Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

The Taliban: (Not Just) America’s Enemy

I subscribe to the newsletter from Brigitte Gabriel’s “ACT! for America” foundation*. Miss Gabriel is Lebanese by birth, but now is an American citizen I believe. She’s a Maronite Christian and strongly pro-Israel as well as pro-America (and the other relatively free countries).

The source for this piece is the newsletter, which I received yesterday as a private e-mail.  Therefore I quote it in full (although it’s addressed to Americans and therefore specifies the problems and atrocities here),  and I haven’t covered over the article’s URL’s.  The boldfaced type is my punching up of the obvious.  :>)

 

The Taliban: America’s Enemy
By Brigitte Gabriel

The Taliban have recently published the autumn edition of their magazine, Azan.

This is the fourth issue of the magazine and is significant in that it calls for Muslims in the West to launch attacks at home or fight in foreign battlefields, urging recruits to even leave behind their children or elderly parents (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/10503925/Taliban-magazine-urges-jihad-and-profiles-the-Honda-125.html)

Surely such calls to Jihad are nothing new, so why is this particular publication important?

Because it has been released just a few days after the Obama administration was quoted saying that “the Taliban are not our enemies and we don’t want to fight them.” (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Peace/2013/11/27/Karzai-Will-Sign-Agreement-with-U-S-Says-Obama-Administration-Claimed-Taliban-Not-Our-Enemy)

Such statements about the Taliban are nothing new from the Obama administration. Vice President Joe Biden told Newsweek magazine the same thing almost exactly two years ago (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/12/vp-biden-says-that-the-taliban-per-se-is-not-our-enemy/).

Not only are these statements from the administration disheartening because our brave troops have been fighting Taliban Jihadis for a decade, they also demonstrate a profound ignorance about Jihadist doctrine.

Jihadist doctrine does not regard nationalities or international borders as significant. Under their doctrine, Jihad is to be waged to make Allah’s law and religion supreme around the entire world. With their latest magazine, the Taliban clearly demonstrate adherence to that doctrine with their call for Muslims in the West to launch attacks at home.

What’s more this is not something new from the Taliban. When they seized power in Afghanistan in 1996, they announced that Afghanistan was to be a launching pad for global Jihad and invited Jihadi fighters to come to their country. Jihadis from all over the Islamic world and even parts of the West and the Pacific Rim heeded that call and gravitated to the new Shariah-ruled outpost established by the Taliban regime.

Among those who relocated to Afghanistan was Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. We know the rest: Al Qaeda launched its attack on America from Afghanistan and the Taliban harbored Al Qaeda from the US when America sought to bring justice down on them.

How anyone can look at these facts and conclude that the Taliban are not our enemy is mind-boggling. The idea that the Taliban want to strictly limit their evil designs to Afghanistan is absurd.

Moreover, the Taliban have in fact been involved in terrorist plots and activity on US soil:

• In May of 2011, six people, including two Imams at a Florida mosque, were indicted for providing material support to none other than the Taliban (http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2011/May/11-nsd-621.html).

• Faisal Shahzad, the Jihadist who attempted to detonate a Vehicle-Born Improvised Explosive Device (VBIED) in New York’s Time Square in May 2010, was trained at a Taliban camp and, according to Attorney General Eric Holder himself, “the Pakistani Taliban was behind the attack…We know they helped facilitate it. We know they probably helped finance it and that he was working at their direction.” (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/LE12Df01.html)

• Najibullah Zazi, an Afghan-American who pled guilty in a plot to bomb the New York City subway in 2009, traveled to Afghanistan to join the Taliban when he was recruited by Al Qaeda to go back to America to attack targets in the US homeland. This shows the continued, close cooperation and collaboration between the Taliban and Al Qaeda (http://www.investigativeproject.org/case/345).

Conclusion

The Taliban are committed Jihadists. As such, they are undoubtedly an enemy of America. They have killed and wounded thousands of US GIs in combat over the past decade and they have, from the time they originally seized power in Afghanistan to today, involved themselves with other Jihadist organizations from around the world. Jihadis do not limit their scope based on political borders; their stated goals are global. To say that the Taliban are not the enemy of the United States is to demonstrate a profound ignorance of the doctrinal basis for the threat from Jihad. When that ignorance comes from the executive branch of the US government, it can only be described as frightening.  [This statement applies just as much to the other Western governments ... and their people.  --J.]

——————————————————————————————-

ACT for America
P.O. Box 12765
Pensacola, FL 32591
www.actforamerica.org

*”ACT” stands for “American Congress for Truth,” which was the original name of Miss Gabriel’s foundation.

ACT’s page about Miss Gabriel describes some of her activities and accomplishments.

There is also a Wikipedia article about Miss Gabriel, who was born Nour Saman.

35 Comments

  1. Yes Julie – the Taliban (not just AQ) are the enemies of freedom everywhere – not just in Afghanistan.

    But the American and British governments will not admit that.

