Are We Winning the War on Terror?

Reports tell us Al-Qaida is stronger than ever. Six years ago Al-Qaida in Iraq did not exist. So much for the success of the War on Terror.

There are two ways of fighting the so-called War on Terror. One is the way of Elephant like Strength through Force. The Army invades and occupies. The residents of the occupied country accept their fate. They live in peace with the conquering army because they know they can do nothing to defeat it. Shock and Awe brings peace to all.

The other is the way of Lilly Livered Yellow Bellied Feminized Surrender Monkeys. This relies on police work to find the terrorists before they strike. Increased security decreases the opportunity for them to strike. Dialogue with those among the terrorists co-religionists who would live in peace even if they disagree with us on other important things decreases the number of potential terrorists. When we do invade a country we stay until the job is done instead of moving most of our strength off to invade another country.

We re beginning to see which method really works. At the very least we see which method does not. So much for the way of the Elephant. Strength Through Force is clearly not working.

Why They Hate Us, Muslim View

That the hard right is in deep trouble is obvious. They can’t run on their record. Their record is one of failure such as Americans before today would not believe was possible. They started a war we cannot win but cannot end. It sucks the wealth of the nation into it with no end in sight. They refuse to put their own wealth or the lives of their children at risk by calling for a draft and higher taxes even as they claim this is a life and death struggle against an implacable enemy. Their economic policy, based on the idea greed is the greatest of all virtues, has left the nation in debt both individually and collectively. Their foreign policy has left the nation hated in foreign lands as never before. These failures spell their doom and they know it.

Meaning the hard right is reduced to its last hope for success. Fear. Fear, in order to be an effective motivator, must have an object. There must be something to cause fear. This something must be an effective motivator People must be so afraid of the object of fear they will leave go of their senses and do things they would not otherwise do. In this case fear must motivate people to vote for the incompetents responsible for the state of affairs listed above. This is going to take some doing.

So the hard right is busy promoting Islamophobia, fear of Islam. It is easy to see the basis for this fear. Yes most all acts of terrorism since September 11, 2001 have been caused by Muslims acting in what they claim is the name of Islam. This does not mean Islam causes terrorism. Nor does it mean all Muslims are terrorists. This does not mean we can’t talk to Muslims, even so-called Islamists. Islam is a very complex religion. Great understanding is needed. But the hard right is not interested in understanding. It is interested in something else.

We know this because any time anyone has a kind word to say for Islam or Muslims the hard right goes into attack mode. People who have kind words to say to Muslims or Islam, people who are trying to understand the complexity of the situation, are labeled dupes and traitors. They are naive and must be ignored. Only people who understand that all Muslims are a threat should be listened to. Unless you believe Islam is evil and must be destroyed you are a part of the problem and not a part of the solution. At least not in the eyes of the hard right.

This attitude could lead to a war no one wants; a war of genocide against all Muslims. This may not be the hard right’s intent. Still they are doing things which increase the possibility of this happening. They are opposing those who would avoid it. But of course if such a war were to come to pass we would need leaders to lead us in the fight. And the leaders of the hard right would then offer themselves. This they wouldn’t mind in the least. So while we can’t prove the purpose of Islamophobia is to keep the hard right in power we can’t disprove this claim either.

Moderates vs Extremists

What makes a moderate a moderate? What makes an extremist an extremist/ The difference is in their attitude towards the idea that the ends justify the means.

For the extremist the ends always justify the means. No matter how evil the means the goodness of the ends makes the means justified. The greatest good justifies the evilest of means. This is what is meant by bearing any burden and paying any price in order to reach a goal. Set the goal. Do not question how the goal is achieved. This is the extremist creed.

For the moderate there are means which are simply not justified by any ends whatsoever. There are acts so evil they must simply not be done. For the moderate is is better not to achieve the goal than to achieve the goal through evil means. For the moderate there are burdens which simply must not be borne; prices which simply must not be paid. For the moderate evil is evil. You cannot justify doing evil by the good which may result.

Extremists do not like moderates. To the extremist the moderate is a coward. To the extremist the moderate is a wimp. To the extremist the moderate is weak. Those who are willing to accept failure rather than pay the price for success simply must not be listened to. Their views must be ignored.

Nor do moderates like extremists. To the moderate the extremist is dangerous. At his worst, claims the moderate, the extremist can be truly evil. To the moderate some cures really are worse than the disease. The moderate is concerned about the price of success. The moderate asks whether the village really was saved if trying to save it lead to its destruction? Was trying to create heaven on earth worth it if hell on earth was the result? To the moderate those who consider asking such questions a sign of weakness and cowardice are among the most dangerous people who ever walked the earth.

The most critical battle is not between the Muslim and the non-Muslim. Nor is it between West and East or Republican and Democrat. The truly important battle is between moderate and extremist. The question is what price should be paid for success? is it possible for sucvcess to cost more than can be paid?

Oppose the Foot and Mouth Disease solution for Terrorism

What is the Foot and Mouth Disease solution for terrorism? If there were no Islam there would be no Islamic terrorism. And how do we insure there is no Islam? We kill all the potential carriers of the "Islamic virus." Which means killing all Muslims. Which means committing genocide against all Muslims. One must note the proponents of this strategy have yet to actually endorse genocide. But how else can they achieve their goal?

We call this the Foot and Mouth disease solution because it is similar to the way in which Foot and Mouth disease is controlled. Foot and Mouth disease is a contagious disease which affects hoofed farm animals. The disease is not fatal but does spread rapidly. To limit the spread of the disease it is standard practice to destroy all infected animals as well as animals subject to infection in the area of an outbreak. While killing these animals is hard on them doing so does lessen the economic damage done by an outbreak. It is therefore standard practice.

On the Islamophobic right advocating the same solution to the problem of terrorism is common. Indeed once one comes to the conclusion there can be no such thing as a moderate, or non-violent Muslim, it is inevitable. If we cannot reason with these people or trust these people, if we must kill them before they kill us then we must commit genocide in order to survive. Since those on the Islamophobic right condemn anyone who suggests we can reason with the enemy, talk to the enemy, negotiate with the enemy and avoid killing the enemy before he kills us as allies of the enemy it is obvious what their policy really and truly is. It is genocide.