I was out in the field this afternoon when the news broke on the shootings at Fort Hood. By the time I returned to the office and logged on, I learned the terrible news. The immediate reaction in the room was that this must be Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Of course, the first reports indicated three gunmen – this turned out to be wrong, of course, but I commented that PTSD is a solitary phenomena; it does not manifest itself in groups. As it turned out, this just might be the first ever recorded case of PRE-TSD; it turns out that Hasan was under orders, but had not yet deployed. America is seeing an increase in the tempo of domestic jihad-inspired terrorist self-starters.
The week’s headlines, as of Friday, 25 September 2009:
FBI Arrests Jordanian for Downtown Dallas Bomb Plot
Illinois Man Charged in Plot to Bomb Federal Offices
And:
Zazi Indicted For Conspiring To Detonate WMD
Najibullah Zazi, 24, arrives at the Byron G. Rogers Federal Building on Sept. 17, 2009, in Denver, Colo. Mohammed Zazi, father of Najibullah Zazi, was arrested along with his son and a third man from New York City for possible ties to terrorists.
From my home station down there in North Cackallacky where the possums and raccoons are haut cuisine, a team of Billy Bobs decided to get their Jihad on:
U.S. Terror Suspects Accused of Targeting Marine Base
The common thread to all of the above is that these guys were nabbed going into the operational phase of their terrorist attacks.
In addition to the cases above, which I first detailed on 26 September, here are some other notable developments 2009 has produced:
May 12, 2009, Oussama Kassir was convicted of charges related to his participation in an effort to establish a jihad training camp in Oregon and his operation of several terrorist Web sites containing instructions about how to make bombs and poisons. Kassir was found guilty of all 11 charges against him, including providing material support to al-Qaeda and distributing information on explosives and weapons of mass destruction.
May 20, 2009, four individuals – James Cromitie, David Williams, Onta Williams and Laguerre Payen – were arrested on charges arising from a plot to detonate explosives near a synagogue in the Bronx, N.Y., and to shoot Stinger surface-to-air guided missiles at military planes located at the National Guard Base at Stewart Airport in Newburgh, N.Y. On June 2, 2009, all four defendants were charged in an eight-count indictment and face potential life in prison, if convicted.
All of them converted to Islam while in prison.
April 28, 29, 2009, five individuals — Mohamad Ibrahim Shnewer, brothers Dritan Duka, Shain Duka and Eljvir Duka and Serdar Tatar — received sentences ranging from 33 years in prison, to life in prison plus 30 years, for plotting to kill U.S. soldiers in an armed attack on the military base in Fort Dix, New Jersey. All five individuals were convicted at trial in December 2008.
On April 30, 2009, Ali al-Marri pleaded guilty to conspiracy to provide material support to al-Qaeda, admitting that he attended terrorist training camps, learned al-Qaeda tradecraft and was dispatched by al-Qaeda to carry out its terrorist objectives in America.
Terrorists all the same, regardless of ideological or political stance – that is all posturing. Example: in the 1980s the Great Socialist People’s Libyan Arab Jamahiriya mounted a bombing campaign against U.S. and British targets in Europe. Several of the bombings were carried out on their behalf by the Baader-Meinhof gang, a secular group of Communists.
Also in the 1980s, the Provisional Irish Republican Army, a group of Catholic membership, received support and training from not only Libya and other Arab terrorist groups, but also the Soviet Union.
It is all the same. Terrorism is always the same. It doesn’t matter whether it’s Islamic-themed, or Neo-Nazi, or Communist-inspired, terrorism is always the same: it is sheer lunacy, plain and simple. The terrorist ethos is flawed logic. They cry out “Injustice!” and yet they are willing to commit the most horrific crimes in the world, in the name of equality and fairness. Eh?
For Americans who don’t know about it, who’ve never been over there: this is a little taste of what Israel experiences, all the time.
66 responses so far
1 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 8:48 am
……always ready with the completely over the top and usually wrong response…….based on the info so far available this was not “terrorism”
2 Churl // Nov 6, 2009 at 8:56 am
Major Hassan may have been suffering from PTSD (Pre-traumatic Stress Disorder):
http://www.startribune.com/nation/69340267.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aU1yDEmP:QMDCinchO7DU
3 sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:12 am
Based on the surprising turns in the anthrax terrorism investigation, I think we should all reserve judgment till the authorities learn more.
This Major Hassan, who apparently committed the shootings, is alive and likely to survive his wounds. That’s going to make the investigation a whole lot easier.
