Are we at war with Islam?

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Trapper John

I was thinking the same thing. Martin Luther was considered an apostate in his day. Didn't stop him.

I thought he was a heretic?

TR

[Trapper John]

Originally Posted by MR2

Sounds like a good premise for a new Phoenix Program. A Thirty Years War would par things down to a more manageable Crusade.

Now that's doin' it SF Style!

[Trapper John]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I thought he was a heretic?

TR

Yep, that too. Along with Galileo, Copernicus, and some notable others. Pretty good company if you ask me

[FlagDayNCO]

As many of the original posts in this thread noted, we have to continue to search for and root out every facet and tactic they are using. Kinetic response (or even pre-emptive strikes) is only a portion of our playbook, at this time. We need to identify more of these Progressive Muslims and work them further. At the same time, the other options should not be diminished.

The Persian Kingdom is emerging again, at speeds faster than even the Muslims ever imagined, thanks in no part to the current POTUS and his Minions. This is not a recent occurrence, but has been developing for decades. Iran and the MB have well laid out plans for their emergence and believed domination, but they did not factor in such wide spread retaliation from their own kind. For Persians, conflict was not limited to the operation of armies, but was carried on behind the front by Persian agents and partisans, by subversion and sabotage, and by propaganda and indoctrination. We should also identify that there is no history to this cause, it is absolute in their terms and considered current for their way of thinking. What we view on our calendar from a thousand years ago is current to them.

The Phoenix plays a part in Persian history. Iran Air uses it as their logo. MR2 is on to something.

This all has to be done knowing that our own people are working in support of the Muslim creep. Whether it is various levels of our government assisting the Muslim cause, partnering with them in some political show of "Make Friends", or business influences, the approach of getting their own to dilute the spread of Muslim into our governance is paramount. We need to use this to help us defend our nation and way of life.

I've been doing this with a Moroccan at my work. He is a Muslim, but absolutely does not agree with Islam by Force. His family follows the same path, which was nationally recognized. Religious freedom is protected under Moroccan Constitution. What is interesting is he shares that an over whelming majority of his "people" back home feel the same way. Yes, there are growing concerns with the MB there, but the people are working to shut that down. His attending prayer here in America helps push his view onto others, so they can see that it is possible to be less intense in their faith.

A Muslim MLK may never emerge, as the True Believers would claim he is diluting Muhammad’s stature and kill him. Then again, there is so much derisive fighting amongst the Islamic world, we may just need to feed the beast.

[98G]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

I think the biggest problem is that a significant portion of those 1.6 billion muslims are never going to stop killing in the name of allah until there is only one religion, for 100% of the population of the planet.

Whether we are at war or not is irrelevant. They are, and will be for the forseeable future.

Personally, I am not sure that there is anything we can do about it, other than to try and stop them where we can.

Maybe a muslim Martin Luther will emerge. Unfortunately, he will be considered an apostate by the true believers.

TR

What I liked in the Pew Research report is that it breaks down by age, by country, by type, etc... so that the sorting function is more controllable. The idea is not to further alienate and challenge 1.6B people, but use vocabulary and focus on where the best leverage points exist. They vary by region and demographic. Isolating a smaller set seems a better approach to me. 800 million are illiterate, so expecting any nuanced understanding from that segment is probably not going to pan out. It is not a solution, but rather places to chip away and plant new ideas.

I admit, it may be no more than an attempt to drive around a blocked road on the wrong one, but it also may be a decent shortcut as well. And the road is blocked...

[tonyz]

While nothing is easier than to denounce the evildoer,

nothing is more difficult than to understand him.

- Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky -



Just throwing out my simple observations and opinions to add to the more educated and experienced on the subject.

Almost universally, the most recent acts of terror (worldwide) perpetrated by Muslims (wherever located) express grievances against the West on behalf of all Muslims.

Second, regardless of the nationality or ethnicity of the terrorist involved - the one common denominator for many of the recent attacks was that such acts were perpetrated by devout Muslims - true believers who see the world in black and white - us versus them.