    Any more than the American government would admit that the Marxist college lecturers and Community Organisers in the United States (financed by the government itself) were just as much the enemy as V.C. and NVA in Vietnam.

    To admit that the Taliban (in general) is the enemy BECAUSE OF ISLAM would destroy the whole establishment position that the problem is “a few extremists” (not Islam itself).

    So expect another squalid Paris Peace Accords style deal.

    Sorry – but the thousands of people who have given their lives have died for nothing.

    In fact I favour getting out now.

    If there is no intention to WIN the war (and there is no such intention) to prolong the war (just to get some face saving deal – which will not be worth the paper it is written upon) is criminal.

  2. NickM says:

    “In fact I favour getting out now.

    If there is no intention to WIN the war (and there is no such intention) to prolong the war (just to get some face saving deal – which will not be worth the paper it is written upon) is criminal.”

    The first principle of war (and many other things) is clarity of purpose. Considering you can sign-on as a GI for 4 years (if my Clancy (PBUH) servese me) we’ve been fecking around the ‘stan to a moveable feast of ends for three generations of GIs. In a sense. It’s a spherical cluster-fuck*. I mean what would an educated Afghan girl do for example? Get the buggery out for starters!

    “So expect another squalid Paris Peace Accords style deal.

    Sorry – but the thousands of people who have given their lives have died for nothing.”

    Too true. They did not die for nothing on Omaha or Sword but this is way different. It’s not even in bombing them back to the stone age but bombing them forward to the renaissance. It is not a “doer” and certainly not a “doer” with the weasel words of BHO et al (he is far from alone).

    It is so half-arsed on so many levels (war on drugs upgrade anyone?) that it is not about “nation building” (whatever that means) but simply NATO’s Article 5.

    We should have gone in and kicked the shit out of them with Biblical alacrity and then left the buggers to wallow in their own shittery. Let the Northern Alliance (lesser bastards) sort it out.

    And yes, Heaven and Earth should have been moved by 12/9/01 to bring us Mullah Omar and OBL’s head on a pair of platters and then stick ‘em in the fryer at a KFC in Brooklyn. As POTUS that is what I’d have done. Not get medieval on their arses (they know that too well) but supersonic.

    *Fritz Zwicky – sort of.

  3. Mr Ed says:

    The Taliban are no threat to the West, if the West were prepared to seal their borders and simply get on with life, the rifles and rockets of the Taliban simply do not have the range to attack the West, and a simple policy of 1000+ factor retaliation would put paid to any long-term plans to attack the West.

    The threat to the West comes from its own governments and ruling classes, who hate freedom and decency with an unbridled passion. Let the Taliban be, but if any receive training to attack the West, and it is proven that they were trained under the Taliban, the consequences should be so terrible that it would only happen once.

    The current policy is almost designed to undermine the West by expending money and lives to no rational end.

  4. NickM says:

    “if the West were prepared to seal their borders and simply get on with life”.

    That is not “getting along with life”.

  5. John Galt says:

    I say we take off and nuke the entire site from orbit.

    It’s the only way to be sure.

  6. Mr Ed – the Islamists are already with us (one point of Julie’s article).

    In many schools in parts of Europe Islamic children are already the majority – a Mark Steyn point.

    Even in America Islamic power is growing (party thanks to the baffling alliance with the left).

    “But that is just California madness” – no it is not,

    The alliance is strong in Minnesota (of all places – I am so old I still think of Minnesota as Swedish, well I suppose it going the same way that Malmo Sweden has gone).

    Even in Chicago – and after January New York City itself (yes the very site of 9/11) is going to be under a Mayor who loves the Islamists (although he is of the Marxist faith himself).

    Perhaps the Prince of Liechtenstein will get on his mighty horse and save the West – but I doubt it.

    They (the Islamists) care (have a belief system) most people in the West do not have a belief system (do not care – not really) – so the Islamists win.

    Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy.

  7. Mr Ed says:

    It strikes me that there is no evidence that being muslim makes one an Islamist. Of the million odd Muslims in the UK, there have been a few demos and a few killers. Any more than being Irish made one an IRA supporter in the 1970s in England.

    I can point to a personal acquaintance a Pakistani Consultant Physician in A & E who will do anything for his non-Islamic neighbours and takes a keen interest in British history. How can you say that people you have not met and have no knowledge of are ‘Islamists’.

    Nick: How is sealing your borders not getting along with life? It is absurdly easy for the UK to control entrance and egress, and track down people who should not be here, but the desire is to do the opposite. In foreign policy, simply seek free trade and avoid adventurist wars.

  8. John Galt says:

    You’re failing to differentiate the medium from the message.

    Sure there are lots of decent people who are muslim because their family are, do Friday prayers at the mosque and raise money for charity (muslim or otherwise), but these examples of decent people say nothing either for or against Islam, just a lot about people.

