Happy enemies

[cestusdei]

Read the Cal Thomas opinion piece at www.townhall.com. He may well have it right. If so then we are in big trouble.

 

[Allweather]

Read the Cal Thomas opinion piece at www.townhall.com. He may well have it right. If so then we are in big trouble.

Actually, what the election shows is that there is some strength in our system. We have the means to force the gov’t to go in another direction, without having to have a military coup, or riots. Some people, like Cal Thomas, want us to commit to some sort of protracted, twilight struggle against Islam. In general, Americans aren’t convinced that this is the way to go. This is very much in keeping with our historical reluctance to engage in foreign adventures. We resisted entry into WWI until German unrestricted submarine warfare, instituted late in the war, left Wilson no choice but to declare. We stayed on the periphery of WWII until we were overtly attacked by a soverign nation, and then had Germany declare war on us. By that time, the Germans were already in retreat. The point is, Americans are reluctant warriors. It takes a lot to get us riled up, and we don’t like to stay riled up for long. Three years is about the max. Short attention span. Any politician who had the crazy idea that Americans would buy into a protracted religious war were just not thinking very clearly, and certainly weren’t studying their history.

 

[cestusdei]

Maybe you’re right. We may have to wait until the Islamic terrorists blow up a large target right here in the US killing several thousand people. That would wake us up.

 

[Allweather]

Maybe you’re right. We may have to wait until the Islamic terrorists blow up a large target right here in the US killing several thousand people. That would wake us up.

Islamic terrorism has been going on against us for a long time. The scale of the 9-11 attacks was, indeed, an attention-getter, but no different in quality than any of the previous attacks over a span of around 20 years, such as Lebanon, or the Cole, or even the '93 WTC bombing. We didn’t mobilize over any of those earlier attacks, nor should be mobilize over 9-11, IMO. By “mobilization” I mean to assume a WAR FOOTING as if we were in a mode of total war with another sovereign nation, such as we were in previous wars. The current struggle is with Islamic terrorism that is multi-national, and criminal, more like the Mafia, than anything else. We can, and should, deal with it more on a law-enforcement basis rather than by sending our aircraft carriers around the world to blow things up.

No sane person doubts that extreme Islamic factions are out to “get us.” However, we might want to wonder why that is. I believe our special support for Israel since 1948 has worked to enrage arabs, and other Islamists around the world. Not that we shouldn’t support Israel; they are our friends and allies. But, that relationship with Israel drags us into conflict with Islam. And, the Christian fundamentalist-dispensationalist segment of our country, well represented by the W Administration, is all set to see the world go up in religious smoke in a great battle with Israel at the center. Frankly, I feel a little nervous about having these fundamentalist Protestants, with their heresies in full swell, dragging us all into their fantasy-end-of-the-world scenario.

Cal Thomas is promoting the viewpoint that we are all in it up to our necks with the Islamics, a death-struggle that will culminate with the Second Coming. They think they’ve got the Revelation prophesies all figured out. I doubt that they do.

 

[cestusdei]

I disagree. If it were only a couple of thousand with no backing we would not have to be on full war footing. I contend, as do others, that there are hundreds of millions of Muslims who support the terrorists and consider themselves at war with the dar el harb. That is something to worry about. Do we wait to receive several million casualties or work to make sure that never happens?

 

[Allweather]

Do we wait to receive several million casualties or work to make sure that never happens?

I think we make sure that doesn’t happen. But, we can do that without staying hyped up in a war footing.

As for “several million casualties” anything along those levels of casualties would certainly signify the arrival of something unprecedented in human history, and probably not possible without a thermonuclear exchange of missiles. We have nothing to fear in that regard, unless catastrophic realignments take place that make Russia or, even, Europe, our enemies. In other words, the arabs don’t have ICBMs and probably never will.

I go back further than any debate about appropriate defense. Our defenses are not in question. We have the premier military force in the world, by leaps and bounds. We (the U.S.) spends more on defense than most other countries COMBINED!! We can project serious military power anywhere in the world within days, and in some cases hours, and in the case of nuclear missiles, literally minutes. What we need to do, IMHO, is examine why it is that we are so energetic in foreign policy. Why do we (Americans) feel that we need to be in everybody else’s business? Can’t we live on our side of the world, let the Islamics live on theirs, and just keep our distance from one another? We will retain our supreme military dominance for the next century at least, while they are pieces of a corrupt and deteriorating culture with no future unless they change. We should disengage from them, and let them deteriorate on their own, so that we don’t make of ourselves an enemy that their corrupt leaders will use as an excuse to stay in power. We don’t mix well with the Islamics, in case you hadn’t noticed. We are very different from them, in very many and important ways, not least of which are our religions, which have almost always been at some level of conflict with one another. These are ancient conflicts, again burning brightly. Can we learn anything from the past? For sure, if we go the route of staying at hot war with a billion people for the next decade or more, terrible things will happen as unintended consequences.

 

[cestusdei]

All of that is nice. Until Iran gives Achmed a suitcase nuclear device and he sets it off in Manhattan. Then it will be to late to say “whoops, we should have taken out Iran when we had the chance, darn that Bush.” All it takes is one mistake on our part and boom. The stakes are to high.

The problem is the Muslims don’t want to let others alone. The world is to interdependent now to do that anyway. Europe is full of them and they are growing. They want a world wide Islamic caliphate and won’t take no for an answer.

We can avoid war, by surrendering. Otherwise, we are already at war and in the fight. There is no going back, even if we wanted too. Sorry, to end the war we must either win or lose. I vote we win.

PS: Lest I be accused of being a chickenhawk. I have served in the military. I also volunteered to go to Iraq as a chaplain. Unfortunately they politely declined my offer due to previous health problems. I would go tomorrow if they said yes.

 

[Loginus]

I agree. Lets wipe out the Muslim religion as it has had a violent past and continues to cause trouble. Then, lets wipe out ALL religion everywhere so we never have to have another religious war or some group that things God is commanding them!

And finally, World Peace shall be achieved:thumbsup:

 

[Valke2]

Maybe you’re right. We may have to wait until the Islamic terrorists blow up a large target right here in the US killing several thousand people. That would wake us up.

Yeah. Maybe then we can attack Iraq again. I think everytime something bad happens in the US, we should declare war on Iraq.