-
UKIP Comes Out Fighting
May 8, 2013 | 15 comments
-
What Will Britain Turn Into?
May 1, 2013 | 31 comments
-
His Queeg Moment
January 29, 2013 | 120 comments
-
High Marks for The Hobbit
January 10, 2013 | 23 comments
-
The Puzzle of Petraeus
November 13, 2012 | 23 comments
Another Perspective
So, What to Do? Ask Lady Houston
Many authors have documented the Islamist threat but when it comes to responding to it they fumble for words.
At least since 9/11, the Muslim jihad against the West has led to a number of eloquent books detailing the plight of the West and documenting in detail what is happening.
I include not only Muslim colonization of Europe, but also the attacks on Christian communities in Africa, Asia and the few Christians remaining in the Middle East.
However, those works which I have read, and some of them are truly excellent pieces of writing and research, all seem to me to share a common weakness.
When, in the concluding chapters, they turn from detailing the remorseless advance of Islam in one continent after another, and the impotence of liberal democracy in the face of it, to what to actually do about it, their often-razor-sharp prose has a tendency to turn to vague platitudes and truisms.
It is impossible to blame the authors of these publications for this. For one thing, the West is facing an enemy unlike any other, an enemy particularly skilled at using the West’s institutions of liberal democracy and the pacific elements of Christianity, to its own advantage.
Further, the enemy has no recognizable military structure. It has no general staff whose mistakes can be taken advantage of, no population concentrations that can be bombed to any point.
Against a drive to Islamize the world, bombing Afghanistan has never been much more than a waste of time, creating an illusion of purposeful activity and cutting a few heads off a hydra. Killing Osama Bin Laden did not damage Islamic jihadism as in, say, World War II killing Hitler would have destroyed the heart of German National Socialism. There can be no possibility of the equivalent of a Gorbachev who either could or would end the machinery of the terrorist jihad. The war in Afghanistan was plainly futile from the start if its object was to defeat international terrorism. The Boko Haram killing Christians in Africa in the name of Allah have probably never heard of Afghanistan. Winning or losing ground in the vicinity of the Khyber Pass will make no difference to the unemployed Muslim “youths” in slums ringing the French (and not only French) cities who regard Western Civilization with fascinated disgust.
We have the finest navies and air forces in the world, almost useless against an enemy who has neither. Further, to even advocate any sort of comparable counter-attack is not only incompatible with our own civilized values, but probably illegal.
I realize I am doing more-or-less what I am criticizing others for: floundering for an answer.
It is the first war in which our side has made broadcasting our own propaganda, let alone anything more active, illegal. Things have reached such a pass that even a cultural revival of patriotism (one, but only one, of the essential requirements, and for Europe more than the United States) would probably need some sort of censorship or government influence in the media comparable to, say, the anti-smoking campaign.
To even talk of systematic discrimination is to walk on dangerous political ground, though to raise it as a possibility is not yet illegal, at least in most places and if one treads with care. To observe the vast Muslim colonization effort in Britain, Europe, and elsewhere, including the gradual acceptance of Sharia Law, polygamy, and forced marriages, must inevitably lead one to think of ways of drying up the Islamic ocean in which the Jihadist fish swim. When there are whole districts of Western cities where non-Muslims are not allowed to enter, and from which in some cases non-Muslim residents and businesses have been systematically driven out after centuries, it seems that some reaction is called for.
“Some reaction.” There I go again. The best I can offer is the vaguest possible words. It is a product of a conflict, perhaps unique in human history, in which only one side is allowed aggression — or even response.
The “warning” books and articles I have read often conclude with the observation that 9/11, the Spanish train bombings, the London bus bombings, the Bali nightclub bombings, the Fort Hood massacre, the Benghazi massacre or whatever, were “A wake-up call.” They were not. Even 9/11 did no more than provoke a couple of blows in the wrong direction. The killing of Bin Laden was satisfactory and richly deserved, yet it had nothing to do with larger strategic objectives, such as clearing the Taliban out of Afghanistan. Without denigrating the bravery, dedication, and righteousness of those involved (my strongest feeling towards those who killed him is envy), the whole exercise had an air of superstition about it, as if destroying a symbol was the same as destroying the reality. What difference did it make to the Islamic colonization of Africa or of the Western world?
One of my favorite characters in history is Fanny Radmall, a slum-born London chorus-girl who married a rich man and became Lady Houston.
While the great statesmen of the democracies dithered at the rise of totalitarianism in Europe, and luminous intellectuals signed the petitions of the Peace Pledge Union, she paid a fantastic sum out of her own pocket for the development the high-speed aircraft which led directly to the Spitfire.
It is to me a story with a liberally fabulous quality about it. One might say: If only it was so simple today. And people like Lady Houston, who instinctively know the right thing to do and do it, are rare in any age.
About the Author
Hal G.P. Colebatch’s “Immram,” Counterstrike, is being published by Australian publisher Imaginites.
potkas7| 1.9.13 @ 7:08AM
Islam, at its core, is an ideology. If you want to challenge and defeat Islam you must confront it at it's root, i.e. by challenging the Tradition Narrative of its foundation.
Is that possible? Sure. It's fairly easy to demonstrate that, historically and intellectually, Islam is a mashup of Judaism and Monophysite Christianity. And the West has a formidable arsenal of weapons to choose from in waging a war of ideas starting with Classical Greek Philosophy, the rich intellectual history of Christianity, and the revolutionary ideas and ideals of the Scientific Age beginning with the Enlightenment.
Holding us back is our ignorance of our own intellectual heritage and our embarrassment at admitting or expounding our own religious history.
loulou| 1.9.13 @ 11:02AM
Gobbledegook.
Job| 1.9.13 @ 4:07PM
any of this sound familiar because it's from the second chapter of the Koran and would suggest to any fair minded fact check that some plagiarism, collusion, copying or mebbe cloning was involved here. now lesse Moses penned Genesis in 1400 BC and Muhammed penned the Koran in 700 AD.
check it out:
earth, and that I know what you reveal and what you conceal?”
34. And We said to the angels, “Bow down to Adam.” They bowed down, except for Satan. He refused, was arrogant, and was one of the disbelievers.
35. We said, “O Adam, inhabit the Garden, you and your spouse, and eat from it freely as you please, but do not approach this tree, lest you become wrongdoers.”
36. But Satan caused them to slip from it, and caused them to depart the state they were in. We said, “Go down, some of you enemies of one another. And you will have residence on earth, and enjoyment for a while.”
37. Then Adam received words from his Lord, so He relented towards him. He is the Relenting, the Merciful.
38. We said, “Go down from it, all of you. Yet whenever guidance comes to you from Me, then whoever follows My guidance—they have nothing to fear, nor shall they grieve.
39. But as for those who disbelieve and reject Our signs—these are the inmates of the Fire—wherein they will remain forever.”
40. O Children of Israel! Remember My blessings which I bestowed upon you, and fulfill your pledge to Me, and I will fulfill My pledge to you, and fear Me.
Cromulent| 1.9.13 @ 12:26PM
Well, I wouldn't call the project "easy". Or Islam would have been strangled in the crib.
I think science has to play a big role here. I'm talking specifically about archeology. Islam's founding story has a lot of holes and inconsistencies. Somewhere on the Arabian peninsula there are artifacts waiting to be discovered that should tear their narrative.
potkas7| 1.9.13 @ 3:24PM
There is a story in the December 21st English Edition of Der Spiegel about a recent archaeological discovery at the southerly end of the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen by Paul Yule of Heidelberg. He has found evidence of a Christian kingdom which dominated Arabia between the 3rd and 5th centuries with its capitol in the city of Zafar. It paints a fascinating picture of Arabia pre-Muhammadan, and suggests that that Kings of Arabia had converted to Judaism in opposition to this Yemeni Christian superpower. According to Yule, Muhammad himself may have been born in a Christian city.
C. Vernon Crisler | 1.9.13 @ 9:43AM
Perhaps the real problem is that we have absolutized religious toleration (e.g., the 1st Amendment) so much that all religions are allowed in the public square. Perhaps we need to rethink this idea and exclude religions that teach violence as a method of propagating their ideas.
Havoc| 1.10.13 @ 1:18AM
Exactly. We have the right to decide what qualifies as religion within our borders.
Doctor Right| 1.9.13 @ 9:53AM
As usual, an excellent analysis.
