Monday, December 17, 2007

Is It Wrong To Use Moslems. . .

. . . to fight Moslems?

I am not against using Mohammedans as allies and confederates in fighting other Mohammedans.

Yes, Moslem troops that we (US) train might one day fight us--as happened with the Afghan pre-Al-Qaeda fighters. In Afghanistan, however, the wisdom at the time told us that the Soviets were the greatest danger to our liberty in the world. Islam although it had reared its ugly head in Iran (Khomeini, Embassy hostage taking [an act of war--but we had "peanut" Jimmy Carter as president then, a "do-gooder" such men are dangerous, and he proved to be as incompetent a leader as you could fear to have]), when we were watching the Soviets, never knowing what they would do next to try and outsmart us, Islam was still in the early stages of emerging as the nextmenace we would face.

Today, Islam is an ever-present danger. The people who follow Islam, however, are not one solid block made up of hateful individuals. There are the active jihadists, who want to kill as many of us--non-believers in their ideology--as they can before they buy the farm. Then there are the "inactive" jihadists--and this includes a large percentage of Moslems in the world, that cheer on the active jihadists, dance gleefully in the streets when these active jihadists are able to score a coup, as did the 9-11 murderers. Then, there are the "hidden" jihadist supporters, who although never showing that they support the ravages caused by their active brethren, do so, and give money to the various "charities" that Moslems have set up to finance the jihadists.

Are there Moslems who are against all forms of jihad? Are there Moslems who can be trusted? Possibly. at times, it might be advantageous to use Moslems who similarly want to use us for their own purposes, to accomplish our goals. In the past, these alliances and fighting a common enemy (also Moslem) has proven successful. In the Moro wars in the Philippines, Moros were employed in the US constabulary forces to combat Moros. How far these were trusted and how far they could be trusted is part of our "small wars" history. We'll talk about this, and other alliances in history between us--non-believers in Islam--and Moslems in future discussions here. Keep watching for them.

The concept of deviousness to accomplish one's purpose is foreign to straight-shooting Americans. The intricate Machiavellian machinations needed to come out a winner in this life-and-death "game" played out in the most irregular battlefields of the world today, need nimble-witted strategists and tacticians, not people wedded to some imaginary "moral" ideal that we must "play fair." As it is said, "All's fair in love and war." We are not dealing with any love here. (I know, Jesus said, "Love your enemy," but that can be done after the enemy has been defeated.) Nowhere in any of our scriptures is it written to tell your intentions and plans to your enemy (even if you are "keeping that enemy closer than you keep your friends that are kept close" to paraphrase a saying of our sworn enemies).

Before we go, here is something to ponder:

In one of the most spectacular defeat of Moslem forces, the reconquest of Spain, alliances with diverse Moslem leaders were made. Rodrigo Díaz de Vivar, El Cid, switched alliances, not always so much for the common good of the Christian forces, but to accomplish his personal goal: to rule Valencia*. (Watch for a soon-to-come post here for more about El Cid and the switching of alliances, not only of El Cid but of Christian kings who often allied with Moslem emirs to accomplish their own purposes). The end result was the expulsion of Islam from Spain, the end of the "dream of a Moslem al-Andalus," a dream that today the Moslems want to turn once again into their reality. Must it never happen!
* . . . the Cid, with a combined Christian and Moorish army, began manoeuvering in order to create his own fiefdom in the Moorish Mediterranean coastal city of Valencia.

en Francais a

Delenda est Islam

Islam delenda est

No comments: