Until the advent of materialism and 19th c. dogma, Western Civilisation was superior to anything Islam had developed. Islam has not aided in the development of the modern world; in fact civilisation has only been created in spite of Islam. Proof of this resides in the 'modern' world and the unending political-economic and spiritual poverty of Muslim states and regions. Squatting on richer civilisations is not 'progress'. Islam is pagan, totalitarian, and irrational.
Bush's rhetoric about 'beating hearts' is almost pathological.
by Ferdinand III
We are not in Iraq to spread democracy – we are there to destroy a regional threat and a nexus of terrorism, money and corruption. To achieve our goals we need to destroy the militia’s, terrorists and gangs that deform the country. In this regard Bush’s rhetoric on Iraq is wearing thin and I can’t be the only one sick of hearing his concern for the ‘beating hearts’ of Iraq. Maybe winning the war first – decisively - is a good idea before engaging in tear jerking rhetoric about hearts and minds. Whether Arabs, Iraqi’s or Muslims want anything from the West - other than guns - is open to dispute. So win the war first and shut up about hearts and minds.
Churchill once said that to jaw-jaw is better than to war-war. Well sometimes it might be but in conflicts with fascists and Muslims I don’t think so. I don’t imagine that the last of the British Conservatives felt much inclined for example, to announce to the English that discussions with Hitler might be better than winning the war militarily. I don’t recall Churchill saying that political reconstruction precedes a military victory. I also don’t remember Churchill during the war announcing that he felt the pain of the average German, and could hear the ‘lovely beating hearts of Germans who yearned for freedom’ as justification for fighting.
I also don’t remember Churchill declaring victory at the beginning of a war, nor do I remember him allowing a break-up in the all important single control and command structure. I don’t recall Churchill allowing the military and political direction of the war to be split up into competing political blocs of self-interested grandees. I also don’t recall Churchill allowing the prosecution of war to fall outside his responsibility [he was PM and Minister of Defence], nor do I remember his orders to hide his army, or barrack his military strength in North Africa and Europe, in an attempt to appease local sensibilities.
Bush’s conduct of the war has been deplorable. Even supporters of the incursion and occupation of Iraq like myself, are appalled at the mishandling of a mission that should have already been long completed. Bush allowed his own political appointee Paul Bremer to disunite the military and political command structure; fire the entire Iraqi government and army; prevent the US from killing militia leaders like Al Sadr; and barrack US troops in the fear that the US military presence would provoke local outrage. Combined with military incompetence and poor generalship the result has been 3.000 dead and 21.000 wounded. The high wounded to dead ratio at 7:1 tells you that the war has been incompetently managed [a normal ratio is 3:1].
Now at the ‘white-ass’ hour to quote Al Pacino the US President has decided – belatedly – to change his generals on the ground in Iraq and some of his political appointees. Let’s hope the command structure is unified; the goals clear and the military is allowed to fight – not waste their time building public toilets and handing out candy.
Churchill’s dictum that jaw-jaw is preferable to a hot war is not that informative. Diplomacy is a part of military strength not a replacement for it. Only weak, parasitical and soft countries rely exclusively on morality, appeals to justice or abstract international treaties to achieve foreign policy success. Soft power and jaw-jawing without military strength and intent to use such strength is a waste of time. We should at least have the intelligence to recognize this with respect to the Arab and Muslim world.
Jawing-jawing with the Arabs about Israel is pointless. Arabs and Muslims want another holocaust. Jaw-jabbering with Iran is nothing more than appeasement as the monkey-Mullahs build their nuclear weapons which will allow Iran to dominate the Middle East – and our oil supplies. Domestically jaw-jawing with Arabs who support organizations like CAIR [council on Arab-Islamic relations] or mosques or other groups that support terror or call for the Western nation state to be replaced with a caliphate is likewise unhelpful. Shutting down these groups; deporting their leaders and cutting off their funding is the only solution.
So it goes with Bush’s rhetoric on Iraq. It is unintelligent, tiresome and dangerous. We are not in Iraq to feel their little beating hearts in our hands and weep over their yearning for freedom. From the days of Nebuchadnezzar, Xerxes and Darius, to the pagan fascist creation of Islam [no separation of church and state] the Arabs, Persians and latter day Muslims have shown no inclination that their beating little hearts yearn for Western democracy and freedom. If they want these ideals then let them fight, die and create through their own sacrifices and efforts, such a society. We are not there to construct our craven image in their arid lands, on top of their failed histories.
There are times when jaw-jaw is just plain dumb-dumb. Bush and the American rhetoric on Iraq has breached the dumb-dumb threshold. Maybe Bush et al. should just focus on winning the damn war and doing what needed to be done in 2003 and 2004.