From my perspective, the best thing that "the West" can do (meaning the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Great Britain) in the short-term is to begin to free ourselves from the yoke middle-eastern oil.
Canada and the USA have vast, untapped reserves that the left and their Democrat allies in government make difficult to obtain. Overcoming that obstruction will not be easy, but it must be done.
Once underway, we can begin to disengage completely from those parts of the world - the Muslim parts - and leave them to their own savage devices. Without the steady flow of oil money from the west, they will eventually descend into anarchy and destroy themselves. I take no pleasure in saying this; I simply believe it to be true.
As an added aside, I'd include Western Europe in "the West," but I fear they may be too far gone, both in terms of their willingness to fight Islamism, and their own immigration policies. And frankly, I'm not really willing to risk American lives to liberate them for the 3rd time in 100 years.
Occam's Tool| 1.9.13 @ 5:19PM
READ Caliphate by Tom Kratman. He outlines what we should do to avoid the problem in gripping detail (in his future, we did, but too late to prevent massive loss of life on our side).
cicero| 1.9.13 @ 10:37AM
This is not the first time that the West has faced this problem. It seems to reoccur periodically. The problem is that this is the first time that the West has refused to defend itself. A hundred years or so ago, Egypt was under pressure by the same forces. The British, who were the protectors of the government, sent in an army, and destroyed the then current Mahdi and all of his forces. ("The River War", Winston Churchill) Now, we sell them weapons, use our own laws against ourselves, and refuse to call this what it is.
If we are serious about stopping this nonsense, we have to take the "fun" out of the game. We have the best special forces in the world. The Brits, French, and Aussies are almost as good. Hunt the bastards down. Humiliate them when caught. Wrap their corpses in pig skins, and bury them .
I read a news item yesterday stating that the residents of Abu Ghraib were awarded millions from a U.S. court. What idiocy. That incident cut down the infiltration of foreign juhadis into Iraq significantly. None of them wanted to risk capture, and humiliation by being mocked by female American soldiers. What idiots our courts are.
Fred in Boise| 1.9.13 @ 11:56AM
As any euro historian can cite, the Islamic Jihad that Mohammed started did not end until the 17th century at the gates of Vienna. Europe did not start the Crusades, the Seljuk Turks did.
There are no true martyrs in the founding of Islam, only war lords killing people. Despite the propaganda, the character of the religion and it's clerics has not changed.
Am befuddled at how it's happened that liberal Western thought has uncoupled itself from reality and seems bent on encouraging fulfillment of a death wish.
Has materialism spoiled us that we think we can truly live in an intellectual dream of our own creation without having to deal with actual world?
Job| 1.9.13 @ 4:13PM
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/.....a2=pla&r=1
the book "Prince" by william simpson with Margaret Thatcher who wrote the forward chronicles the was the Saudi Prince Bandar secured the 20 billion dollar AWACs deal for the Saudis when Ronald Reagan was pres ( He learned how the inside the beltway works and started throwing money in there the same way PACs and lobbies do). BTW I think our MSM is compromised by the same lobby.
Job| 1.9.13 @ 4:15PM
chronicled the way.
Occam's Tool| 1.9.13 @ 5:22PM
Cicero and Fred: correct. I have a solution, and it doesn't involve genocide.
Pick a city in Iran that is of sufficient population, not Teheran. Nuke it. Then tell them to stop thei atomic energy development, otherwise more attacks will follow. Then state that more nukes will follow any terrorist attacks on the USA, Israel or other Western soil, or non-Muslims, but that they are welcome to kill themselves.
Stuart Koehl| 1.9.13 @ 10:42AM
Actually, Hal, Lady Houston 100,000 pounds to Supermarine in 1931 to complete design and construction of the S.6B seaplane, designed by Reginald Mitchell. The S.6B was not a lineal ancestor of the Spitfire, but its Rolls Royce R engine did lead directly to the Rolls Royce PV.12, which was then developed into the Rolls Royce Merlin, which powered not only the Spitfire, but also the Hurricane, the P-51 Mustang, the de Haviland Mosquito, the Avro Lancaster and several other important Allied aircraft of World War II. Without Lady Houston, there would not have been a Merlin engine, hence no engine to power the planes that held off the Luftwaffe in 1940.
