aid drinking major/O-4 who is politically connected. Dimed the school & professor to his mentor, likely a senator or a very senior general.

I’m not sure what purpose it serves to suspend the professor. SOMEBODY approved the course he was teaching. This is like suspending the Sanford (Florida) police chief over the Trayvon-shooting. It’s vindictive.

This is an incredibly insightful post that shows some real knowledge of the inner workings of the military. KUDO'S and thanks for sharing.

“The best way to destroy a subject is to make it mandatory.”

Actually, I agree with this “Islam is not the enemy” policy, but for odd reasons.

Conventional military doctrine is at its best when it is “faceless”, that is, “red vs. blue”, or as some wit put it, “In war, the enemy always attacks from the top and the right, with the *defenders* on the bottom and the left.”

Note that the vast bulk of such training assumes that the “good guys” are fighting in the defense, not in the attack.

Cultural difference are for unconventional warfare training, where soldiers have to learn how to rub elbows with “the greasy natives”, eat weird food, not use local deities as boot scrapers, that sort of nonsense, which is essential to their doing their job.

And it is here, too, that institutional knowledge, informally from other soldiers, as well as non-military authorized book reading come in real handy, as they are devoid of p.c.b.s., and call a Wahhabi a Wahhabi, and worse.

Likewise, soldiers have very long memories about who and what they encounter. Privates can have p.c.b.s. slung at them all day by civilians or bored 2LTs who have been ordered to give p.c.b.s. classes; but when their E7 tells them who is doing what to who and why, he is the one they both believe and invest in.

And they will faithfully pass on *that* knowledge once they become E7s as well.

A great example of this institutional knowledge is how long and how bitterly the Army remembered the treachery of the Democrat controlled congress at the end of the Vietnam war. How it betrayed their allies and friends.

This meant that when they were tasked to rebuild the Iraqi military, they went at it with a singular purpose, that being that it would not matter if and when congress again betrayed the Iraqis. They would have enough knowledge and training to succeed on their own.

The bottom line to all of this is that conventional forces need to not personalize their training. It shouldn’t matter to them if they are fighting Swedes one day and Somalis the next. They treat all fairly and based on how the enemy behaves.

Unconventional forces, on the other hand, take care of business their own way, including their less than doctrinal knowledge base. If they need information, they get information. They don’t wait until it is given to them.

The Truth About Islam

The history of Islam's practitioners speaks for itself. Islam, by the very nature of its own doctrine, history and by the actions of its followers has shown itself to be the existential enemy of Western civilization. Dr. Andrew Bostom's The Legacy of Jihad: Islamic Holy War and the Fate of Non-Muslims provides insight into the Islamic mindset and what its ascendancy might mean for the rest of us:

Lee Harris' outstanding work, The Suicide of Reason: Radical Islam's Threat to the West explains why and how the West's days may be numbered. We are our own worst enemy unless we face up to the hard choices necessary to remain free and prosperous.

If anyone is still having trouble wrapping their minds around the fact that Western civilization does in fact have mortal and existential enemies, take a quick turn through Lee Harris' Civilization and Its Enemies

Let us also dispense with the idea that Islam is a religion. Islam is not so much a religion as it is a supremacist, totalitarian political ideology, a destructive and murderous meme impervious to moderation or change, and with a narrowly circumscribed set of rituals that define every aspect of its followers’ lives. As for 'tolerance', here's a quote from the Muslim Brotherhood and their mission in the U.S, calling for...

"...a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions."

Speaking to the “Islam is a religion of peace," assertion that we hear from Muslims and ignorant (yes, ignorant) Westerners, when Muslims assert that Islam is a “religion of peace” they are not engaging in al taqqiya, they are actually making an assertion in good faith.

The problem lies in the fact that Islam has, from the Western point of view, a defective concept of peace. In semitic languages like Arabic, the consonants are the “root” of the word: islam = submission, and salam = peace have the same root, slm.

The only concept of peace in Islamic jurisprudence is the peace between the conqueror and the conquered, between master and slave. There is no concept of a negotiated peace between nations in Islamic law (note that law is the defining property of Islam—their clerics are jurists, schools of Qu’ranic interpretation are called fiqh, a legalistic term)—Muslims may negotiate a “hudna” or armistice of limited duration with non-Muslim, but not a definitive enduring peace.

In that regard, Islam was, is and will be a serial murderer of entire cultures and peoples. This is precisely what Islam has done throughout its entire 1400 year history. This is what it has done whenever it has finally gotten the upper hand in whatever culture it has infiltrated. This is what has been inextricably interwoven into the DNA of its operating system. Those whom Islam does not destroy, it enslaves, diminishes and impoverishes. Islam strives for the conversion, enslavement or death of all who do not conform to its sadistic and cruel vision of Mankind. Islam cannot be ‘reformed’ in the light of our Western values of humanity and freedom. Were that so, it would no longer be Islam. For its psychopathic and cruel misogyny alone, Islam is an abomination and worthy only of extinction.

Strictly speaking, Jihad is the enemy. RIP is pretty close to being in this category, since those practicing RIP are obligated to pay tribute to and cower from the RIP authorities.

I prefer smashing Jihad.

Finally, to help clarify (@v@) => RIP theology is Jihadist ... just read its book(s).

FYI, all religions are defined by those devoted to interpretation of its theology or meaning. It is expected there is some variation in theology between members of a religion. However, foundational theology differences make it a different religion. Most _members_ of a religion do not live it's theology; therefore, they do not actually believe in the religion, since actual believe results in behavior.

Intellectual belief is theology; actual belief as exhibited by action, is doctrine.

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.