Third, it is not uncommon to hear both leader and foot solider terrorist alike, speak of establishing a Caliphate.

Fourth, the terrorists all express a deep hatred of the West - especially the United States.

As for moderate Muslims managing the relatively "small" percentage of radical Muslims...the radical Muslims are just no fun...they are on a mission from Allah...if your argue with them they may kill you. So who is really driving the bus and how does that bode for an actual reduction in violence?

IMO, all Muslims are certainly not the enemy, but Islam has been at war with the West since its inception. One need merely look at all the seemingly unconnected attacks worldwide by Muslims against non-Muslims. I maintain that the attacks are not random and in fact are connected by one root ideology. At this stage, who is at war with whom might be less important than the West aggressively killing the folks who mean to does us harm (and for the most part they let us know who they are) and the West continue developing, as best we can, our counter to the breeding grounds of terrorism - ignorance, poverty, discontent, unemployment and propaganda. People are dying in the name of Allah...lots of them.

See the link below and scroll down:

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/attacks-2013.htm

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by tonyz

IMO, all Muslims are certainly not the enemy, but Islam has been at war with the West since its inception. One need merely look at all the seemingly unconnected attacks worldwide by Muslims against non-Muslims. I maintain that the attacks are not random and in fact are connected by one root ideology.

Yep

[The Reaper]

The muslims came within a hair's breadth of overrunning all of Europe at Vienna in 1683.

Less than 100 years before our independence, the horde was at the gates besieging the city when the Poles arrived and saved Europe.

Does anyone think that was the end of it?

TR

[Roguish Lawyer]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

Less than 100 years before our independence, the horde was at the gates besieging the city when the Poles arrived and saved Europe.

Fortunately this was before light bulbs were invented.

[Dusty]

Originally Posted by Roguish Lawyer

Fortunately this was before light bulbs were invented.

Gong!!!

[Trapper John]

The XO and I were sitting on the back porch this morning enjoying the start of a new day. As is her custom, she opened the paper to read and out fell the Parade magazine insert with the picture of Malala Yousafzai captioned "The Face of Courage". Well, that started me thinking about this thread, the demographics of the Muslim world and their beliefs (thanks to 98G), and a Phoenix Program Redux (MR2 is on to something IMO), and the many thoughtful posts of the rest of you here.

Maybe it is young Muslim women that we should target as assets to begin the change? Malala in her view is not unique - she represents the aspirations of most young women of her generation. (98G you might want to verify that from the Pew demographic study.) These are the Muslims we need to support. Their enlightenment with proper support, education, and protection (the darker side of the Phoenix Program comes into play here) would be unstoppable, IMO.

And before my Brothers chastise me for suggesting an army of girls, (I hear the snickering ) I can tell you from experience of raising two girls, they can be vicious when crossed - like being locked in a closet with a wolverine. Exploitable assets? You bet!

And while I'm at it, GR, I can say with almost certainty that Malala would not run away and pout when she was challenged.

[PRB]

Maybe there might be an 'in'.....

There is no ambiguity in Islam, Koran. Hadith, Sira or Sharia law as to women's inferiority.
After military conquest Muhammad would give out captured women, in at least one case he asked that they be raped in front of their husbands. They were then the sex slaves/concubines of the new 'owner'...there are 4 Koranic verses that allows that the owner has full sexual rights with his new slave. There are no verses that prohibit rape. (One of the reasons all US female PW's were sexually abused....it is allowed)
The Koran has verses that allow a man to beat his wife...no where does it command him to love her. It states a man 'Is a degree above her' and the Hadith says that they are intellectually inferior and are the majority of hells occupants (because they are weak of will).
A man may divorce his wife at will, if he does this twice and then wishes to remarry she must have sex with another man first (Sharia)...men are exempt from this type of degradation.
Women are not free to marry whom they will as are men...a husband can also marry 3 more wives at his will.
She must be available at all times for sex (as a field ready to be tilled) according to the Koran.
Women do not inherit proportionally to men as they are half of a man.
Her word in court is worth half of that of a man.
If a woman is raped there must be 4 male witnesses or she can be charged with adultery not rape. She can be stoned to death...the male gets lashed.
If an Islamic woman is killed in an accident the blood money is half of that for a man.
If the woman killed is not Islamic it is halved again.
Etc.Etc.....
Islam in Arabic means 'submission' and that submission is twice the load for any female.