Fred in Boise| 1.9.13 @ 11:44AM
People are led to think the Spitfire won the battle of Britain when it was the Hurricane that shot down the vast majority of German planes.
JmsA| 1.9.13 @ 2:30PM
Yes, the Hurricanes shot down the majority of German bombers, but it was the Spitfires that dealt with the fighter escorts, the Bf-109, or(Messerschmitt) Me-109. To put it another way, and paraphrasing German fighter ace Adolf Galland: the Hurricane was a very nice plane to shoot down.
Stuart Koehl| 1.9.13 @ 3:43PM
As Hurricanes outnumbered Spitfires by two-to-one in Fighter Command, it should be no surprise that Hurricanes accounted for two-thirds of the CLAIMS (the British over claimed by about two-to-one); we may assume actual German aircraft losses were proportionally similar.
Because of its superior performance, when possible Fighter Command controllers would send Spitfire squadrons after the Bf.109 escorts, and the Hurricane squadrons after the bombers, but this was not always possible.
While the Spitfire Mk.1 was very closely matched to the Bf.109E (especially after the former received constant-speed propellers), the Hurricane, though slower, was a better gun platform, very rugged, and easy to repair.
Both aircraft were equipped with the Merlin Mk.I or Mk.III engine, developing 1080-1180 hp. Without that engine, neither fighter would have been a match for its German counterpart.
JmsA| 1.9.13 @ 5:10PM
As usual, you're correct Mr. Koehl. I once read a comment, no doubt by someone of note, though I can't recall the name, that the Germans lost the war because of their inability to produce a piston engine to equal the performance of the Marlin.
I wonder if you could elaborate on another historian's assertion that the loss Luftwaffe planes and air crews, not only during the Battle of Britain, but subsequently during Hitler's invasion of the West in the spring of 1940, as well as later in North Africa, ultimately caught up with the Luftwaffe and the Wehrmacht proper, during the invasion of the Soviet Union?
Occam's Tool| 1.9.13 @ 5:35PM
JmsA: I will let Stuart rip me apart on this one, but here goes:
The Battle of Britain occurred after the invasion of the West. The major contributor to Luftwaffe attrition was the joint bomber Offensive, particularly AND especially when our bombers were escorted by long range escorts, especially the Mustang. Since the German fighter pilots were under orders NOT to tangle with the fighters but pursue the bombers,this greatly increased their attrition.
In fact, it can be safely summarized that the Americans and Brits were responsible for much of the destruction of the Luftwaffe, almost ALL of the destruction of the German Navy, but only about 10% of the destruction of the Wehrmacht. The destruction of the Wehrmacht was a combination of both inadequate logistics combined with an intelligence and strategic failure of monumental proportions. Gehlen was an idiot, and Hitler deprived his legions of their tactical flexibility, resulting in needless destructionof units that could have fought longer and better, otherwise.
However, if that had occurred, we would not be talking about Hiroshima and Nagasaki, but Munich and Berlin.
JmsA| 1.9.13 @ 9:18PM
Thanks, OT. I believe that's a good assessment of that which occurred, particularly after the start of USAAF daytime operations over Western Europe, including the implementation of "Defence of the Reich" strategy. As to the contribution to the final outcome, you're correct regarding the P-51 Mustang. I believe it was Goering who came to the conclusion the jig was up, as he observed Mustangs escorting American bombers over Berlin.
JmsA| 1.9.13 @ 9:25PM
Cont'd.:
As to my original query to Mr. Koehl, I was primarily alluding to observations made by a historian, whose name I cannot recall, in reference to the toll taken on the Luftwaffe prior to the invasion of Russia: Namely, the resulting operational limitations imposed on it, both tactically and strategically, in light of also their lack of a true (4-engine) strategic bomber force, relative to the Russian territorial expanse and the latter's relocation of its industry to the Urals and beyond, etc.
I believe you were referring to Hermann Goering, head of the Luftwaffe, instead of Gehlen. As I understand it, Reinhard Gehlen, unlike Goering, was a rather efficient intelligence officer in the FHO/Fremde Heere Ost or Foreign Armies East, who thankfully Hitler did not pay much, if any attention to during the war, and later helped American intelligence operations against the Soviet Union, including the formation of the Gehlen Organization, etc.