    “[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, “I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.”

    Muslim Surat Al-’Anfāl (The Spoils of War) 8:12

    Kill the unbeliever, kill the adulterer, kill the child raped by someone who was not a blood relation, death, death, death…

    It’s a death cult, no different from the Thuggee worship of Kali. The fact that not all muslims follow the tennets of their religion demonstrates nothing. This fact should be recognized and all of the lies about Islam being the “Religion of Peace” shown for what they are.

    There are some memes that simply cannot be tolerated, Nazism was one and I would suggest that Islam is another. It needs to be recognized for what it is a barbarous medieval cult that enslaves hundreds of millions and threatens the peace and stability of humanity.

  9. RAB says:

    “The fact that not all muslims follow the tennets of their religion demonstrates nothing.”

    Correct. Just as there are unobservant Christians so there are unobservant Muslims. I have drunk Raki and beer with many a Muslim in Turkey and Northen Cyprus and called them friends. I have seen young Muslim guys squiring (screwing) western ladies of a certain age for a Visa, and seen the chagrin and contempt they are held in by their more observant brothers, but lips are bit and morals smoothed over, for the sake of the goal of getting to the West by whatever means.

    But Islam is a totality, not just a religion. Paul is right, they care, and we generally do not, and when push comes to shove and the chips are down and conflict comes, then I do not expect to find my Raki drinking “friends” fighting on my side.

    Until our Politicians realise that we are already in a very loudly declared war that they dismiss as merely backround noise and extremism, and understand the true nature of the so called religion of peace, (if they will ever admit to it) then we are lost.

    Because Islam plays the long game, and for keeps, while our simpering, self righteous, self absorbed, self certain politicians, play the short game of til the next election and their own aggrandizement. Their stupidity and vanity will be the death of Western civilisation.

  10. Julie near Chicago says:

    Amen, brother RAB! ;)

    And JG. :)

    To the extent that jihadists, or Somali pirates, or anybody else makes the seas and the airways unsafe for shipping or travel, “free trade” is not possible. Think of the Achille Lauro hijacking by the Palestine Liberation Front, and of the other cruise ships also hijacked. Think of the many hijacked planes over the decades. Think of the deaths from the Somali pirates. Obviously these are not all attacks by Muslims in the name of Allah, but the fact is that they all interfere with free trade.

    Wars that are undertaken and fought seriously and responsibly, which is to say, among other things, fought with a commitment to prevail, that is, to WIN, and which furthermore are fought in defense of oneself or of allies or even of innocent people as such — such wars are not “adventures.” Adventurism isn’t undertaken out of a need for defense of self or others, but rather for plunder or for glory and “bragging rights.”

    According to the site “The Religion of Peace,” which keeps a running count of jihadist attacks, since 9/11 there have been over 22,000 lethal terrorist attacks committed worldwide in the name of Islam. Among other things, that page states:

    These are not incidents of ordinary crime involving nominal Muslims killing for money or vendetta. We only include incidents of deadly violence that are reasonably determined to have been committed out of religious duty – as interpreted by the perpetrator. Islam needs to be a motive, but it need not be the only factor.

    We usually list only attacks resulting in loss of life (with a handful of exceptions). In several cases, the deaths are undercounted because deaths from trauma caused by the Islamists may occur in later days, despite the best efforts of medical personnel to keep the victims alive.

    We usually don’t include incidents related to combat, such as in Iraq and Afghanistan, unless it involves particularly heinous terror tactics, such as suicide bombings or attacks on troops sleeping in their barracks or providing medical care to the local population.

    [ ... ]

  11. NickM says:

    And your point is Julie? Sorry to be blunt but if we poke a hornet’s nest we get stung. The ‘stan is not freedom of the seas or freedom of the air. You must know that whilst our two countries build ships and airliners and that whilst we have the capacity to build spacecraft (I have been to the Kennedy Space Centre and the NASM, including the Steven F Udvar-Hazy annex. Quite how I got that round the missus is beyond me – for we were on honeymoon but I wanted to see the the ‘planes. Duxford is better mind. The honeymoon also included Key West as well as DC.

    None of this matters a flying jot to our ‘stantics. I recall shortly after 9/11 some twinkly tribal elder (they are always “twinkly” like bad Santas) being interviewed. He was massing at the Af-Pak border with his chums and waving a little mashie and talking about “Killing Americans” – that being his schtick. Above him,very far above him, there was the contrails of a B-52 in the sky. What can men do against such reckless hate?

    We should have gone in (and I mean all of us – article 5 and all) and meted out revenge in a manner most apocalyptical.

    All over in a week.

