Comments on: Looking Back in Anger

By: Tom W.

Tom W. — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 10:23:28 +0000

I wouldn’t be so quick to argue that we’re fighting this war by half-measures.

Ask the French how all-out war against Muslims went in Algeria. The French used collective punishment in the form of indiscriminate airstrikes and artillery barrages on villages; mass summary executions; horrific torture; and concentration camps, but they still lost.

Not only that, their KIA rate was almost four times ours, even though they killed 350,000 to 1.5 million Algerians.

Ask the Soviets how they did using all-out war against Muslims in Afghanistan. Their KIA rate was twice ours, even though they killed a million Afghans.

This is the Long War. By fighting it with a level of restraint, we’re slowly turning Muslims against al Qaeda and their ilk.

Don’t get me wrong: I’m sick of Islam. I hate it. But we need Muslims both to help us win and to bring about an Enlightenment in their awful religion.

Be patient. We’re doing this the smart way, no matter what the so-called experts say.

By: Lena in LaLaLand

Lena in LaLaLand — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 02:24:06 +0000

I was getting ready for school in the 10th grade on the morning of Sept. 11th. I remember feeling angry and seeing many angry people, not just that day, but weeks afterwards. Where has the outrage gone? I’m 20 now, and that feeling that I saw other people having seems as distant as what I had for lunch a few days ago. I find this unfortunate and awfully discouraging.

One of the things that angers me the most is how many Americans are saying that we deserved Sept. 11th or that ‘we had it coming’.

By: Michael Lonie

Michael Lonie — Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:26:51 +0000

Well said Dr. Rusin.

Anger is a motivating emotion in war, not a guide to action. If I may quote the Communist physicist P. M. S. Blackett, “Wars are not fought on gusts of emotion.” Our government has chosen not to motivate by anger as was done in WWII. I think this is turning out to be a mistake. We are showing ourselves incompetent at the information war, or propaganda war if you will. Two examples should explain it.

Iran is a key enemy in this war. No one will be safe until the Ayatollahs are overthrown, not us, not Middle Easterners, not the Iranians themselves. A simple ploy to help discredit them among Muslims would be to refer to the Ayatollahs in all American public statements as “The Pharaohs of Tehran”. “Pharaoh” has an extremly pejoritive connotation in Islam, being the ultimate hypocrite and evildoer. This is a small thing but I think it would help.

We should also be publicizing through Arabic and Persian language broadcasts the vicious atrocities our enemies committed in Fallujah and Baqubah when they briefly ruled those places. “This is the way the New Caliphate will govern you. Is that what you want?” should be our question. We should harp on this continuously, adding more examples as we find them. We can see in Anbar Province how the actual experience of being ruled by these radical Islamists disgusts the people ruled. It is a weakness in our enemies we can exploit, if we have the will and intelligence to do so.

We must pit our big idea against our enemy’s. His is a worldwide caliphate where Muslims will swagger around lording it over wretched dhimmis (the rest of us). It is an attractive and flattering self image for Muslims. We must pit against it our idea, liberty and prosperity in a modern world. So far we are not doing a good job of that.

By: AST

AST — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:46:19 +0000

I don’t care whether we’re angry as long as we remain resolute in hunting down terrorists and destroying them. We haven’t backed up our rhetoric with action. If we had, we’d have overthrown the regime in Syria by now and served notice on Pakistan that there can be no refuge in its borders for Al Qaeda or the Taliban. You don’t have to be angry to decide to rid the world of vermin. In fact, it might be better for our efforts against these apostate Islamists if they saw us as implacable, resolute and regardless of our losses. They believe that everything that happens is the will of God and is fated. The more we identify ourselves with the hand of fate and make their ultimate destruction inevitable, the more likely they are to lose their appeal to young Muslims, especially if we combine our military efforts with progress in political, social and physical infrastructure.

They will commit any atrocity, use any tactic, such as forcing us to kill women and children jacketed in explosive belts, to weaken our will.

By: Dr. Ellen

Dr. Ellen — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 19:46:09 +0000

I have a doctorate in PHYSICS, for Pete’s sake, and there have been Modernists who are filled with rage that I should think the facts of physics are immutable (even if we may not know them perfectly).

You needn’t imagine, then, the rage of the Modernists when we dare to assert that history actually happened, instead of merely being a story told by the dominant patriarchy. You needn’t imagine it, because it’s on display every day in the words of the Far Left and their enablers.

By: David Thomson

David Thomson — Tue, 11 Sep 2007 17:36:36 +0000

A very high number of Americans want to take a permanent vacation from history. This was the central reason why Bill Clinton was elected president. Soviet Communism had been defeated and we now supposedly could almost exclusively focus on domestic issues. Unfortunately, as someone once said: you may not be interested in war—but war is interested in you. The Islamic nihilists will not be satisfied until they dominate the entire planet. We are in an existential fight to the death. Liberalism is unable to respond to such a threat. Its adherents would have to abandon core principle and assume the responsibilities of adulthood. They prefer to remain immature children.

The Democratic Party and its Ron Paul Republican allies greatly endanger our country. We must never underestimate the importance of next year’s elections. It will likely be our very last chance to save ourselves.