Rusted Sky

Motivationally all the radical Muslims share at least one common trait, they believe that Israel, the U.S.A., and the rest of the non-Muslim world, in that order, are blaphemously interfering with Allah's plan for Muslim world dominance. Furthermore the inhabitants of the Western World continue to insult the world's Muslims by refusing to acknowledge that Islam has special understanding of the intentions of the Creator as to how to lead a righteous life.

Obviously any dog, pig, monkey, or person who holds any idea contrary to the revealed word of Allah must be killed.

As long as this is a popular idea within the adherants of Islam we are in deadly danger. Hezbollah, Hamas, and Al Qaeda are acting with all the fervor of the Spanish Inquisition, only this time they have rockets, machine guns, and explosives plus they are working on an atomic bomb.

pray for sanity

otpu

I guess I don't know what you think victory looks like in this "war."

It seems to me that victory will come from fighting smart. Your "anti-naunce" rhetoric is fine for goading people to take the threat seriously, but it doesn't seem to help much in terms of winning. Your fond of saying things like "it gets messy."

Basically, I feel like you think we need to accept that we're going to be fighting an entire religion for the rest of human history, and that we just need to accept all the terrible things that go with that as the miserable reality of war.

That's certainly the President's rheotric as well. I would think that this kind of talk would be obviously harmful to actual efforts to, you know, win.

By the way, here's one commenter discussing how Israel's lack of, well, nuance has resulted in their worst defeat ever.

http://www.belgraviadispatch.com/2006/08/the_isrealilebanese_denouement.html

What will winning look like? When mosques no longer echo with chants of "Death to the Infidel". When the heroes of Islam are the peacemakers, the ones who preach co-existance instead of head-hacking jihad. When Israel and Arab nations can live peacefully side by side.

That work for you?

J.

I believe Israel's problem was a lack of determination to do everything - and I mean EVERYTHING - it would take to win. Mindful of bad press, they fought a limited war against an organization which equated simple survival with victory - so it was near impossible for them to 'win' with the media, regardless of what the actual end state was. You'll notice in the media coverage that the only casualties were Lebanese. Never Hezbollah, always Lebanese. Pity the poor Lebanese, being pounded by those bastard Jews for no good reason. And, oddly enough, you didn't see Israel parading it's hurt and dead for the camera, like Hezbollah did.

It's also hard to 'win' when you're fighting an enemy like the Black Knight in "Monty Python and the Holy Grail".

You know, I don't think we'll be fighting Islam for the rest of human history. We'll be playing at fighting it until we reach a tipping point, and THEN we'll pull out everything in the arsenal. Once the survivors are convinced we aren't going to accept Islam and we aren't going to die, we'll acheive a form of peace. And as I've said before, I REALLY hope it doesn't come to that. But I fear it will.

Which is why I say it's going to get messy.

I'm also a bit concerned at the 22 August date that Ahmafrigginnutcase seems to be obsessed with. If he lights off a nuke over Israel, he may well get to his reward sooner than he expects.

Reading your comments - I'm thinking you think there's some magic way we can convince those who want to destroy us to peacefully coexist with us. Can you explain a bit more on that, if I have it right? And if you like, I'll make it a centerpiece of a post.

J.

Don't know how comments got turned off there - I've been having some oddities with the DB for this blog...

Dang, but I don't want to export everything and rebuild...

Hezbollah a 'political' organization? Dear me! And they then act independently against the good will and wishes of their Sovereign Nation in which they are a party? That is a *criminal* activity at least and a subversive or revolutionary one in the main conception of it. Hamas *also* was a 'political party' and what have *they* done to fix the streets, get the sewers working and, generally, get some order amongst their populace? And why do they attack from their Sovereign territory another Nation State? Can't they have the good honor to do that thing that is required and declare war? They ARE the leaders of their Nation, such as it is.

Unfortunately all of these organizations, from State sponsored Hamas and Hezbollah, to semi-independent al Qaeda to the Moro Islamic Liberation Front and FARC and Shining path all have very similar goals and traits: they seek to undermine the legitimacy of Nations to rule as Sovereigns for their People. Terrorists do this from the outside of Nations and in the interstices between Nations and use low cost goods and communications to work their will. They each have differing end-goals, but they each require that the Nation State concept be diminished or removed so that they can reach those goals. The Islamic Fascistic/Imperial concept of a return of Caliphate is a common goal for them, although *which* sect/school/splinter group will actually lead the Caliphate is something they intend to work out afterwards. Similarly Shining Path and other Red/Maoist/Stalinist/Leninist groups seek to remove the concept of National Sovereignty and install themselves over the workers to work 'the will of the people'. FARC, more along the Capitalist lines, wishes to remove the effectiveness of law enforcement and military interdiction so as to gain market-share against their more Nation-oriented brethern in the Far East (who work within the concepts of Nations while breaking the laws of them, but understand that their bread and butter is normal commerce). Throw in the more-or-less Nationalist groups, like ETA, the various IRA's and similar, that are more than willing to train outside their Nations and work with other terrorist organizations so that they can weaken their home government both at home and abroad by being uncontrollable by it.

