Saturday, January 27, 2007

Europe, the West and Islam. Have we already surrendered?

Der Spiegel has excerpts of a new book by Henryk M. Broder entitled "Hurray! We're capitulating."

Today everything has changed, except the resolve not to hurt the feelings of Muslims. The issue today no longer revolves around a group of Berlin pupils with an "immigration background," but around 1.3 billion Muslims worldwide --many of whom are thin-skinned and unpredictable. At issue is freedom of opinion, one of the central tenets of the Enlightenment and democracy. And whether respect, consideration and tolerance are the right approach to dealing with cultures that, for their part, behave without respect, consideration or tolerance when it comes to anything they view as decadent, provocative and unworthy -- from women in short skirts to cartoons they deem provocative without even having seen them.

...Objectively speaking, the cartoon controversy was a tempest in a teacup. But subjectively it was a show of strength and, in the context of the "clash of civilizations," a dress rehearsal for the real thing. The Muslims demonstrated how quickly and effectively they can mobilize the masses, and the free West showed that it has nothing to counter the offensive -- nothing but fear, cowardice and an overriding concern about the balance of trade. Now the Islamists know that they are dealing with a paper tiger whose roar is nothing but a tape recording.

..."Nowadays acts of terrorism are not committed for their own sake, but in the name of an ideology one could call Nazi-Islamism," Romanian-American author Norman Manea told the German daily Die Welt in March 2004. The only difference, in Manea's view, is "that this ideology invokes a religion, whereas the Nazis were mythical without being religious." Manea believes that what he calls a "World War III" has already begun. "The Europeans are putting off the recognition -- as they did in the 1930s -- of the tremendous tragedy that awaits them and that has, in fact, already arrived."

Friday, January 26, 2007

The second holocaust.

Newt Gingrich is not the only one to speak bluntly about the seriousness of our present-day threats:

"Israel is in the greatest danger it has been in since 1967. Prior to '67, many wondered if Israel would survive. After '67, Israel seemed military dominant, despite the '73 war. I would say we are (now) back to question of survival."

... the United States could "lose two or three cities to nuclear weapons, or more than a million to biological weapons." such a scenario, "freedom as we know it will disappear, and we will become a much grimmer, much more militarized, dictatorial society."

"Three nuclear weapons are a second Holocaust...People are greatly underestimating how dangerous the world is becoming. I'll repeat it, three nuclear weapons are a second Holocaust. Our enemies are quite explicit in their desire to destroy us. They say it publicly? We are sleepwalking through this process as though it's only a problem of communication."

"Our enemies are fully as determined as Nazi Germany, and more determined than the Soviets. Our enemies will kill us the first chance they get. There is no rational ability to deny that fact. It's very clear that the problems are larger and more immediate than the political systems in Israel or the US are currently capable of dealing with."

..."citizens who do not wake up every morning and think about the
possible catastrophic civilian casualties are deluding themselves."

Benny Morris, a famous Israeli intellectual, provides us with a scenario:
The second holocaust will be quite different. One bright morning, in five or 10 years, perhaps during a regional crisis, perhaps out of the blue, a day or a year or five years after Iran's acquisition of the Bomb, the mullahs in Qom will convene in secret session, under a portrait of the steely-eyed Ayatollah Khomeini, and give President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, by then in his second or third term, the go-ahead.
The orders will go out and the Shihab III and IV missiles will take off for Tel Aviv, Beersheba, Haifa and Jerusalem, and probably some military sites, including Israel's half dozen air and (reported) nuclear missile bases. Some of the Shihabs will be nuclear-tipped, perhaps even with multiple warheads. Others will be dupes, packed merely with biological or chemical agents, or old newspapers, to draw off or confuse Israel's anti-missile batteries and Home Front Command units. With a country the size and shape of Israel (an elongated 20,000 square kilometers), probably four or five hits will suffice: No more Israel.

Of gay sheep, slaughtered sheep, and abortion: The Belgian demographic advance story and the Oregon technological advance story.

Mark Steyn provides humor to a not-so-funny debate:

The first story is about the 25,000 sheep in Brussels that a few days ago found themselves pointed toward Mecca and then slit through the throat and bled to death. Muslims do this to celebrate Eid al-Adha, which commemorates Abraham's willingness to sacrifice his son to God and God's willingness to settle for a ram in lieu. The Belgian Muslim population has grown so fast that there aren't enough places in the city to perform the ritual sacrifice, and come Eid it's like sheep drivetime at every Brussels slaughterhouse, with rams backed up ram-to-ram as far as the eye can see. As reported by the Journal, Mohamed Mimoun grabbed his sheep, took a number and realized he was in for a two-hour wait. Even worse, en route to the slaughterhouse, he was stopped by a cop and fined for having the sheep in the trunk of his Toyota. By law, the sheep is supposed to ride in the rear passenger seats. Baa, baa, back seat.

On which note, let us turn to the gay sheep. Apparently, researchers at Oregon Health and Science University and Oregon State University have been experimenting with ovine hormonal balances in order to persuade homosexual rams of the error of their ways. It seems they've had "considerable success" with injecting hormones into the rams' brains. Suddenly the lads are playing the field and crooning a couple of choruses of "Embrace me, my sweet embraceable ewe."

Read the whole story here, and there's more here.

Thursday, January 25, 2007

Terrorism tracker map.

Check out A global display of terrorism and other suspicious incidents. Thanks to Free Republic.

Monday, January 22, 2007

The decline of the US?

Victor Davis Hanson concludes that

there is real danger from the fallout from Iraq. But it is not that the United States must pack up, in an admission of its new limitations. Rather the daily mayhem and its attendant criticism have tired Americans to the point that the notion of pulling in our horns and letting the world be seems attractive and guilt-free as never before.

Friday, January 19, 2007

The Jihad may be stated as a doctrine of a permanent state of war, not continuous fighting.

To understand the war against Islamist terrorism one must begin to understand the Islamic way of war, its philosophy and doctrine, the meanings of jihad in Islam—and one needs to understand that those meanings are highly varied and utilitarian depending on the source.

With respect to the war against the global jihad and its associated terror groups, individual terrorists, and clandestine adherents, one should ask if there is a unique method or attitude to their approach to war. Is there a philosophy, or treatise such as Clausewitz’s On War that attempts to form their thinking about war? Is there a document that can be reviewed and understood in such a manner that we may begin to think strategically about our opponent. There is one work that stands out from the many.

The Quranic Concept of War, by Brigadier General S. K. Malik of the Pakistani Army provides readers with unequalled insight.
Joseph Myers explores The Quranic Concept of War.

Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Some changes to the war in Iraq.

First, a New Yorker article on Knowing the Enemy.

Second, commentary by a military man: A Strategy for the Long War.

Here's a quote: was the best thing I've read on the kinds of changes we need to bring to the war. It is that, but let me say why I think so, and elaborate on some of the good concepts at work in the article.
There are three concepts to understand. The first is "information warfare." The second is David Kilcullen's concept of "Disaggregation," which the article asserts may be the grand strategy we need for the Long War, the equivalent of Containment in the Cold War. The third is consequences: the need for sticks as well as carrots.

Tuesday, January 16, 2007

A BBC undercover production.

Jihad preaching in British mosques: thanks to Jihad Watch.

Part 1

Part 2

Part 3

UPDATE: YouTube pulled the video, but you can see it all at

In today's leisured world it is apparently better to be inactively perfect than actively good.

Victor Davis Hanson: any measure of fairness, Saddam's fate was singular in the annals of recent murderous dictators. The world seems to forget that usually such killers are either given statues, villas in exile, or, even when tried, rarely convicted and punished.

The mass-murdering Joseph Stalin and Chairman Mao together killed off nearly 100 million people. Yet both died in their sleep. They are still heroes to many in Russia and China.

Worse yet, examine the fates of more recent killers. Jean-Bedel Bokassa, the savage "cannibal" president of the Central African Republic, was given sanctuary by the now hypercritical France. He was even on friendly, gift-exchanging terms with then French President Valery Giscard d'Estaing.

...Why, then, blame the nascent democracy in Iraq--and the United States--for his conviction, however clumsy and crass the execution? ... there is an even more disturbing paradox--the very moral contradictions of contemporary international justice itself. In today's leisured world it is apparently better to be inactively perfect than actively good.

Read it in RealClearPolitics.