    As to the seas and skies… Well, stick a couple of .50s on ships and have a navy worth spitting at (we don’t have one any more) and that’ll do it. As to air piracy… Well my Dad when working in Zambia had a mate who was almost sky-jacked. Alas for him (the pi

  12. Julie near Chicago says:

    “If we poke a hornet’s nest”? Nick, do you know when the Achille Lauro was hijacked? It was a few years before 9/11, not to say 2003, if that’s the poking date of which you speak. On the other hand, if you mean that the way the Afghanistan war has been fought is on a par with poking a hornet’s nest, I can agree that to some extent it’s an apt observation, although Islamic terrorist attacks have been going on since long before Munich (1972).

    It seems to me that people fail to understand that the worldwide jihadi terrorist antics are one aspect of what the Taliban and Al Quaida and Jamat al-Fukra and on and on are about; and that the Taliban is among jihadi terror’s main sponsors and promoters. That was the underlying point in this posting.

  13. NickM says:

    My last comment got partially nixxed. A curse on you Cu! Anyway I was going to say my Dad’s mate was flying in Africa for whatever reason and a bloke across the aisle got up and attempted a hi-jack. Bad move. Because in the seat behind him was a Sky Marshall with a big knife. The jerk attempting to hi-jack the ‘plane for the Popular People’s Front of… Well, they never got to know because by that point his throat had been cut by the Sky Marshall and it was back to normal service.

    Do you want chicken or beef madam? That sort of thing.

  14. Mr Ed says:

    I would not class the PLO and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine as Islamic organisations, they were secular socialist organisations, here’s the Wiki on the PFLP – which is by no means as amusing as a Life of Brian outfit – and it was founded by a Christian.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popular_Front_for_the_Liberation_of_Palestine

    The whole Palestinian terror ‘scene’ was mightily complicated by events in Jordan and Lebanon, with various sides taking support from regional Arab powers, all under the smiling watch of the Soviets.

    I believe that Hamas received some Israeli funding when it started, as a counter-weight to the unlovely PLO, but like most government programmes, it took on a life of its own.

  15. RAB says:

    Nick and Paul have pretty much aced the idea of if you are going to fight a war then you have to fight it to win… totally win, no stalemates. Otherwise you are ultimately going to lose.

    A story, not well known, one of the reasons why the UK was not involved in the Vietnam War.

    In the early 60′s a delegation of specialist military advisors was sent by Britain at the request of the USA, to advise on how to win the war in Vietnam, to stop the imagined domino effect of Communist insurgency in the far East.

    A good friend of mine’s father was one of those sent. He had been in the SAS in Malaya. We won that one, stopped them in their tracks and had them running for home wherever that was. We did it by putting SAS and other troops into the villages that were being threatened and raided by the Communist insurgents, and keeping them there side by side with the villagers and taking out the Commies every time they turned up. Hence we won their trust and won the war.

    The French had also been asked to contribute, and sent a delegation… well they were the old Colonial power after all, but they had just lost their colony comprehensively, so what, you might think, did they know?

    Anyway when my friend’s father and his delegation get to Washington, they find that the American Colonel or General in charge hated us Brits.

    We may think History is a factual thing… this happened, that happened, and the out come was… But history is all in the interpretation isn’t it? Being the winner or the loser in a war colours your thinking and outlook for starters, doesn’t it? Imagine the shock of a Japanese porn fan googling “The rape of Nanking” hoping for an eyeful, but getting a bit of his country’s history that his teachers had neglected to tell him about.

    Anyway, this American hated Brits. He had bought into the stuff he was taught about the Revolution, and 1812, and that the USA could have won WW2 on it’s own etc etc. But most crucially he had no understanding of the effectiveness of Special Forces doing specialised things. The USA had only had the Green Berets since about the 1950′s, Britain had had the SAS and Long Range Desert Group all through WW2.

    But the American in charge loved the French, loyal friends in the Revolution etc etc. So he dismissed the Brits and listened to the French on how to fight a jungle war and win (er… except they had comprehensively lost) rather than us Brits who had comprehensively won.

    Well my mate’s dad and his fellow delegates were very pissed off at their dismissive treatment and went home and reported to the powers that be… let ‘em get on with it, they wouldn’t listen to us, they listen to the French, fuck ‘em they’re going to lose… In effect.

    There would have been no… “We had to burn down the village in order to save it” nonsense if the American Govt had listened to the Brit Delegation, they would have saved the village and won the war. But so it goes with History eh?

  16. CountingCats says:

    Nick,

    The hornets have been flapping around all sort of agitated for 14+ centuries. We didn’t ‘poke a hornets nest’, we responded to those hornets invading our house and stinging our rellies and pets.

    When it comes to causus belli, how far back do we go? European countries invaded north Africa, so therefore those countries deserve a kicking? Ok, so why the invasion in the first place? Easy? Those countries finally became strong enough to do something about the Barbary states which had sponsored west Mediterranean and atlantic piracy for six hundred years, Treaties were worthless, jiziah helped, but the only way of stamping it out was to take control of those territories sponsoring it.