[Pete]

Western Females (NOW types) don't seem to have any problems with any of that - as long as it's not the Southern Baptists....

[JHD]

I have been reading this thread with fascination and appreciate the level of intimate knowledge you all have learned about this religion. I know this thread is not comparing Islam with Christianity, but in pondering the question posed by the OP, I can't help but do so.

In Christianity, free will is paramount, as God wants us to come to him of our own free will and not by force. Islam seems to be a requirement for all believers and non-believers must be forced into it. (I know there are examples in history where this is not the case, but for the past few centuries, Christianity has not been killing non-believers while followers of radical Islam have.)

Christianity follows the Ten Commandments, including "thou shalt not kill", while Islam encourages murder of non-believers and degradation of women.

Our country was founded with the belief that all should have the freedom to worship, or not worship, as they see fit. Radical Islam is not of the same opinion.

In all religions, there are the devout, and the less devout, and the not-so-much. But even the not-so-much devout Christian believes the core principles of Christianity even if they don't always follow them. I am assuming it is the same for Islam. There are also those that pick and choose what they will or won't believe in on both sides, but that is probably not the majority.

So, in theory, if we are not at war with Islam itself, IMO, we should be. And I like the idea of fighting it from within. It seems it would have to be an insidious method to achieve success and chane their way of thinking and the basic fundamentals of their beliefs.

[Trapper John]

Originally Posted by JHD

I have been reading this thread with fascination and appreciate the level of intimate knowledge you all have learned about this religion. I know this thread is not comparing Islam with Christianity, but in pondering the question posed by the OP, I can't help but do so.

In Christianity, free will is paramount, as God wants us to come to him of our own free will and not by force. Islam seems to be a requirement for all believers and non-believers must be forced into it. (I know there are examples in history where this is not the case, but for the past few centuries, Christianity has not been killing non-believers while followers of radical Islam have.)

Christianity follows the Ten Commandments, including "thou shalt not kill", while Islam encourages murder of non-believers and degradation of women.

Our country was founded with the belief that all should have the freedom to worship, or not worship, as they see fit. Radical Islam is not of the same opinion.

In all religions, there are the devout, and the less devout, and the not-so-much. But even the not-so-much devout Christian believes the core principles of Christianity even if they don't always follow them. I am assuming it is the same for Islam. There are also those that pick and choose what they will or won't believe in on both sides, but that is probably not the majority.

So, in theory, if we are not at war with Islam itself, IMO, we should be. And I like the idea of fighting it from within. It seems it would have to be an insidious method to achieve success and chane their way of thinking and the basic fundamentals of their beliefs.

To change "their way of thinking and basic fundamentals of the their beliefs" is an exercise in futility, IMO. You simply cannot change who a person is or any group of people's core beliefs. To fight this battle ("war") from the point of view of Christianity v Islam is a trap and is a no win argument for the reasons that Sigaba and others have pointed out.

The objective (again my opinion) is to find the groups or a demographic that already aspire to personal liberty and reject the subjugation of Islam. The Pew report that 98G references seems to identify possible demographic groups that are aspiring to that. Malala is a case in point and the women under the age of 25 may be the target assets. And the more I think about it, the better I like MR2s idea of a Phoenix Program Redux as a means.

Pete, to your point, I hadn't thought about it, but I don't recall NOW getting their panties in a knot over the subjugation of women under Islam either. Hmmmm!