As to your final point, I believe it also accurate, as the B-29 bomber and the bomb were both designed/intended for Europe, had the war not ended when it did, as the Germans correspondingly developed high altitude fighters such as the Focke-Wulf Ta-152, to counter it.
Occam's Tool| 3.9.13 @ 9:13PM
Actually, Gehlen made error after error in predicting Soviet intentions. I was referring to Gehlen with regards to the destruction of the German Army, since poor intelligence and strategy eliminated any benefit that operational brilliance gave the Wehrmacht.
Fred in Boise| 1.9.13 @ 11:40AM
All the West needs to do is hold the Muslim entities accountable to the same non-disrimination laws it demands of non Muslims.
The only reason the Islamic colonies thrive is because they intimidate the hell out of local government leaders (including judges). Find some political backbone, enforce the laws and the clout is gone.
Muslim clerics are nothing more, or less, than an organized crime group trying to seem legit. Their followers get sucked in as they see no viable alternative to their cultural and political helplessness within the local Mosque.
Western leaders of merit can show them what the Western idea of rational, civil LAW can achieve for them. Without enforcement, only weakness is shown and no one wants to be on the losing side of an ideological war where one side is a punching bag and the other fights with beheadings.
JmsA| 1.9.13 @ 2:45PM
All the West has to do is keep them away. Islam is a political scheme disguised as a religion.
Fred in Boise| 1.9.13 @ 4:41PM
LOL Amen!
Fred in Boise| 1.9.13 @ 11:47AM
One thing that truly puzzles me is why otherwise intelligent people can be so stupid. How does one explain Obama's stance on Islam except to cite the existence of educated fools.
The media and the public seems to have forgotten that there is such a thing. Am afraid we are indeed doomed to repeat history....
Occam's Tool| 1.9.13 @ 5:27PM
I haven't seen you here before, Fred. Welcome aboard. Love your stuff.
And, it is always good to see Stuart back.
My view is that we are attacked because our foes do not believe we are grimly prepared to defend ourselves. Some demonstration of this, costly of our enemies' lives, must be established to restore deterrence.
It is not necessary to "kill them all," just to destroy their will to fight and kill.
The difference between Communism and Islam is that most people living under Communism weren't devout Communists. This is not true for Islam. I don't remember Russians carrying posters on the street stating "The Hell with Freedom."
Jim Adcox| 1.9.13 @ 12:34PM
Genesis 16: 11 and 12 provide the origin of the modern dilemma of which Colebatch writes:
"And the angel of the Lord said unto her [Hagar], 'Behold, thou art with child and shalt bear a son, and shalt call his name Ishmael; because the Lord hath heard thy affliction. And he will be a wild man; his hand will be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.'"
THKrupp| 1.9.13 @ 1:02PM
Potkas7 is right. Islam is an ideology and that is really the only way you can fight it. There is no military solution to Islam except for killing every man woman and child who professes Islam and every man woman and child that might profess it. Thats the solution my grandmother advocated for Catholicism. She was no more right than the author is. We didnt beat the USSR so much as everyone living there basically stopped believing in communism. The west had a superior ideology that allowed the avg person access to more freedoms of many different stripes.
Western Philosophy has the advantage over Islam in this regard as well.
Jason in NYC| 1.9.13 @ 1:34PM
While there may be Lady Houstons among us today, what is synonymous with the Spitfire? What do we have in common today with the English people who understood the threat from totalitarianism? Where's our Churchill? It's evident to me in my daily travels that most Americans (and probably most Westerners) don't understand the existential threat from Islam, or they're afraid to confront it. We as individuals must not be afraid to speak out about the objectives of Islam and how this ideology is not compatible with a free society. The few who are brave enough to make this case in otherwise polite company are the only hope at ending the social stigma.
Belianis | 1.9.13 @ 2:25PM
The best priest that I ever met was Father Pedro Gallo of Spain. He talked with such eloquence about the Reconquest, Poitiers, Belgrade, Lepanto and Vienna that he inspired in me the desire to become a crusader. It seems that now I will get my wish; fortunately this 58 y/o is still full of the fighting spirit of his youth.
Occam's Tool| 1.9.13 @ 5:28PM
G-d Bless and keep you, Mr. B.
JmsA| 1.9.13 @ 3:02PM
I like your post, Belianís (de Grecia).
I thought you might like this translation by P. Archer:
Don Belianís of Greece to Don Quixote de La Mancha:
I did my cutting, thrusting, hacking away, more
Than any other in a long line of valiant knights;
I was brave and bold and clever in arts of war,
Put over a hundred thousand wrongs to rights.
My deeds will live on in history
In courtly love I was gallant and skillful;
I took on giants like they meant nothing to me,
And in fighting duels I played by every rule.
I made Dame Fortune grovel at my knees
And was smart enough to grab opportunity
By the balls, make it do what I please,
I took on all comers with impunity
And was on top of my game in my heyday
But I envy your prowess, oh great Don Quixote!
Belianis | 1.9.13 @ 8:35PM
Thanks a trillion for your kind words, Occam's Tool and JmsA
Thom| 1.9.13 @ 3:12PM
What to do about Islam? Well first you start by calling a Pig a Pig. Every religion is at its core
a philosophy or ideology. Right within Islam's Holly manuscript are the quotes every would be
Islamist terrorist going back hundreds of years has quoted. You'll find nothing comparable
coming out of the New Testament. As long as Islam adheres to a book that embraces violence
throughout its teachings Islam will never be compatible with a peaceful co-existence with any
other philosophy be it religion based or not. The Arabs (Muslims) partnered with the Nazis
during WWII. Fascism and Islam share many philosophic tenets. A person can't change where
they were born or who their parents were but they can choose their philosophy and religion. If
people born in Muslim countries can be compelled to worship Islam then they can be
compelled to support anything found in their Holly Bible. Religious freedoms end at the point
where intimidation and force are its enablers. There is no such thing as religious freedoms
under Islam. Inviting Muslims who worship Islam into your country is like letting the James
gang camp out on your land and then complain about all the missing livestock.
A Pig is a Pig. Muslims choose the Pig not the other way around. The Pig is not going to
become something else.
Havoc| 1.10.13 @ 1:16AM
Mr. Colebatch:
The problem is not Islamists - the problem is Islam. This is called, 'knowing the enemy'.
Instead of wasting years and treasure nation-building in the Middle East, we should have seized the Saudi oil fields and turned them to our own purposes. We should have followed up by closing all mosques in the USA and deporting all Muslims on our soil.
President Bush and his 'Islam is a religion of peace' idiocy has rendered us defenseless.
WaffenSS| 1.10.13 @ 5:48AM
Albert Speer designed some ellaborate gassing and cremation facillities. As the war ended, they stayed on the drawing board. This is a rough call and everybody is going to pillory my stance. This isn't going to end with lets be friends. Your daughters are going to be held down and have their clitoris removed with a broken coke bottle and your your sons are going to be butt fucked. These jihadists are going to have the world behind a goat and donkey with the concommitant goat and donkey hygene. Acedia was the worst of the seven deadly sins, for good reason.
atilla| 1.10.13 @ 3:13PM
PICK ANY UN-SUSPECTING HOSTILE MUSLIM COUNTRY AND ONE DAY UN-ANNOUNCED BOMB THE LEADERS RESIDENCES AND GOV'T BUILDINGS AND ALL MAJOR MILITARY FACILITIES AND SHIPS AND AIRCRAFT. THAT SHOULD TAKE MAYBE HALF A DAY AND DENY ANY PARTICIPATION IN IT.
LET THE MUSLIM WORLD TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHO IS NEXT ....AND SO FORTH AND SO ON.
IF THE YOUTHS IN THE LARGER CITIES TAKE OFFENSE AT THAT THEY WILL RIOT. THEN ITS SHOOT TO KILL RIOTERS.
AT SOME POINT AND IT REALL ISN'T IMPORTANT WHEN, THEY THE ISLAMISTS , WILL GET THE MESSAGE..IMAGINE HALF THE ISLAMIC COUNTRIES ACTUALLY BOMBED BACK TO THE 7TH CENTURY....NO LEADERS, NO MILITARY INFRASTRUCTURE.....BLOCKADE ALL ARMS SHIPMENTS.
WHAT A GREAT IDEA.
THEY RESPECT THE "STRONG HORSE". WHY DON'T WE ACT LIKE THE STRONG HORSE THAT WE IN FACT ARE???
T