4 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:52 am
I have always believed that immigration is the lifeblood of this country. But that is only true so long as those who come here buy into American and Western ideals. If the left is so desperate to have Europe serve as its model of what is the role of government I suggest they also learn the lessons from that same continent when it comes to what Islamic immigration really means. It means colonization,–not assimilation–by people who have no desire to live under Western mores rather they wish to reform countries in their own model dominated first and foremost by Islam. How much longer are we to have our liberal (in the classical sense) ideals of tolerance and acceptance/respect for other cultures be twisted and used against us before we wise up and realize that, even if the West tries so hard to not be at war with ISlam, Islam has certainly declared war on the West.
We should not be compelled to tolerate the intolerant, co-exist with those who prefer a world without us, or respect those who hold us in contempt. We are losing our very culture. And that will be bad for all the world. Islam has been the great stifler of the ages–in business, science, education, the arts, politics, justice. A “New Dark Ages” is descending upon Europe. That continent’s demise is already demographically assured. The US will be the only force to stand up to this new caliphate. Unless we make the same mistakes that Europe made in not believing enough in its own heritage and culture to protect and defend it.
5 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:57 am
Otto, you are just as much an ideologue in that you refuse to even consider the notion that this could be motivated by Jihad. Hmm, I used the term “if” because I am not sure. You seem sure that it was not Jihad. And which one of us is blinded by ideology again? You are a walking liberal cliche. Just as predictable, and just as boring. *yawn*
6 ProfNickD // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:00 am
Yet another Islamic terrorist who doesn’t understand that his religion has nothing to do with violence.
7 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:11 am
Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:57 am
“Otto, you are just as much an ideologue in that you refuse to even consider the notion that this could be motivated by Jihad.I used the term “if” because I am not sure.”
…………I’m sure you don’t go around shouting FIRE in theaters either……..I don’t refuse to consider anything but from the little we do know it appears that the guy was disturbed (ie. crazy) as are most of the people who carry out these shooting outrages
8 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:14 am
9 ProfNickD // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:00 am
“Yet another Islamic terrorist who doesn’t understand that his religion has nothing to do with violence.”
………..They just can’t help themselves
9 sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:17 am
Raider1:
Most American Muslims are NOT like that.
My own Primary Care Physician for years was a member of the Dawoodi Bohras, a sect of Shiite Islam that does not interpret jihad as worldwide conquest, and in which women have considerable rights. She wore no hijab or other traditional dress in her work.
But worldwide, it is estimated by intelligence analysts that 5-10% of Muslims are of that radicalized variety.
There are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, so just 5% of that number is 75 million. That’s a whole lot of radical Islamists, who can cause a whole lot of trouble. Just 19 of them inflicted more casualties on America than the Imperial Japanese Navy did at Pearl Harbor.
10 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:21 am
‘from the little we do know…’ Exactly Otto. (And gee, where do you get off quoting Oliver Wendall Holmes? Especially when it is completely irrlevant to your point? Other than once again an effort at pedantic demonstration of your hackneyed knowledge on display for display’s sake. Next thing you’ll be quoting *gasp* Churchill?)
11 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:23 am
Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 9:52 am
“We should not be compelled to tolerate the intolerant, co-exist with those who prefer a world without us, or respect those who hold us in contempt. We are losing our very culture. And that will be bad for all the world. Islam has been the great stifler of the ages–in business, science, education, the arts, politics, justice. A “New Dark Ages” is descending upon Europe. That continent’s demise is already demographically assured. The US will be the only force to stand up to this new caliphate. Unless we make the same mistakes that Europe made in not believing enough in its own heritage and culture to protect and defend it.”
……….Does this mean we have to deport large numbers of Christian fundamentalists?………..How about that guy who was carrying the anti semitic banner at the Republican rally yesterday claiming Obama was in the pay of the Rothchilds (sic)…….well no one ever said Republicans could spell……I’m afraid from your hysterical outpourings it’s very obvious that “intolerance” is your mainspring but unfortunately we have to tolerate you because many of us subscribe to beliefs like the first amendment which lie at the the heart of what this country is about.
12 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:24 am
Sinz…I can show you studies and statistic that show a LOT more “sympathy” for terrorism than 5%. They may not be “radicalized” and most would never fly a plane into a building. But they would also at least express some understanding of where the terrorists are coming from. THAT is dangerous.
13 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:26 am
Otto. When’s the last time you’ve even set foot in Europe? Just curious.
14 mymy // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:29 am
Otto To equate an inappropriate sign with the murder of 12 is silly
15 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:32 am
16 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:21 am
“And gee, where do you get off quoting Oliver Wendall Holmes?”
a) it’s “Wendell” Holmes
b) it was an appropriate response to your incendiary nonsense
c) one only quotes Churchill’s big lines when it’s appropriate and comparing two off year gubernatorial races with the north African campaign doesn’t qualify ……but then it’s obvious from your other apocalyptic comments that you have little sense of proportion
16 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:40 am
Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:26 am
“Otto. When’s the last time you’ve even set foot in Europe? Just curious.”
……..About nine weeks ago…….ten days in Britain……two weeks in Italy…..then a few days in Paris…….my daughter is married to a German lawyer…….my eldest son has a British girlfriend……my youngest son has an Italian girlfriend (at the moment)…….I visit Europe at least twice a year these days but it until about three years ago it was probably 6-8 times a year……and I’ve lived in two European countries……I know Europe very well
17 ProfNickD // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:44 am
There is no such thing as “Christian terrorism,” at least there hasn’t been any for several hundred years.
Timothy McVeigh was anti-government and anti-tax, not carrying out Christian doctrines.
The IRA was Marxist, not Christian.
There have only been six deadly abortion-related attacks ever recorded, all of them in the U.S. (the last bombing was 1998), leading to 8 deaths — none of these was perpetrated by a Christian carrying out Christian doctrines: one was in a Klan-related group; another was an excommunicated Presbyterian church member; Eric Rudolph, also the Olympic park bomber was seeking, to destroy modern society; one was a long-standing anti-abortion activist, but having no ties to any Church; another has his sentence overturned on appeal on grounds of mental disorder; the 6th, recently caught, was also a mental patient and was taking anti-schizophrenia medication.
Islamic terrorists, on the other hand are responsible for over 14,000 deadly attacks, causing 84,000 deaths — all just since 9/11.
http://thereligionofpeace.com/
Please don’t make any moral or practical equivalence between Christian terrorism and Islamic terrorism.
18 sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:46 am
raider1 & ottovbs:
When it comes to Muslims in our midst,
we have a few things going for us that the Europeans don’t have.
In America, a lot of our Muslims are Black Muslims (Malcolm X, Mohammed Ali, etc.). They’re as much Black Nationalists as they are Muslims, and don’t share the agenda of Saudi Arabia. And in recent years, many black Muslims have shed even the inflammatory notions of the Nation of Islam.
American immigrants come from all over the world, and our Muslim immigrants are no exception. We’ve got Chinese Muslims, African Muslims, etc. That diversity, combined with our native Black Muslim movement, also makes it much less likely that they’re ever going to unite into some “Fifth Column” here.
Finally, America has offered equality of economic opportunity to Muslims. They can be doctors (like my Primary Care Physician was), scientists, engineers–and hold high office.
Europe, in contrast, gets their Muslims mostly from the Near East, particularly Pakistan.
Pakistani Muslims are the radical’s radicals. They are hopped up as hell on jihad, Sharia, taking over “Dar al-Harb” (the non-Muslim world), particularly the ones living outside the major cities.
And in European countries like France, Muslim immigrants from Pakistan and elsewhere are still treated like second-class citizens, segregated, ostracized, rather than having the same opportunities in life that native Frenchmen do. Combined with these immigrants’ radicalism, that’s an explosive combination.
19 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:48 am
Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:36 am
……..I’m not going to engage in a prolonged debate with you……it’s very obvious from your comments exactly what you are and it’s neither constructive or useful to politize this tragedy but I don’t suppose that’s going to stop you
20 MI-GOPer // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:51 am
automaticBS proves, again, that the Left will find any excuse to explain away violence if it’s targeted at the military, the tea partiers or even if it’s a few SEIU union goons roughing up some malcontent townhallers… imagine automaticBS’s glee if this had been a GOP meeting in Oklahoma where a muslim opened up fire and slaughtered people? Or a mall in suburban white America? AutomaticBS probably would have replied: “Serves ‘em right. They’ve been spreading a message of intolerance and hate; they got what they deserved”.
Of course, that’s after automaticBS makes the usual blathering gun control rant applied illogically: “If soldiers didn’t have guns, people wouldn’t get hurt. We need to get the guns –especially lethal handguns and semi-automatic rifles– off the military bases. The military’s weapons should be kept in a lockbox stored in countries where we are fighting. Not here. We need real gun control now!”
And then he’d go back to eating his coco-puffs with orange juice and await the sugar spike to send him into another far Left “insight”.
Someone who cries out “Allah Akbar” and begins killing his fellow soldiers doesn’t have a clear, rational mind. But it shouldn’t stop the hangman from exacting his measure.
21 sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:56 am
raider1:
Bringing up abortion clinic bombings (which were few and uncoordinated) is how liberals attempt to employ “tu quoque.” They ignore the relative body counts between Islamist terrorism (Marine barracks in Lebanon, Khobar Towers, 9-11, Beslan, and all the various attacks on Israel) and those killed in abortion clinic attacks which are smaller by two or three orders of magnitude.