They have a Transnationalist conception of the world. They each have a ruling group/elite/religion/gang that they want at the top. They use common means and methodologies and work together across ideological boundaries. They are Transnational Terrorists, brothers to those working *inside* of Nations to undermine them, the Transnational Progressivists.

The ones who cannot see the fundamental difference between the rule of law and those that obey no laws and seek to undermine the compacts of Nations that establish laws, they are the ones who say there is 'moral equivalence' between conflict via Jus ad bellum and barbaric terrorism. To both of these transnationalist groups they have commonality that there should be no borders, no nations and that people are *born* into classes and groups. And they both, organizationally, wish to put their group on top. This is a pure refusal to accept the Peace of Westphalia and replace it with barbaric warlord states and Empires.

THAT is their connectivity. Without Sovereign States you have no liberty. No Empire has ever been made that is not authoritarian. Wishing for 'no borders' and 'one world' is the exact same thing as wishing for a 'global Caliphate' or a 'workers global paradise' save for having a different ruling group. If you like your rights, you support Westphalia, the diplomacy that has grown up around it, the understanding of interactions between Nations as being supreme activities beyond what is allowable for individuals. Ask to find out 'why they hate us' and you find out it is not hate... but the desire to *rule* that motivates such because they have no such rights within their Nations now. Because they do not resist nor supplant their governments with something better, they seek to return to Empire, and authority of their supported group over everyone else. They fail themselves and then blame *anyone* but themselves for that failure.

That is why when I look at Iraq The Model I am impressed with what they tell us happening on the Arabic part of the 'net... their fellows in surrounding Nations are looking at them and basically asking: you CAN actually do this? These people in various totalitarian or authoritarian States have been told, for generations, that they have *nothing* and little value to their Nation and are to *serve* the Nation they live in. Usually by threat of force. Breaking that grip is not easy and is *not* the end point, but it may be a *turning* point.

Until then, We the People can use the older and honorable form of State sanctioned warfare, empower individuals and companies, and hunt down terrorists, shut off their supplies, make their suppliers lose money and generally get the point across that there is NO profit to be made in attacking the Free People of the United States. Target the goods and transport and you end the legitimacy of working with terrorists and barbarians. The military is not made for that and cannot do that against non-Nation States. But We the People can when given Warrants and then Letters to do so. The terrorists all boast of their courage and bravery in killing innocent women and children... and that the West has no bravery, at all. It is time to let them feel the this Republic has that, and individuals willing to line up to hunt them down for fair reward. This 20th Century Republic is a great weight lifter for heavy loads at short times... but for distance and perserverence we need to rework ourselves into 19th Century fitness: or the road to barbarism will be our end.

What gets me is the "we can't stoop to their level" argument.
We can be a helluva lot more determined without ever stooping to their level.
We don't target children and civilians.
We don't train our children to hate and consider fellow humans monsters that need to be killed,
from birth.
We don't abuse women and children.
We don't consider women as less than equal.
We don't kill someone for changing beliefs, being gay, protesting, not saying prayers 5 times a day, etc..
We don't kill women for being raped, or talking to a man without our permission.
I could go on, but the point is, we will never stoop to their level, but we can be alot more ruthless.
I blame all collateral damage on the terrorists, where the blame belongs.

Jerry, you say that Isreal could have "won" if they'd done "everything necessary." Can you be more specific on how you would like to have seen Israel fight? The article I linked to asserted that Hezbollah was not going to be eliminated even by massive carpet-bombing... you might disagree. I'd like to hear specifics.

Not until you reply to the things I asked you, Jason.

But here's a hint.

Total war.

Hell, everyone hates those damn Jews anyway without good reason, why not make it worth being hated?

J.

AJacksonian -

Very well reasoned argument there.

I wonder if issuing letters of marque to 'organizations' willing to eliminate terrorist gangs would work?

(Can you imagine contacting the Mafia and telling them - "We'll buy all the oil you can sell us at $50 a barrel. You keep the profits. Here's your letter of marque." - and the resulting changes in the ME?

