“That “something” is control over you”

Are you going to tell us the secret to all wars? The one that’s somehow related to arab freedom? I’d love to hear it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/bernardhenri-levy/will-unesco-be-faithful-t_b_294165.html

The fact that we in the west are as anxious as we are about Islamic extremism, the fact that we are fearful we might not win, speak eloquently of a pathetic lack of resolve. We are not facing off against an enemy who matches us in resources, weapons of war or even popular support. This is not WW2. These people should not be a threat to us materially or culturally. But they are; and it is due only to our paralysis of will, courage and confidence.

By that logic, Jews should have asked “Why they (the Nazis) hate us?” and all while walking in the gas chambers apologize to their SS guards for the ten pfenning one of their long dead ancestors had unlawfully charged in 1737AD.

Both WWII UK ad US weren’t perfect. But Nazis and Japanese imperialists (who routinely sluaghtered millions of Chinese and experimented in biological warfare) were far worse and we have a better world for the Allies not having gazed at their navels asking themselves about their sins but instead kept sending bombers over Japan and Germany. Millions of Chinese and East-europeans owe their lives to that.

What you are proposing just helps jihadi recruiting. Jihadism will not end by us wringing our hands but by Muslim populations having Jihad’s and Islam’s crimes smeared on their noses (just like Germans were forced to visit death camps) until they reject them in horror instead of, like now, considering that a crime is only a crime when the victim is Muslim.

That “something” is control over you.

“The answer to the last question is the key to understanding the reason for every war that has ever been fought”

I’m dying to hear the answer. What is it? I’d love to know the reason for every war that’s ever been fought.

Jan McDaniel -

“You are making the claim that Islamism is not monolithic”

It isn’t. At the very least, it’s split between two groups that regularly pick fights with one another. So what?

“just as leftists claimed Communism was not”

Irrelevant. And what’s with this “monolithic” business anyway?

“Mr. Puder did not claim that Islamism is monolithic. He did claim that all Islamist violence shares a goal–defeating non-Muslim power”

Oh, I see – a straw man. We’re both talking about the goals of islamist violence. Lets not change the subject.

“Just as all Communists shared the goal of defeating capitalist power”

Irrelevant.

“You are the one setting up a straw man”

There’s a bit of it going around.

“Of course there is nothing wrong with wanting to know your opponent’s motivation”

Then stop accusing people who ask the question of being suckers.

“Islamists are at war for the cause of Islamic supremacy”

Rubbish. Some of the creeps at the top might be selling that line, and some of the clowns at the bottom might believe it’s true, but nobody lines up to be killed just because they think they’re superior – particularly if they just keep losing. Outrage is a much better motivator. I reckon it’s safe to think they’re mad about something (rightly or wrongly).

“just as Nazis went to war for Aryan supremacy”

The NAZIs too! How about the mongols – are they involved?

“A rudimentary internet search will disabuse you of the notion that no one excuses suicide bombing.”

Fair enough. I guess I should have qualified that the “nobody” I had in mind is the group this article ultimately tries to criticise – i.e. western leftists. Obviously the terrorists themselves excuse it.

From a mahoundian perspective, what exactly does justice mean? Raymond Ibrahim has pointed out that, while fighting for justice from a Western perspective is viewed by most of us as a noble cause, “justice” in mahoundian epistemology “justice” actually means granting mahoundians a legal status superior to those of non-muslims (a.k.a. human beings), in addition to making a woman be equally legal to half a man. Just as violent jihad against the human race is viewed by the inbred bedouin savage tapeworms that wage it as “charity”, “altruism” and “love.”

This should be thrown in the face of leftards and other assorted apologists and appeasers, so that the so-called “justice” mahoundians claim to fight for will be debated for what it means in mahoundian epistemology, and NOT for what it means to us Westerners.

It’s not the culture or the government alone, but the ideas present in the alleged holy books themselves that transform these people into monsters – and it’s true for the Shia as well as the Sunni.

You are making the claim that Islamism is not monolithic, just as leftists claimed Communism was not.

Mr. Puder did not claim that Islamism is monolithic. He did claim that all Islamist violence shares a goal–defeating non-Muslim power. Just as all Communists shared the goal of defeating capitalist power.

You are the one setting up a straw man. Of course there is nothing wrong with wanting to know your opponent’s motivation. Stockholm syndrome is about accepting your opponent’s position as valid.

Islamists are at war for the cause of Islamic supremacy just as Nazis went to war for Aryan supremacy.

A rudimentary internet search will disabuse you of the notion that no one excuses suicide bombing.