And Timothy McVeigh doesn’t belong in either of these categories; he was a self-admitted agnostic, NOT a devout Christian. Perhaps we should start a separate category for “atheist terrorism.”
Liberals also ignore how these acts were perpetrated. Abortion clinic bombings were not perpetrated by suicide-bombers.
Suicide-bombing is carried out by a very few ideologies: Islamist radicalism and Tamil Tigers separatism come to mind. The Christian abortion clinic attackers were not suicide-bombers. Raising the penalty for those types of attacks to death by lethal injection might make them think twice about further attacks. But that wouldn’t deter suicide-bombers like the Islamists.
Suicide-bombers are impossible to deter by legal penalties. Our laws and the penalties for violating them work as a deterrent to someone who loves his life and doesn’t want to rot in jail or die of lethal injection. Those 19 terrorists of 9-11 were not only willing but eager to give their lives in their attack. They couldn’t care less about the penalties in U.S. law for murder.
Liberals, unable to face up to the sheer virulent evil of Islamist terrorism, keep trying to rationalize it, excuse it, belittle it, employ “tu quoque” to deflect it
But the Islamists have other plans.
I expect America will be attacked on our home soil again. Unfortunately. I wish it were not so.
How the liberals in charge of our nation like Obama and Pelosi rise to that challenge will determine if they survive in power for long after that attack. They should remember the precedent of Carter and the hostages in Iran.
22 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:56 am
Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:43 am
“It is not innappropriate (although I was waiting for the memo declaring you to be the arbiter of such rulings) rather an homage. ”
……..There’s nothing wrong with quoting clever sallies, aphorisms, or lines from great speeches but they need to be appropriate and in scale to the subject being discussed……..Holmes, Churchill and Lincoln were as familiar with the word hyperbole as you and most on the right appear ignorant of it
23 MI-GOPer // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:57 am
automaticBS inclines the “other ear” this time: “… it’s very obvious from your (Raider1) comments exactly what you are and it’s neither constructive or useful to politize this tragedy but I don’t suppose that’s going to stop you”.
Of course, three weeks ago, automaticBS was perfectly willing to use the death of a part-time Census Bureau worker in eastern Kentucky to claim that the anti-govt protests of Tea Partiers and Townhallers killed that partitime Census Bureau worker. Even before the body of Bill Sparkman was in the morgue… but that was ok because it’s always ok to politicize a death if it advances an argument smearing the opponents of Obama Messiah.
AutomaticBS? The perfect name for the Village Idiot.
24 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:01 am
Well. With all due respct YOU are the one who brought up Scahefer’s use of Chuchill (for reasons I stated) so you really are the one who makes “big deals” of such silliness wouldn’t you agree? And as Chuchull would say “there some things up with which I shall not put.”
25 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:05 am
32 sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 10:56 am
“Bringing up abortion clinic bombings (which were few and uncoordinated) is how liberals attempt to employ “tu quoque.”
……….That makes them ok does it Sinz……Christian fundamentalists are relatively less effective so that’s ok……..I was actually present when a bomb was set off in the UK in about 1975 by the IRA who were largely funded by Americans…….my wife and two of my kids were with me at the time……I can assure you it makes no f**** difference who sets off the bombs…..it’s terrorism……not that the events down at fort hood appear to have any connection with terrorism but the usual suspect here can’t resist the temptation to politicize this awful event…….it’s rather sickening actually
26 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:07 am
MI-GOPer…exactly what am I?
27 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:08 am
Otto..when is the last time you set foot on the continent of Europe?
28 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:10 am
Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:01 am
Well. With all due respct YOU are the one who brought up Scahefer’s use of Chuchill
……But in a different context…..another word you seem unfamiliar with…….and have some of the keys on your computer failed or are you just demonstrating your maturity
29 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:12 am
Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:08 am
“Otto..when is the last time you set foot on the continent of Europe?”
……..See 25!!
30 Churl // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:12 am
Herewith a link to an AP story on the shooting. they seem to be updating it occasionally.
http://m.apnews.com/ap/db_16026/contentdetail.htm?contentguid=0h3MOtJu
31 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:13 am
Ah I see 25. Then you of all people should know what is happening and be concerned. Unless you think becomeing Eurabia is a good thing for the world?
32 Churl // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:25 am
The Australian press has an interesting article on Hasan:
http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/fort-hood-killer-caught-on-camera-before-shooting-spree/story-e6freuy9-1225795190530
33 mymy // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:32 am
Thanks MI that was my point.I just didn’t make it clear.I come to this site just to find out what Mr. Frums C.W. of the day is.Mr.Frums site doesn’t seem to be having the impact he wished.I found it hard to take Mr. Frum seriously after he bragged about riding a bike 30 min.to buy organic milk.