    So, as to who kicked which hornets nest, how far back do you want to go? Only to the day after the Achille Lauro was released? Only to the 12th September 2001?

    9/11 wasn’t our problem? Who do we feed to the crocodile next?

  17. CountingCats says:

    to stop the imagined domino effect of Communist insurgency in the far East.

    imagined? Really?

  18. RAB says:

    Imagined at the time of the early 60′s yes Cats. And the ultimate reality? North Korea (domino 1, and still loony after all these years) Vietnam (not nearly as commie as you’d think) Cambodia (generally thought to have gone completely Pol Pot over having being bombed to fuck by Kissinger and Nixon illegally) no longer called Kampuchea, but back to Cambodia again, having been invaded and pacified by, hee hee, Vietnam!

    And the sponsors of said insurgency? Russia (Now a Kleptocrat gangster Republic) China (Neo-Capitalist, but watch your P’s and Q’s just to be on the safe side).

    Not exactly a world record for domino tumbling then… was it? ;-)

  19. Julie near Chicago says:

    RAB, kindly include me with Nick & Paul in “if you’re going to fight, fight to WIN.” I b’lieve I put that in caps already once in one of this set of postings.

    However, if you do WIN militarily it’s not going to matter unless you CLAIM the win and PAY THE PRICE OF DEFENDING THE WIN, both of which we failed to do in V-N and haven’t really done in Iraq either. That’s “we’re leaving, we’re not leaving, we’re leaving 2 weeks from Tuesday, what’s our exit strategy, there’s still no date given for when we’re leaving.”

    I’m too tired to fight the Russian, Chinese, and Indo-Chinese communists again today, but of course in 2000 I suppose you could join certain American imbeciles and say ‘WW II, the “Unnecessary War,” the Nazis haven’t taken over the world (nor even W. Europe and the U.K.), in fact Germany is a virtual monument to democracy&freedom [sic].’ Or, ‘The Cold War, completely unnecessary, obviously [now] the USSR was in no economic shape to keep going.’ Like remarking that the recovered smallpox victim didn’t need to see the doc in the first place, look, he’s just fine now.

    But the ultimate win by the Communists in V-N encouraged their mayhem world-wide, and especially in Africa and Latin America.

  20. Mr Ed says:

    The advance of Communism from the second Russian Revolution, after a few false starts – Hungary, Munich, the miracle on the Vistula, Finland 1939-40, retreat from wartime- occupied Persia and Austria, was only checked in Greece and Korea by war, Malaya by war and Indonesia (by ‘stab first, ask later’) until Pinochet’s coup in Chile. Communist regimes ruled from Vladivostok to the inter-German border, Albania to the 38th Parallel in Korea, Cuba to Cambodia(splitters), Laos and Vietnam, Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia and Guinea-Bissau, with Soviet-friendly states in Algeria, Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen (bit) as well as China and Mongolia. That economics doomed the states to reform, steal, beg, blackmail or starve (or war intervened) did not mean that they would not have carried on if not opposed. Communism did not spread by accident, but design.

    If you read David Morgan’s book Hostile Skies on the Falklands War, he said that they all felt in UK Forces Germany that a Soviet attack was a matter of when, not if, and they all kept the car with a full tank and a jerry can should they get a chance to pack the family off towards the Channel ports in the hope of getting over to the UK when the fan sputtered.

  21. RAB says:

    if you do WIN militarily it’s not going to matter unless you CLAIM the win and PAY THE PRICE OF DEFENDING THE WIN, both of which we failed to do in V-N and haven’t really done in Iraq either. That’s “we’re leaving, we’re not leaving, we’re leaving 2 weeks from Tuesday, what’s our exit strategy, there’s still no date given for when we’re leaving.”

    I feel I am being admonished for something, but I can’t figure out quite what. Maybe I was a bit telescoped in saying we need to totally win, but I meant TOTALLY WIN, as in these people are no longer and hopefully will never be a threat to us or anybody else again. And yes I meant for the duration of any percievable threat. Germany (West) was occupied by troops from USA, Britain and France. There are still substantial British and American Military bases in Germany to this day, which is perhaps a bit over the top given current circumstances. Japan was occupied for many years and the USA still has bases there too. They even introduced Baseball to take their minds off their defeat (cruel and un-natural punishment in my book ;-) )

    Vietnam was an American miscalculation of huge proportions. The Vietnamese wern’t to start with a dedicated commie movement, but a Nationalistic one. Good Intelligence would have told the USA that…Alas. They had seen the French run like buggery from the Japs, have their own country (France) overrun by the Germans in 10 minutes, get liberated by the Brits and the Yanks, and turn up five years later expecting to carry on just as before. They told them to fuck off! And they got the guns etc to do that from the only available source… Russia. But there were strings attached, and it all became more of the same domino theory that had started in Korea.