J.

Ben -

Remember, we're operating on the binary theory of social equivalence here. Because the US has done bad things in the past, it is forever tainted and unworthy. Therefore, NOTHING we do will ever be good enough.

Whereas, because they can claim they're being 'oppressed', the little brown brothers are automatically given complete protection from anything resembling the sorts of responsibility that the US has to perform up to. But I've commented on THAT before.

Re the colalteral damage - it reminds me of a criminal taking a hostage... then shouting that the police will have the blame if he has to kill the hostage.

J.

Jason -

To expound... Israel's been living under the threat of extermination for decades. Yet they refused to pull out all the stops to fight this war. Hezbollah was doing EVERYTHING it could weapon-wise. If they had a kitchen sink full of explosives and the means to deliver it, they would have.

But IDF counterbattery fire gave them a better option - get the IDF to target civilians by firing from between houses, stores, buildings... anyplace that would maximize the civilian losses when the IDF returned fire. And then have the media on hand to record the carnage.

What should the IDF have done? Hell if I know - but I've got some ideas.

First, make a general announcement that counterbattery fire WOULD happen. And that if the local civilians didn't want to lose their homes or shops or whatever, that THEY needed to stop Hezbollah from firing from those areas. Establish a free tipline, so if Hezbollah showed up and started setting up, you could call the IDF and get a drone with a Hellfire missile to take out the Hezbollah folk with a minimum of collateral damage. Make it VERY clear that they were after Hezbollah - and that Hezbollah was putting Lebanese civilians in danger by using them as human shields.

Second - ratchet up the PR machine. Remind the world DAILY that Hezbollah was hiding behind Lebanese civilians. Have a website where every possible video from every possible IDF source would be available for every operation. Show the reasons behind every target, if possible. And remind the world constantly that Hezbollah fires rockets at random, while they try their damndest to only take out military targets.

To continue the infowar meme, tell the world in advance and repeatedly that while the Palestinians parade their dead - repeatedly - their customs won't allow it. Constantly emphasize the difference between the IDF and Hezbollah.

That'll help some. How much, I don't know.

J.

Your last comment, here, Jerry, is very encouraging. These are specific details, and I agree with most of them.

My main point in this exchange is that a detailed approach is important. Understanding our potential friends and foes is important to enlisting and eliminating them (repsectively).

PR is vital, because short of blowing up all the muslims, we need a whole lot of muslims (and non-muslims who happen to be Arabs or Persians) to be on our side. Or at least, for them not to be our enemies.

So, I come back to my original point: We need to be encourging people to think about details, INCLUDING differences between our enemies so that we can develop detailed strategies and tactics for victory.

J - The Warrant system used is set and defined by Congress. So the mafia, being transnational in its outlook and use, are out. However, I would say that mercenary organizations composed and run by Americans and Incorporated in America and held accountable by Congress are much more likely to see a good profit by goods seizure and either getting bounty or by 'auction', the latter of which is the tried and true method of liquidating assets. Seizing oil? If from a Nation supporting terrorism, then yes. The Letters are *not* transferable... and while a bribe might work *once* the chances of you going unnoticed in a non-fulfilled Letter are slim to none. Thus you would *become* a target of the Nation's military by committing and act of Treason. That is why US Citizens are the limiting factor. We handle these bullies *ourselves* and don't depend on no-account mafioso or such. And if you try to go Corsair... you get the age old punishment of death.

As I have pointed out it is an old formula that only goes wrong when accountability cannot be ensured. The world now makes that a much easier thing to do and stops Privateers from turning Pirate because of the rewards for turning in Pirates is *also* high. Turn on your Nation and you get what is coming to you... and for all the romanticism of Pirates, only ONE scored more than 10 ships as booty. And even he died by the Navy of a Nation he went against, so all the booty did him little good.

This is the era the terrorists wish to bring back to the world... and we can either say it isn't real and find ourselves with terrorists everywhere... or start to actually *deal* with them. I trust my fellow Citizens to do that... and those that can't be trusted will find the pointy end headed their way of those they betrayed.

Jason:

Oh, stuff a sock in it, man. I ask YOU for ideas, and you hand-wave and applaud that I finally gave details about what I was thinking. And you agree with my points! That must mean that you're right, and I'm eventually going to come around to your way of thinking on the rest of things, right?

"Very encouraging". Thank you so very much. I exist only to win your approval.

/sarc

J.

AJacksonian -

Well, scratch that bright idea then...

(Guess this explains why I'm not a member of the Diplomatic Corps...)

J.