34 mymy // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:50 am
OTTO I apologize you may well have lived all the places you say.It makes no difference to me.Your equating an inappropriate sign with the murder of 12 does.
35 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 11:56 am
Otto, what are YOUR thoughts on German self-censorhip of publishing houses for fear of Muslim violence?
36 Churl // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:22 pm
Newsweek weighs in, more weird than I expected.
http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thehumancondition/archive/2009/11/06/is-fort-hood-a-harbinger-nidal-malik-hasan-may-be-a-symptom-of-a-military-on-the-brink.aspx
37 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:03 pm
mymy // Nov 6, 2009 at 12:40 pm
“The vets I know say Navy 5yrs,Army 5yrs ect.Why Military?”
……..because this is a blog…..I’m not going to give you may SS # either…….and btw remember what Cheney said to Leahy?
38 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:07 pm
…..boy the editors are working overtime here…….actually I’ve always thought it was pity blog posters didn’t have to give chapter and verse on themselves then the real people could be separated from the snotty nosed kids, the mad and the bad.
39 mymy // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:10 pm
OTTO you certainly are a prickly soul.
40 mymy // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:11 pm
OTTO as we say in the south “just bless your heart”
41 Raider1 // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:15 pm
Sinz…the problem though is the strain of Islam that is being exported by Saudi Arabia (Wahaabism) that is being taken up by more and more young muslims around the world which is a violent, very radicalized version of the religion. And OUR oil money is paying for it. Just as the average age of Westerners (especially European) is increasing, the average age of Muslims is getting younger…and these are the ones who most gravitate towards the more militant brand. And that trend is spilling over now beyond Arabia to once docile Muslim domains as Sri Lanka, Indonesia, etc.
Again, the TRENDS are against the West. Men like Otto think that by denying it, they make it cease to be.
42 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:36 pm
39 mymy // Nov 6, 2009 at 1:10 pm
“OTTO you certainly are a prickly soul.”
……Sorry for the Cheneyism, I thought you were being a smartass………..but yes I am……..when I didn’t work in the oil and manufacturing businesses people who interacted with me knew they had to have their shit together which meant that I knew I had to have my shit together……the whole thing is self reinforcing ………Business management is no place for illogicality, denial of reality, and lack of commonsense…….I wonder if people like Raider ever look in the mirror……he starts off castigating the muslim religion for intolerance and then posts about 15 items demonstrating extreme intolerance…….I’d say it was bizarre but the word is way over used.
43 LFC // Nov 6, 2009 at 2:12 pm
I gotta’ go with Chris Rock’s commentary on Columbine for this one:
Whatever happened to crazy? What, you can’t be crazy no more? Did we eliminate ”crazy”
from the dictionary?
I don’t think radical religion necessarily makes the people crazy. I think the crazy people tend to find radical religion, which then nurtures that crazy. And technology has made the process for crazies to find each other much easier.
44 Reason60 // Nov 6, 2009 at 2:52 pm
I think is it odd that Prof Nick sees examples like Timothy McVeigh as being “anti-government and anti-tax, not carrying out Christian doctrines.”
What does that mean, “not carrying out Christian doctrines”? Does it mean Christianity is a religion of peace? And that those who murder are by definition not Christian?
It sounds like the same spin we hear, that Islamic faith could not possibly be the motive here; in fact, deranged people are often drawn to religion as a way of easily explaining the world, a way of making sense of things. And it often becomes a catalyst for madness, a handy tool to justify nearly anything; See Koresh, David; Jones, Jim; etc.
It also can be a handy tool to justify political ends, of tribal grievances, of ethnic anxieties; See Milosovic, Slobodan; Sudanese Janjaweed Militias
I guess the bigger point that we are struggling with, is how should we respond to Islamist attacks? Should we engage in:
1. A holy war of Christianity versus Islam?
2. An ethnic war of Europeans versus Arabs?
3. A political Cold War of secular democracy versus religious intolerance?
Obviously, I believe that #3 is the best course; We defeated Communism with a steady decades-long campaign of a full-throated bold support for free thinking secular culture and civic tolerance to counter the drive for its opposite.
45 sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:00 pm
Reason60:
There’s one problem with that idea.
The Soviets never bombed New York City and Washington DC.
If they had, the Cold War would have turned hot very fast–and nuclear war would have resulted.
You just don’t seem to get it.
The United States was attacked on its home soil.
Thousands of its citizens were killed.
The enemy threatened more attacks would follow until America was defeated.
