[kenmore]

And for those who don't think the terrorist groups are alive and well in both Canada and the US and plotting daily. have a look at this.
http://www.collive.com/show_news.rtx?id=8982

[BartSimpson]

Thanos Thanos:

The Wikileaks incident clearly showed that the Muslims are continually at odds with each other.

Nothing I didn't already know. But Wikileaks isn't observing that the common interest of attacking the West frequently causes the tribes and the factions within Islam to set aside their issues with each other.

Thanos Thanos:

This alone completely deflates any possibility of a resurrected imperial caliphate ever coming into existence again.

No, it doesn't. Because for some they want a Caliphate as a symbol of greatness and pride. Back in the 1960's we saw a grasp at a pan-Islamic union involving Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Turkey, Jordan, Sudan, Libya, and Algiers and while the effort sputtered for a number of reasons the effort clearly underlines the desire of many Muslims for a unified Ummah.

Thanos Thanos:

It also rips away any justification the 'eternal war between cultures' argument might have ever wrongly had attached to it. Consequently the best course of action remains vigilant police and civilian/military intelligence operations against individual terrorists and groups, and sanctions/containment of bad regimes like Iran.

Which ignores the 'why' in the equation.

Thanos Thanos:

Aside from leaving the Muslims completely alone, up to and including never engaging in any petroleum-based commerce with them ever again, what is the solution? Can there even ever be a solution at all? Yes, there will always be certain Muslims that hate us and will attack us, even if we were able or desirous to cut off ever conceivable form of contact we have with them. And no, this does not justify our doing more ham-fisted, useless, and irrelevant blundering around with our entire armies in their part of the world. The Western world is never ever going to be so dominated by the Christian churchs that such war can be made into a culture-spanning religious crusade.

That latter point is an equally dangerous assumption. Given the right circumstances religious extremists could take power in Europe or North America. While it may seem unlikely right now it is still something to consider with vigilance.

Thanos Thanos:

And I'd genuinely like to see what would happen politically in the United States to whatever politician who said that they had to bring back the military draft and probably quadruple the national debt in order to create the resources that would be required to supply the boots on the ground necessary to first overwhelmingly dominate and then comprehensively transform the background culture of the entire Muslim world.

Sometimes, in the end, one has to accept the sad reality that not ever problem or crisis even has a solution for it (e.g. Israeli Jews vs Palestinian Arabs). Any direct hot war against Communism would have resulted in a literal apocalyptic ending of the entire world. Continued conflict with the Muslim world could someday end up with the same outcome, especially if other nations come to believe that the quasi-imperial recklessness of the anti-Muslim crusaders is more of a threat to them than the Muslims are and end up joining in against 'our' side; LOL, try screaming something as existentially ridiculous as 'war on terror! war on terror!' at the Russians or Chinese as a reason to start poking around in their backyards and see what kind of reaction you get from them. Perhaps the best thing to do for a while would be to quit listening at all to those, especially the ones among 'us', who are cheerleading so energetically for Armaggedon to happen sooner rather than later. Or, hopefully, never.

Again, we're just a few nuked cities away from an Armageddon against the Muslims.

*If Iran nukes Tel Aviv (a very high probability, by the way) then Israel will nuke about 200 Muslim cities across the Middle East. They don't exactly make that policy a secret as it's their version of MAD.

*If Muslim terror groups nuke a few cities in Europe the probability of a Muslim expulsion from Europe is inevitable. The probability of a European follow-up by nuking Muslim cities is about even money.

*If US cities get nuked the estimation is that whoever the sitting President is will do almost nothing about it and then the President who follows will likely enact the Israeli MAD policy. Perhaps even with Israeli complicity.

All three of those * points have been war gamed at length by better people than myself and I'm pretty comfortable with the estimations.

What I wish we would do is avoid these scenarios by focusing on evangelizing the Muslim world away from fundamentalist Islam. I have no idea how to do that. But if we could get more of the Muslim world to look like, say, Malaysia instead of Saudi Arabia and Iran then we'd have a real shot at a lasting peace.

But what we are doing right now is utterly avoiding that option because it's politically incorrect to even consider.

That leaves us looking at those bullet points.

[Zipperfish]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

But where the solution to Communist aggression was to end Communism, the lasting solution to Islamic aggression is to end Islam as a philosophy.

And how do you propose to end American aggression?

[kenmore]

Quote "Islam is not a religion, nor is it a cult. In its fullest form, it is a complete, total, 100% system of life.

Islam has religious, legal, political, economic, social, and military
components. The religious component is a beard for all of the other
components.

Islamization begins when there are sufficient Muslims in a country to
agitate for their religious privileges.

When politically correct, tolerant, and culturally diverse societies
agree to Muslim demands for their religious privileges, some of the
other components tend to creep in as well."

[BartSimpson]

Zipperfish Zipperfish:

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

But where the solution to Communist aggression was to end Communism, the lasting solution to Islamic aggression is to end Islam as a philosophy.

And how do you propose to end American aggression?

How do you propose to end Canadian passive aggression?

[Thanos]

A religious-based tyranny could easily erupt some day in the United States. But Europe? Not so much. If anything resulted from some sort of attack on Europe it'd be a massive return of nationalistic fascism. I don't doubt that the Euros, who have been and always will be a bunch of dangerous killers throughout most of their history no matter how much they try to hide it today, would probably exterminate all the Muslims in their midst in the wake of such an attack. Ditto in the US, except the preachers in charge would also be happily liquidating all the homosexuals, liberals, and atheists they could catch. Both continents would also probably erupt into massive civil war as those who don't want to bow down so easily to such lunatics would assuredly fight back.

Aside from the initial nuclear destruction of a lot of Muslim cities (which would be more than sufficient to irretrievably destroy most of those countries altogether) odds are that Europe and North America wouldn't have too much time or interest in the Islamic part of the world, at least not in the short term. They'd all be far too busy taking out their ridicuous vengeance out on their own culturally rebellious co-citizens to gather the resources to go a-warrin' overseas any more.

[martin14]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

My comparison is more apples and apples.

It is true that most people in Communist countries were not our enemies. Likewise I believe that most people in many Islamic countries are not our enemies. (Read: most people in some Islamic countries ARE our enemies)

But where the solution to Communist aggression was to end Communism, the lasting solution to Islamic aggression is to end Islam as a philosophy.

One big difference is the level of actual belief between the two.

My time in Slovakia taught me many mid and higher level Communists didnt
fervently believe in the system they used.

I think there are many more true believers in Islam.

[CDN_PATRIOT]

Lemmy Lemmy:

"If we find a guy trying to board a plane with C4 in his underwear, then a crowded mosque in the West Bank eats a cruise missile. If a plane blows up over the Atlantic, then a bomb goes off in a crowded Saudi shopping mall. If a package of explosives is found on a cargo plane in Yemen, then a quiet Yemeni neighbourhood gets demolished." No more counter terrorism. You kill one of us, we kill 10,000 of you. Merry Christmas, fuckers.

While this might seem like poetic justice, and a sure fire way to deal with the terrorists using the 'fight fire with fire' model, let me say this:

If our manner of thinking on retaliation towards the terrorists shifted to the 'fight fire with fire' model, we would become that which we hate. Our condemnation of the terrorists would be worthless, and we would also throw out our own morality and honour by killing civilians in cold blood. We would be the evil that we fight so hard against on a daily basis to protect our own rights and freedoms.

-J.