    WW2 was not unessessary, nor the Cold war either, they were genuine threats that had a very real possibility of being realised, the intent was definately there, and the Germans, considering they were fighting on three fronts at once at times, made a bloody good military fist of it.Russia thought it could, by surrupticiously supplying anti capitalist movements worldwide, undermine the West without going head to head with the heavy weaponary (though they were well tooled up for that too) until they checked with the accounts department and found out they were a broke and busted flush, and their WMD were rusting and leaking radioactivity into the Baltic.

    But what the fuck are we still doing in the ‘Stan etc? We can stay there for ever and a day, introduce Baseball even (they already have Cricket) and still they will spit in our face and call us Infidels.

    Isolate or exterminate are our only options there. I definately prefer the first.

  22. John Galt says:

    I take the point about the domino theory being more fantasy than reality, but it was a genuine intention of the soviets to attack the west with proxy wars on foreign fronts rather than fight a conventional war in western europe that could only result in western forces being rapidly overwhelmed and the US pressing the button.

    The soviets poured vast sums into their military to back up this intention, but in so doing destroyed their economy. Khrushchev understood this which was why he supported economic reform, a reduction in military spending and a form of détente a decade before it actually happened. This was why he was removed by Brezhnev and others during the 1964 coup.

    We should probably be grateful to Brezhnev, because if it hadn’t been for the years of economic stagnation under his rule then the soviet union might have lasted longer than it did.

    I seem to recall that the Korean war was the only time the west faced a red army directly and that was the Chinese rather than the Rooskies.

    One of the few points in favour of Harold Wilson was that he played a difficult balancing act during the Vietnam War of avoiding the involvement of UK troops while still getting US support in other matters (primarily economic support).

    When challenged by his lefty cabinet why he wasn’t stronger in criticism of the US involvement in Vietnam, he clearly and categorically said “…because we can’t kick our creditors in the balls”.

  23. Julie near Chicago says:

    RAB, no admonishment of any sort was meant, and I had no problem at all with your statement. I just wanted to make my own position crystal-clear to everybody, because I think it would be easy to misunderstand me as one of the “I know, let’s have a war!” folks, which I certainly am not. I could have just as well have written, “I wish to associate myself with Nick’s and Paul’s position on that issue.” And your points about long-term occupation of Germany and Japan are exactly right and as far as I can see, something similar, but longer-lasting (as I said, a minimum of three generations, but probably more like a 100-200 years), is necessary to truly WIN against Islam; because their whole entire Universe-view, not just their worldview, needs to be changed. Their understanding, and their values. That does not sit well with any of us, but I believe it is the truth just the same. The alternative being to turn the many Asian and African centers of jihad into glass, which is out of the question and wholly unthinkable.

    It’s not true that Muslims cannot become acculturated, however. As Robert Spencer points out, it did happen in parts of the Russian/Soviet Empire and Eastern Europe. Also, several people have pointed out that it’s helpful when the occupiers find wives in the occupied country, and make for themselves a life in that country. (I do NOT mean doing anything by force; I mean, allowing nature and romance and genuine love to take their course.)

    It would help enormously if the Western nations would apply their laws ruthlessly to Muslim infractions, sending a clear message that to stay in any one of them means doing things according to the host country’s ways and rules. Unfortunately there seems little sign of that, and I put our government right up there with the worst offenders since we have known terrorist supporters in important positions in our government.

    . . .

    One thing–it’s a myth that Ho Chi Minh was just a Nationalist, still less an “agrarian reformer.” He had taken up Communism as a student in Paris in (I believe) the 20′s, and then was sent to Moscow and trained specifically to be a Communist leader. Then he was sent to China and worked to establish Communism there. The goal was to bring Communism to N.V., and then to unite the whole country under Communism–not for the sake of the Vietnamese particularly, but for the sake of Communist theory and ambitions.

    He was always a dedicated Communist, and remember that Communism was supposed to be an international movement, that Marxism aimed for global socialism and national boundaries were supposed to become meaningless; and that the U.S.S.R. was in clear fact an empire within the strict meaning of the word, with expansionist aims as expressed by Stalin.

    I would recommend the books Vietnamese Communism, by Robert F. Turner, and Triumph Forsaken, by Mark Moyar. Both show Ho’s progress from childhood to fully committed Communist leader.

    As to the V-N wish to throw out the French, yes, but unfortunately Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam was assassinated, as you know, and then his reputation was dishonestly trashed by the Communists, with of course plenty of help from the Western news media, and the rest is history. Again, see the books above.

    . . .

    Complete agreement on necessity of WW II and the Cold War. :>)

  24. John Galt says:

    “Complete agreement on necessity of WW II and the Cold War.”

    WWI and the Cold War were wars of national survival against utter ruination, therefore necessary.