That resembles Pearl Harbor more than it does the Cold War.
Do you remember how we responded to Pearl Harbor?
We’re already at war. Real war, hot war.
We were at war the moment the first hijacked jetliner slammed into the World Trade Center.
46 balconesfault // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:08 pm
Do you remember how we responded to Pearl Harbor?
Yep. We didn’t invade Russia – no matter how much a threat we thought they were.
47 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:14 pm
sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:00 pm
“That resembles Pearl Harbor more than it does the Cold War.
Do you remember how we responded to Pearl Harbor?
We’re already at war. Real war, hot war.
We were at war the moment the first hijacked jetliner slammed into the World Trade Center.”
……..Another one with no sense of proportion whatsoever…..the attack on Pearl Harbor was conducted by the the empire of Japan, the third most powerful military state in the world……it took over 3.5 years of huge national, military and naval exertion to subdue them and ultimately required dropping two nuclear bombs……..the attack on the twin towers was a brilliantly executed terrorist act perpetrated by a group of Islamic fundamentalists who have been living in caves since the end of 2001…….the chances of Al Quaeda “defeating” America are zero……do get a sense of reality
48 Kanzeon // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:20 pm
Raider1:
It’s easy to bitch.
Let’s say I agreed with you, that Muslim immigration was destroying European culture. What relevance does that have to me as an American? I can’t influence European policy. In the United States, our immigration challenges come from Mexico. No one is really sure how many Muslim immigrants are in the US, but the consensus is that it is less than 1% of the population.
What would you propose to do about it? A religious test for entry is unAmerican. Many immigrants come here because they are persecuted by Islamic fundamentalists. Many others are coming here for a better life. Who are you going to exclude, and how?
The world’s problems can’t be solved by self-righteous absolutism and doomsaying.
49 Reason60 // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Sinz-
The idea here is that we need to choose our enemies carefully. Osama Bin ladin’s dream is a holy war of Islam vs Christianity. Do you want to oblige him? How would this turn out?
Right now our strategy seems to be invading and occupying any and all nations that we perceive as unfriendly, determined to force upon them a government and culture to our liking. This is madness, based on the idea that we can “engineer the human soul”, in Stalin’s words.
“The enemy threatened more attacks would follow until America was defeated”
Wrong- they did not threaten to attack us until we were defeated- they threatened to attack us until we withdrew from their country.
Bin Ladin’s motivation was a burning desire to see Western soldiers leave the Holy Land of Saudi Arabia. Or to put it another way, has we not stationed forces in Saudi Arabia after the Gulf War, 9-11 would not have occured.
Ultimately, how does anyone see the Iraq/ Afghanistan/ Pakistan/ future Iranian/ future Somalian/ future Yemenian wars ending?
Does anyone really think we will create stable, civil, democratic governments there that are friendly towards us?
Does anyone imagine they will lay down their arms and surrender?
After fighting for the past 30 years without pause, defeating the Red Army, and fighting the US Army to a stalemate after 8 years?
After 9-11 our only enemy was Al Qaida, a scattered group of terrorists armed with boxcutters; today our enemies are legion. We are creating more enemies than we can possibly kill. This isn’t my opinion- it is the opinion of the generals who are fighting the war. Their strategy is to work politically, building political support among the Afghan population by building schools, hospitals, roads and bridges to deny political support to the Taliban.
Ultimately though, this is social engineering on a grand scale; trying to create a sort of Great Society on the other side of the world, similar to the British Empire’s policy of creating India and Hong Kong into models of British society, amenable to rule by the Crown.
And all empires fail in the end.
50 SpartacusIsNotDead // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Sinz wrote: “We’re already at war. Real war, hot war. We were at war the moment the first hijacked jetliner slammed into the World Trade Center.”
With whom are we at war? This kind of simplistic thinking suggests there’s a common enemy that can be identified by its religion or ethnicity. Unless the intent is to indiscriminately kill Muslims and Arabs on a wide scale, there is practically nothing to be gained by using religion or ethnicity to classify those who try to harm us. To continue to do so means we’re going to spend a lot of time and resources searching for enemies where they don’t exist.
51 SpartacusIsNotDead // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:44 pm
Raider 1 wrote: “I have always believed that immigration is the lifeblood of this country. But that is only true so long as those who come here buy into American and Western ideals. ”
What on earth does immigration have to do with the shootings at Ft. Hood?
52 Oneon1isto // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:48 pm
It is important to separate individual ideologies and sects from religion.
The reason I have an abhorrent reaction to all of this conjecture about Jihad is that American’s (myself included) do not have a healthy understanding of Islam. We extrapolate what we do know far too often, and equate Islam with what various sects within the massive religion are up to. We extrapolate based on what we’ve heard, and that’s overwhelmingly of the violent ideologies, and not the peaceful ones.
I am not complicit in what any sect of my religion does, and neither are the Muslims you and I undoubtedly know. Any talk of Islam as a single “entity” is wrongheaded and should be stopped at once.
53 The Fruits of Diversity | Conservative Heritage Times // Nov 6, 2009 at 4:24 pm
[...] must read this. As I said before, I think this piece hits the nail on the head. See article at . VDare, Richmond, CA, Muslim, Gang Rape, | | | | | [...]
54 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 4:36 pm
sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 3:00 pm
……I got news for you Sinz……Canada which of course has a conservative govt has announced it is pulling it’s troops out of Afghanistan…..withdrawal complete by 2011…..I give Harper credit he has the guts to look reality in the face and take the tough decision
55 sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:05 pm
reason60:
I agree with you about that.
It may surprise you,
but I do NOT believe that nation-building democracies in developing nations is a cure-all for Islamist terrorism.
Bush had hoped that free elections and so forth would be so enticing as to lure ordinary folks away from radicalism. After free elections in Gaza, supported by the Bush Administration, led to the election of HAMAS (an actual terrorist group), Bush got pretty quiet about his theory.
There’s plenty of evidence that Islamist radicalism isn’t seduced by the trappings of democracy. The London subway bombers grew up in Britain, lived most of their middle-class lives in the world’s oldest democracy, were reasonably affluent–and yet they became radicalized, fell in love with jihad, and carried out these terrorist bombings. If Muslims can be radicalized despite having lived all their lives in Britain or America, the chance that building a fledgling democracy in some Muslim country somewhere will stop radicalism there is nil.
You brought up the Cold War. The U.S. did much better in the Cold War when it abandoned the theory of “monolithic Communism” and began to work hard to divide Chinese Communists from Soviet Communists, Soviet Communists from Polish and Yugoslav Communists, etc.
The same principle could be applied to the War on Terror, to divide the Shiites of Hezbollah off from the Sunnis of al-Qaeda–except for one small detail:
For the United States Government to get into the business of playing religious sects off against one another like we played Chinese Communists off against Soviet Communists, risks violating the Bill of Rights guarantees on freedom of religion. We’ve usually taken that to mean that the U.S. Government should have no opinions on which religions it would prefer to have better relationships with.
That’s a problem I would like to bounce off some constitutional scholar sometime.
I’m also a big believer in the theory that “nothing succeeds like success.” The U.S. prevailed against Soviet Communism, not because market economies were proven superior over command economies in some stuffy economics journal–but because the USSR was clearly failing by the 1980s. No one but a few malcontents still believes in Marxism-Leninism anymore–again, not because it was disproven in academia, but because the nation that tried to live up to those ideas collapsed.
What that means for the War on Terror, is that the U.S. must put al-Qaeda out of business. If the entire might of the world’s only superpower can’t deal with some 10,000 terrorists, that would mean that the U.S. can be attacked with impunity–and Islamist radicals everywhere will be emboldened to take their own pot shots at us.
56 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:22 pm
sinz54 // Nov 6, 2009 at 5:05 pm
“There’s plenty of evidence that Islamist radicalism isn’t seduced by the trappings of democracy. ”
………Neither was Timothy McVeigh……the vast majority of muslims in Britain are perfectly good law abiding people……they have some crazies just as we do
“The U.S. prevailed against Soviet Communism, not because market economies were proven superior over command economies in some stuffy economics journal–but because the USSR was clearly failing by the 1980s.”
…..your monomania is entertaining……….what have stuffy journals got to do with this……the US prevailed because our free market system was vastly more efficient than their command system which gave us the wherewithal to spend on more efficient weapon systems and satisfy the desires of our people for material comfort…….and since the other day in another of your bursts of realism you were predicting certain war between this country and China in the next 25 years, you’d better be thankful that nuclear weapons have essentially made major wars between the great powers obsolete because I wouldn’t fancy our chances in a conventional war against the Chinese army I saw on parade a couple of weeks ago at their 60th anniversary celebrations!
57 Reason60 // Nov 6, 2009 at 6:28 pm
Sinz-
I agree with much of your post; especially the part about democracy not being a cure-all. I think we would agree that without a culture of tolerance, and a healthy respect for the notions of “loyal opposition”, democracy is a convenient tool for dictators and demogogues to gain power (witness Hugo Chavez).
I also agree that focusing our action on AQ, instead of Islam or Arabs, is productive; alienating them from their source of support can work.
I would also put forward that the large American footprint in their homeland is a lightning rod for anger, and a major recruiting tool. No one likes foreigners on their own soil.
Someone made the point that our drone attacks were like attacking a beehive by trying to kill bees, one at a time; the bees can reproduce faster than we can kill them.
Politics is war by other means, as the saying goes; I believe we can get better results by withdrawing military forces, and focusing on politicially alienating AQ, than by blowing up one house at a time.
58 ProfNickD // Nov 6, 2009 at 6:31 pm
Reason60,
I think that the West (broadly defined as those countries that accept the Enlightenment and constitutional government) has been at war with Islam for a long time, or, more specifically, Islam has been at war with the West for a long time — but, if the thought of a religious-based culture (Islam) making war on enlightened countries (the West) makes you uncomfortable, then simply think of it as a war for civilization against barbarism.
59 Reason60 // Nov 6, 2009 at 7:31 pm
Prof Nick-
Actually, agree with you that Islamists have been waging a sporadic war with the Enlightenment for centuries; I know about the piracy, the slave trading, etc.
However, isn’t it interesting that they never launched a full scale war against the West, since the time of the Moors?
Even when America was much weaker than the Ottoman Turks, they didn’t seem much interested in exporting their revolution. They seemed content to harass and enslave the occasional Westerner who strayed onto their turf.
Likewise, I don’t think we can overestimate the power of being a foreign occupying Empire. to have foreign troops stationed on your own home soil is abhorrent to anyone and only inflames an already tense situation.
I don’t for a moment think that withdrawal of our troops from their soil will cause them to become secular or friendly towards Christianity;
But consider the Saudis; the Wahabbist sect are even more bitterly intolerant of Christianity than the Taliban; But being intolerant towards Christianity doesn’t prevent them from having friendly diplomatic relations, and a mutually beneficial alliance.
60 ottovbvs // Nov 6, 2009 at 8:15 pm
Reason60 // Nov 6, 2009 at 7:31 pm
“However, isn’t it interesting that they never launched a full scale war against the West, since the time of the Moors?”
…….You might want to check out the siege of Vienna which happened in the mid 17th century…….and the Austrian Empire was engaged in major wars against the Ottoman empire until the early 18th Century
61 BoolaBoola // Nov 7, 2009 at 1:29 am
The idea that it’s ok for Americans to kill other Americans over political differences was dormant until Scott Roeder resurrected it by murdering Dr. George Tiller.
This is all the fault of the right-to-lifers.
We should deport them. ALL of them.
62 sinz54 // Nov 7, 2009 at 9:15 am
ottovbs:
That’s exactly my point.
Communism wasn’t defeated by economic studies and econometric models that attempted to prove its inherent inefficiencies (though those existed).
Communism was defeated when the U.S. beat the USSR in competition. Nobody advocates Communism anymore because the USSR is dead.
The same holds true for the War on Terror. We can go hunting through the Quran and Islamic philosophy to learn about jihad and Dar al-Harb and the philosophical differences between Sunni and Shiite. And it’s all useless.
The reason we’re not winning the War on Terror is our economic dependence on the Muslim oil states of the Middle East. If the U.S. had been economically DEPENDENT on the USSR for raw materials, I doubt we would ever have won the Cold War.
The West MUST find alternative sources of energy outside the Middle East oil fields. This would enable us to drive down the world price of oil (once we stop using so much of it), which would have the effect of greatly reducing the power of the Muslim oil bloc.
Saudi Arabia, our so-called “friend and ally,” is the source of a lot of the virulent radical propaganda against the West. We have looked the other way because of their strategic location and willingness to sell us oil. That can only stop when the West stops needing so much of their oil.
63 rbottoms // Nov 7, 2009 at 8:24 pm
A REMF gets pwned by a former POW.
She drops the boom on a smug douche ready to lecture her about Iraq and PTSD.
64 sinz54 // Nov 9, 2009 at 11:47 am
Well, there we are:
65 Independent // Nov 9, 2009 at 8:40 pm
boolaboola says: “The idea that it’s ok for Americans to kill other Americans over political differences was dormant until Scott Roeder resurrected it by murdering Dr. George Tiller”.
i thought that was an execution based on moral grounds that tiller was helping women secure a brutally homocidal and roundly discredited late term abortion? it had nothing to do with any political movement nor was mr roeder a leader of any movement. tiller, like jack kevorkian, was a homocidal maniac intent on murdering innocent, indefensible children who were viable in their mothers’ womb
66 “Diversity Über Alles” « Red Tory v.3.0 // Nov 10, 2009 at 1:10 pm
[...] a more sensible response might be that of Sean Linnane (pseudonym of a retired U.S. Army Special Forces Combat Diver, NCO now serving in other [...]
You must log in to post a comment.