    It is why I believe that at some point we will have to eradicate the muslim states hell bent on the destruction of the west for exactly the same reason. This pussy footing around and support for 5th columnists in the form of muslim immigration without integration is the most stupid policy imaginable and is yet further evidence that those in power are deliberately doing this to foment discord.

  25. Julie near Chicago says:

    Give that man another cigar! *applause*

  26. NickM says:

    “Imagine the shock of a Japanese porn fan googling “The rape of Nanking” hoping for an eyeful, but getting a bit of his country’s history that his teachers had neglected to tell him about.”

    History curricula in Japan skirt around WWII like I do around Stockport. Apart from Hiroshima which was a terrible thing done unto them. Even the article of surrender is pussy-footing, Hirohito himself stated, “The War in the Pacific has progressed to a position not necessarily to the advantage of the Empire of Japan”. That’s Japanese for “We’re conclusively fucked”. Dear Gods they were training 14 year-old school girls to use improvised spears against US Marines storming the beaches and dear old Comrade Joe was moving divisions East to join the party – which would have been magnificent. Thank you Manhattan Programme! No it was not good but when you consider the alternative… I once temped at NICO in Longbenton, Newcastle. The second largest office complex on the planet (the biggest is the Pentagon) and that (Longbenton) was originally built in the ’40s as a hospital for the wounded coming back from Operation Olympic. That never happened due to Enola Gay etc. so we got NI instead (they had to do something with it).

    Japan by and large has not come to terms with the evils it carried out in China (and other places) in a way Germany has. By the same token we haven’t held them to account the same way. The NAZIs are a by-word for evil but what the Japanese did was at least as vile.

    As ever physics solves the problem.

    Anyway, JG, as a gay man who has issues with muslims why do you live in muslim dominated Malaysia? I would not live in a community that wanted me dead. Around here they don’t give a toss unless I can win paralympic Au. I went down to see the lights put on the village tree and it was Sarah and Barney doing the switching of course. Barney Storey once nigh on killed me – the cove!

  27. John Galt says:

    Don’t blame me, blame the wife. She’s the one who CHOSE to be born in Malaysia :-)

    Now if she’d been born in Singapore, that would have been a whole lot easier. Never mind, it is what it is. Actually where I live in Penang it is about 41% Chinese/Buddhist, 41% Malay/Islam and 8% Indian/Hindu.

    The state government is Chinese as is the state’s Chief Minister (actually my wife’s uncle), so the Malay’s tend to stick to their government jobs and their government housing allocated in specific areas (mainly Pulau Tikus which means “Mouse Island” in Malay, but most Chinese / Indians refer to as “Rat Town”) and leave the rest to the Chinese.

    If you are a Bumiputera (i.e. local indigenous Malay or similar) under Malaysian law then you are muslim by statute, regardless of your own particular views and this has been challenged regularly on the basis that it violates the principle of Freedom of Religion

    Once Muslim, Now Christian and Caught in the Courts

    In short, Malaysia is a nominally secular country whose main religion is Islam and Penang is about the most non-muslim part of the country. On the whole it isn’t a problem and as long as your not wandering around the streets half naked or blind drunk then nobody would hassle you, unlike in London it seems:

    Muslim vigilantes jailed for ‘sharia law’ attacks in London

    Equally, the local police turn a blind eye to the antics of the foreign Ang Mo wandering around the streets. There are special tourist police at Batu Ferringhi (“Foreigners Rock”) to deal with any problems that arise. They don’t want the vital tourist trade to be affected.

    In short, I don’t get affected by the local laws and customs as they have a sort of ‘blind spot’ towards the whites here, whom they only see as tourists. Most people never even cotton on to the fact that I live here unless I tell them (e.g. the local expat community).

    As for the laws on homosexuality, well they might be on the statutes here, but the Chinese and Indian communities in Penang are pretty tolerant lot and the police won’t act without a formal complaint.

    So provided you don’t go disturbing your neighbours or behaving wantonly in public even the faggots are left alone in Penang.

    All-in-all, there are worse places to live and the climate is a lot better than Bristol, East Cheshire, London and even Chicago. 30-degrees celsius at the moment with sunshine and I’m just off to a house warming party.

  28. CountingCats says:

    JG,

    30 C in Penang? A balmy 27 here on Queenslands sunny Gold Coast.

    I must say, I have long been intrigued by the references to the wife, but I am waaay too much of a gentleman to ask. So, forget I mentioned that, shall we?

    Julie,

    When it comes to Ms Gabriel I have audio books of her reading both Because They Hate and They Must Be Stopped on my phone. I have listened to them, along with a load of other stuff, while driving.

  29. John Galt says:

    In fairness Cats, we are 5.4-degrees North of the equator, versus 28-degrees South for Brisbane, so that makes a difference.

    As for the wife…how far will you go to please your (now deceased) mother? Let me assure you, there’s a lot of it about, even in Brisbane. :-)

  30. Julie near Chicago says:

    Cats, I am jealous. I ought to see if the library has them for audio download.

    There seems to be some sort of horrid turf-war going on over here amongst the conservatives, over who is pure as the driven and who is black as coal (and neither faction admits there are persons who are neither). It’s pathetic.

    It seems to me Debbie Schlussel is one of Miss Gabriel’s detractors. Then again, Miss S. sets my red flags waving, so….

    And of course the libruls/lefties pick up any smears the conservatives put out there, and spread them around as the Word of God.

    More important matters: Of course you are in some other hemisphere, and JG is stuck in the tropics, poor guy; whereas Near Chicago (actually a bit northwest of it, just S. of the Wisconsin state line if you care) we were at -6˚F last night, but today we warmed up to a balmy 17˚F. We have 4.5″ of snow. This is more like my idea of a real winter. :>)))

  31. CountingCats says:

    Yeah, but, while JG is technically having a winter right now, I am having summer.

  32. NickM says:

    Well, it’s chilly in Cheshire. Just in case anyone wanted to know. And Julie, can you use real money because all those Fs make no sense to me. I actually think in Kelvin. So a nice day is about 300K. ;-)

  33. John Galt says:

    Yes, it has to be said we don’t get seasons here. It’s either hot and wet or hot and dry.

    Occasionally when the Indonesians are burning their forests it becomes hot and bit smoggy, but nothing like Shanghai or even Singapore. More like the smell of a neighbor’s barbecue.

    P.S. Global Warming my arse.

  34. Mr Ed “It strikes me that there is no evidence that being a Muslim makes someone an Islamist” – and then goes on to comparing to being Irish and the IRA.

    Mr Ed Islam is a religion – not a nationality or ethnic group.

    Being a Muslim means believing in the doctrines preached (and practiced) by Mohammed.

    What else could a believing Muslim be other than an Islamist?. For example one either believes (as Mohammed did) that those who mock Islam should be murdered or you do not believe that. Mohammed himself sent people to murder poets (including an old blind poet and a pregnant female poet) – it was not people acting centuries later in his name, it was him himself at the time. There is no logical position of “I support Islam but not its crimes” Islam is the crimes, that is what “submission” (inspiring terror – terrorism) is about.

    It you had said a NOMINAL Muslim you might have had a point – but I do not think you did you used that word. And nominal Muslims can turn into real ones – overnight.

    A believing Muslim is a Islamist – period (otherwise the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan would have been good ideas). The life of Mohammed is hardly a secret – those who choose to follow him (as oppose to just being born into certain families without thinking about matters) are endorsing his crimes (remember Mohammed was not a criminal till he invented Islam – his murders and so on were committed to further the religion he had invented, to spread “submission” which is what Islam means).

    As for Hamas – it is an outgrowth of the Muslim Brotherhood which was created in the 1920s.

    There is a basic contradiction in the Lew Rockwell line.

    The line is “Muslims are just like everyone else” and “the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were terrible ideas – should not have been done”.

    But if Muslims are just like everyone else (like that nice chap you mention) then the war to liberate them from nasty dictators (Saddam and the Taliban) would have been a GOOD idea

    And least Mr Bush and Mr Blair were logically consistent – “most Muslims are good people so it would be a good thing to free them from tyranny”.

    The Lew Rockwell line makes no sense at all – it is totally contradictory.

    It is precisely because Muslims are NOT like other people that the Afghan and Iraq wars were bad ideas.

    It was NOT like liberating Germany. Italy and Imperial Japan after World War II (as Mr Bush and Mr Blair thought it would be).

  35. John Galt says:

    I know I keep banging on about this, but we’re back to Sayyid Qutb again.

    CCiZ on Sayyid Qutb

    He was the spiritual leader behind the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood of the 1950′s and 1960′s until his execution in 1966 and through Ayman al-Zawahiri the core of the movement described as Al-Qaeda (its a convenient label, little more)

    Towards the end of his life, Sayyid Qutb believed that the failure of the Muslim Brotherhood was not their philosophy of violent rebellion to overthrow the secular government of Nasser and replace it with an Islamic government ruling under Sharia law, but rather the ignorance of local Muslims towards Islam.

    In his view, it was the very problem we describe, the fact that the vast majority of Muslim’s did not rise up in revolution because they were not true believers in Islam, they did not understand its fundamental precepts and that ultimately they were not prepared to “submit” as Islam ACTUALLY DEMANDS!

    These Muslims, who had been born into Islam rather than through religious conversion were (according to Qutb), suffering from a condition he defined as “Jahiliyyah” in that although they were nominally Muslim, they did not truly understand the teachings of Islam and by not supporting Jihad they themselves became an obstacle to be eliminated along with the kufr (i.e. unbelievers like you and me).

    Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.

    TL;DR – Just because lots of nominal Muslims don’t act upon the tenets of Islam doesn’t make it any less dangerous or detestable.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: