In partnership with that ever-ready ally of jihadists, Russia. "Erdogan: Our Goal Is Restoration Of Ottoman Empire Might," from Armtown.com, September 21 (thanks to Fjordman):
Turkey's goal is to live in peace with all countries and restore the might of the Ottoman Empire, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said. "I believe that each Turkish family should have at least three children. We believe in Turkey's future and call on everybody to believe," he said. Dwelling on Turkish-Russian relations, he described them as strategic. "Russia is our partner. The trade between our countries has reached $40 billion," Milliyet newspaper quoted Erdogan as saying.
.
I guess all the's left to say is: Sieg Heil! He already has the nice mustache.. not that I have checked but I suspect he is also missing a testicle.
.
There's only one good direction in which Russia can go which would make the Russians a better people, a nobler people, and that is to cogently explore the parameters of freedom and build a Russian state based on Western principles respecting the worth and dignity of the individual (and it's never to date been done in Mother Russia). Making deals with retrograde forces like the present Turkish government, not to mention Iran, will merely insure that Russia will continue on its aberrant path which will result in keeping Russia not so great and keeping its people small. Russia, like the Palestinians, never seems to miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. What a waste being on the wrong side of history again and again.
and this from arab allies from the Drudge report..ARAB STATES LAUNCH SECRET MOVES WITH CHINA, RUSSIA, FRANCE TO STOP USING DOLLAR FOR OIL TRADING... DEVELOPING...
off topic, but you can see we need to stop sending these thugs our tax money..jizya
It's the conquest by the womb strategy he's calling for and he fully expects the sappy hearted West to fully corporate in enabling the Muslim mid-East to relieve its overpopulation with massive westward immigration made possible by sellout politicians and a sheep like public at the destination points. They have time & determination on their side and we have a stupid we-don't-want-to-appear-racist public on ours.
Turkey's goal is to live in peace with all countries and restore the might of the Ottoman Empire, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said.
..................
Nope--no contradictions in the two parts of the statement above--no sir. And just think--if Turkey becomes part of the EU, maybe all of Europe can become part of the restored Ottoman Empire, too! Wouldn't that be cool?
No doubt they can start with Albania and Kosovo, then move on to Bosnia and Macedonia, and finally make a grab for Bulgaria, Greece, and Sicily.
By that time, the stealth Jihad should be far enough along in the rest of Eurabia for them to make their move. Of course, the Muslims in Europe proper might have different ideas, so perhaps we might be witness to an Islamic power struggle--right in the heart of Europe!
Certainly something to think about.
From the Sick Man of Europe to a Sick Man in Europe.
Isn't Europe sick enough already?
Can we hurry up on the Vaccination for this Sickness already.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2009/09/fitzgerald-the-new-york-times-scolds-erdogan-but-generally-remains-an-ex-ponto-pollyanna.html
Funny that he has to urge Turkish women to have children. I wonder whether this means that, just perhaps, birth rates aren't doing so well as he likes?
Nonie Darwish mentioned that quite a few Egyptian women were NOT getting married.
Muslims kill off quite a few of their women. All those 'honor' murders, and all that wife-beating (even of pregnant women) and all that abuse and neglect of little girls, and the deaths in childbirth of girls married and impregnated too young...and the horrendous fallout from FGM in those parts of the Ummah that practise it, both the girls who bleed to death under the knife and the girls who die later on of UTIs and other infections due to urine and menses 'backing up', or from obstructed first labours, has surely got to add up.
If all sane non-Muslim societies resolutely defended their borders against woman-stealing expeditions both large and small, and did not assist the Ummah with food or modern medicine, dar al Islam would implode population-wise, I suspect, quite quickly. Historically - i.e. in the era before modern medicine and certain other advances were invented and communicated, however imperfectly, to Muslim parts of the world - the general evidence of history, including the evidence from archaeology, is that heavily Islamified regions DECLINED drastically over time in terms of both population and productivity. The land desertified; infrastructure (e.g. the Roman roads in North Africa) collapsed and was not rebuilt; villages and towns steadily emptied of their inhabitants and did not recover.
The notorious Ottoman 'tree tax' is a case in point: by imposing a tax on trees, in the areas that now comprise Israel, Lebanon and Syria (I don't know whether they tried it in other places) the Ottomans guaranteed that people seeking to avoid the tax would not plant new trees, and that many would, indeed, DESTROY existing trees - fruit trees, timber trees, shade trees. A recipe for desertification and ecological and agricultural collapse. Stupid, stupid, stupid. "In the path of allah, even the trees have died", observed A Carlebach in 1955 - he didn't realize it was the result of a piece of sadistically rapacious and blindly stupid Ottoman legislation.
PS - Three children, eh? Well I can report that my little part of the Lands of the Infidel isn't doing so badly in the baby stakes: I have four, one sister has six, another has three; and just yesterday I was talking to two enormously pregnant non-Muslim Aussie ladies, one expecting her third and another, her fourth (among our acquaintance, within the past five years, couples we thought had well and truly finished their families, suddenly produced, in the one case a third and in the other a fourth child); and I will be an auntie twice over this year, thanks to two brothers who have decided to start their families. But this isn't about a campaign to 'outbreed' anybody; it was already happening before the government tried offering a (ridiculous) baby bonus; it's just that a lot of Australians in the past few years seem to have mysteriously decided, quite independently of the Guvmint, that having a few more babies might be nice (along with an equally mysterious collective decision, again not obeying any decree from on high, to dig up their backyards and make vegetable gardens and keep chooks; maybe we know we're at war, without even knowing that we know?).
The fulfillment of Biblical prophecy just rolls along as sure as the sun rises.
restore the might of the Ottoman
ya slavery crushing of all other faiths running a protection racket jizha a thing the mafia would love sounds more like what he wants is muslims to be top pig in the pen and every one else to pay for it
I thought you were a bloke.
Wellington,
From what I have read and heard, Russia as the 19th century was nearing its fin du siècle was progressing at quite a clip and enacting many reforms. One scholar of Russian history, Donald Treadgold (among others), argued that the Revolutionary forces were paradoxically exacerbated by Russia actually improving in those final decades -- since in part it aroused their feelings of having their justification pulled out from under their feet: the justification of poverty, corruption and misery for which Communism was the only solution. There was also the psychological "thanks, but not enough" phenomenon that happens whenever change for the better begins, but too slowly for the impatient (let alone for the utopian).
O.T. Is anyone familiar with this site?
http://www.loonwatch.com/
I remember there was a "Jim Sutter" who attacked Spencer in the past. This looks like Sutter's work. There are no names attached to this site. Isn't that cowardice? Does anyone know who runs this web site?
Some great input here from Wellington, Graven-Image and others, but I must say, Dumbledoresarmy, you continue to take the cake. Your combination of historical knowledge and passion (the P.S.) are quite impressive.
Keep up the good work!
Hi mate.
No, I'm female. I think you got tripped up by my nom de plume - it's short for "[member of] dumbledore's army", because of the analogy I see between what we do here in Mr Spencer's virtual hedge school of the resistance to jihad and sharia, and what Harry Potter and his friends do in Rowlings' story when they form their clandestine group to practise 'defence against the dark arts'.
You may also have 'read' me a bit wrong because as a child and as an adult I read - and still read - a lot of rather unfeminine literature...J E Macdonnell paperbacks about naval warfare during WWII, C S Forester's Hornblower books, Idriess's books from soldier diaries 'The Desert Column' and 'Horrie the Wog Dog', Churchill's history of WWII...not to mention enjoying stories about Robin Hood and King Arthur and King Alfred. I'm very grateful for all those tough guys who beat the jihad off from northwest Europe so my ancestors *didn't* have to wear burqas or live in harems; and honestly, any person with commonsense can see that the only way to deal with Jihadis is to hammer them down flat as soon as they stick up their heads over the parapets. So my postings have a somewhat martial tone at times...I think it's my father speaking through me.
I think too it's the fighting Irish and Scots and Danish ancestors that speak through me, when I contemplate the fact that out there in dar al Islam there are a whole bunch of psychopathic greedy supremacist life-hating death-worshipping b*st*rds who see me and my daughters as slave fodder; and who hate dogs (I have a dog) and wine and music (my husband sings in the church choir; one of my daughters takes singing lessons and has her heart set on a career in musical theatre) and representational art (two of my children are very good artists, and that *isn't* just a proud mother talking) and *thinking* itself. I think about that and it's like looking over the edge of a cliff into the bottomless pits of Hell itself.
BTW - You're a fellow Aussie, are you not? There's quite a few of us posting here and there have been others along the way. We have *got * to get more organised. I have been racking my brains trying to work out how we might get Spencer to Australia ASAP (my own resources being somewhat limited). I *did* hear that Geert Wilders may be visiting, Western Australia I think; and Canon Sookhdeo has been here quite a few times, attempting to raise the alarm among Aussie Anglicans (and other church folks).
"In the path of allah, even the trees have died," observed A Carlebach.
Fitting quote, Dumbledore. Maybe that's why the caliphs referred to themselves as "The Shadow of God on Earth."
Test">http://jihadwatch.org”_”>Test
"Ottoman might" of course is probably code for "return of the Caliphate" (since it was the Ottomans who had the privilege of holding the Caliphate for over 500 years). We all know that the vast majority of Muslims around the world yearn for a restoration of the Caliphate.
I've had an epiphany about that recently. I think it would be beneficial for us if the Caliphate were restored and revived. The principal benefit for us would be that the "diversity" of Islam -- one of the main cloaking devices Islam apologists use to try to obfuscate the relatively unified nature of the Islam that threatens us -- would be replaced by a massive visible target, so to speak.
Hi DDA from another Aussie (HK-based). I'm just back from two weeks on a boat in the Med with two other Aussie couples. On the issue of Islam both were of the "be nice to them and they'll integrate" school of thought, don't say horrid things about them, or they'll be inflamed. And on Turkey, that it should be brought into the EU. One of these couples rather of the right, but still lovey-dovey in re the ROP.... I was even told that my views -- informed as they are by rather wide reading around the subject and by lurking here on JW -- were "on the verge of bigotry", or "just about under the umbrella of bigotry" ("What, me bigoted"??), even as I showed that it was aspects of Islam that fitted perfectly any definition of bigotry, whereas I was just pointing this out (this being a reaction that Robert has often commented on, with his "misunderstanders of Islam" quotes -- namely, attack the critic, attack the "pointer-outer", rather than addressing the issue pointed out).
Anyway, I'll repeat here my previous comments, echoed by a couple of posters above: that I do enjoy your erudite and constructive posts. If ever you manage to get RS to Oz, I'll let my sailing mates know; they'll go along, I'm sure, and Robert will do a better job of enlightening them than I did....
BTW: and slightly OT, re my own handle of "Meeker": it's the name of the jailer in the play "Inherit the Wind", which is about the famous 1925 Scopes "Monkey Trial", a test of free speech in the US. Meeker is sympathetic to the jailed teacher, Scopes, who is in jail for having taught evolution in the classroom. I played the part of Meeker in a 1995 HK production of the play; I saw the current revival at the Old Vic in London last Saturday night, with Kevin Spacey in the lead....
OT but, for all of you Aussie Jihad Watchers out there ("hi there!"), please check out The Australian's website where you can blog at the various letters of the day: http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/letters/index.php
Today, there's a very good letter about Iran and Israel: http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/letters/index.php/theaustralian/comments/theres_no_equivalence
I encourage you all to make comments as, for those of you who know, there are far too many psychos who comment there. You can see that today. The frustrating thing about The Australian is that their moderators are slow and only update comments once to twice a day. However, if you get in early and make a good stab at it, you will get published and it is quite fun too.
Overall, in terms of media publications, The Australian is far more balanced and fair when it comes to Israel and exposing Islam's insanity compared to other media outlets owned by Fairfax.
I look forward to seeing some comments there from you fellow Jihad Watchers.
Exactly, Canto. "the conquest by the womb strategy." Disgusting.
Because Western women are no longer tied to the kitchen stove and continuous child-bearing, we're going to lose our superior civilization. They'll out-breed us. They already have. Polygamy works wonders in boosting a population, and so does child brides.
It's going to all boil down to Demographics.
I went to the site, wildjew. It's pathetic, pitiful, idiotic, and insane.
it looks like a left wing nutcase site run by 60;s era peace protesters hears there contact info@loonwatch.com
Thanks DDA, EFOC and others ... As an adopted Aussie (I lived in Melbourne for 3 years awhile back), I miss my straight-forward non-PC mates who didn't cloak themselves in dhimmitude ... and had no issues saying "Merry Christmas" during the silly season (didn't John Howard say something like "anyone who says happy holidays is a bloody idiot") ... with BHO in charge here in the States, I'm looking forward to one day posting to JW from my cottage somewhere in north Queensland!
Robert -- get yourself Down Under and debate one of those nutty imams that seem to get in the news all the time.
B4A
Oh yeah. The Turks.
From "Aristakes History":
"Now when evening fell, they took their loot, captives, and the booty from the slain, and departed. But they left behind them a scene more pitiful and lamentable than it had been before. The death-agonies were of many types: for some who had fallen [75] [fatally wounded] were still alive. From thirst their tongues had dried up, and with weak and soft voices they sought to quench their thirst, but there was no one to give them drink. Others who were terribly wounded, and could not make sounds, were breathing violently. Others whose throats had been slit but were still alive were emitting gurgling sounds in pain. Yet others, who had been badly wounded, were scraping the ground with their feet and clawing at it with their fingernails. There were others whose appearance was so frightful that the very rocks and other inanimate objects were moved to lamentation and sighing. For when the infidels were removing captives from the mountain, they took the children from their parents' embrace, and threw them to the ground, and [the Saljuqs'] place of encampment was swarming with them. Some [of the children] had died when they fell against rocks. The sides of some of them had torn open and their intestines poured out onto the ground. As for those remaining alive, what ear could bear their crying? Those [children] capable of walking were moving about here and there looking for their mothers, and the mountains reverberated with the loudness of their crying. Those who [76] were [to young to be] steady on their feet, were crying as they crawled along on their knees. Those who were even younger than they, thumped the ground with their feet, and, weakened through crawling they could scarcely breath. With their piteous sounds and unceasing cries they resembled lambs newly separated from their mothers, who, being impatient by nature, angrily struck out this way and that, offending the very air with their bleating and weighing heavily upon the listeners' ears.
Such is your wicked history, oh mountain!
[...]
Recall what took place then [to] the class of clerics and priests who happened to be there, or [to] the elderly, or [to] the multitude of youths, whose newly-grown beards adorned their cheeks like a beautiful picture, whose ringlets of hair gleamed upon their brows resembling the glowing hues of roses, making their faces shine, [recall] how suddenly they fell to the ground and tumbled over, struck by the enemies' swords, as if struck by hail. Add to this the number of children who were taken from their mothers' embraces and hurled to the ground, who sought their mothers with their baby sighs. But the parents, cudgled, were quickly separated from them. What heart of stone would not be straitened by tears, hearing these numerous and varied [recitations] of evil? Virgins fell dishonored, newly-married women were separated from their men and led into slavery. In one single moment the country, which had been crowded with [97] people, like a densely populated city, became an uninhabited wasteland. [As for the people], they were either killed by the sword, or taken captive. Oh Christ, for your forgiveness at that time; Oh the wickedness that befell us! How bitter was the death we died!
[...]
When the enemy attacked, they cut [the citizens] down, not after the fashion of a war, but as though they were slaughtering sheep penned up in a yard. Some [the Saljuqs] seized, brought forward and beheaded with the sword. They died a double death. More bitter than death was the scintillating of swords above them, then the death verdict. Swords in hand they came upon some, fell upon them like beasts, pierced their hearts and killed them instantly. As for the stout and corpulent, they were made to go down on their knees, and their hands were secured down by stakes. Then the skin together with the nails was pulled up on both sides over the forearm and shoulder as far as the tips of the second hand, forcibly removed, and [the Saljuqs] fashioned bowstrings out of them. Oh how bitter this narration is!
As for the presbyters and clerics, what ear could bear the unique tortures to which they were subjected? Their skin was flayed from the breast upward, over the face, and [g109] then twisted around the head. And only after so torturing them did [the Saljuqs] kill them. Who has heard of more bitter, unbelievable tortures? We have not encountered any in the martyrdoms of the saints."
http://rbedrosian.com/a1.htm
How does Erdogan propose to peacefully retake Greece and the Balkans?
Is Erdogan correctly viewed as a Neo-Fascist? His revanchist statements betray a mindset that should worry the European Union.
Hesperado,
Be careful what you wish for! Reminds me a bit of Stalin naively welcoming Hitler's triumph in Germany in '33 as the "icebreaker of the revolution". Instead, Hitler went on to invade the Soviet Union.
The rebirth of the Caliphate is an exponential necessity in the fulfillment of Islam's global conquest. It will auger in the institutional mechanisms - legal authority and unified command - to pursue Muhammad's dictum that "Allah's religion" should prevail upon the earth. We would be wise to dread its reappearance.
The Turks have never been 'moderates' in their heart of hearts. Just look at attitudes towards Cyprus as an indicator.
As Mr.Spencer said: They didn't fight because they couldn't, not because they didn't want to...
Turkey's goal is to live in peace with all countries and restore the might of the Ottoman Empire, Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said. . . . Dwelling on Turkish-Russian relations, he described them as strategic. "Russia is our partner. The trade between our countries has reached $40 billion," Milliyet newspaper quoted Erdogan as saying.
'Cuz the Ottoman Empire got along soooo well with Russia.
Cornelius,
"The rebirth of the Caliphate is an exponential necessity in the fulfillment of Islam's global conquest. It will auger in the institutional mechanisms - legal authority and unified command - to pursue Muhammad's dictum that "Allah's religion" should prevail upon the earth."
I know -- then it will become that much clearer to an addle-headedly myopic West that Islam is the problem. A Caliphate will serve to clarify and render more coherent in a concrete way the enemy. This will only be beneficial, of course, to the degree that the West wakes up in time.
Hesp,
I understand your logic, I just don't agree.
The rebirth of the Caliphate is the natural progression for Islam's aspirational, globalized Sharia. I don't think it logical to want the enemy camp strengthened, their internal divisions overcome, their resources marshaled, and orthodoxy imposed throughout their realm...in the vain hope that the Western public will somehow then find its bearings...the same Western public that has suffered the most heinous mass atrocities in modern times and yet still clings stubbornly to a fictional narrative that Islam is peace.
Do you really believe that a reborn Caliphate will somehow do what 9-11, London, Madrid, Bali, Bombay, etc, etc haven't?...Wake us up to the task at hand?
Sorry friend, it's a bit like your 50 year timetable for Europe's anti-Jihad...it just doesn't wash. The re-birth of the Caliphate is our worst nightmare...the stepping stone to Islam's world conquest. We should be doing everything in our power to stave off such a development.
Cornelius,
"I don't think it logical to want the enemy camp strengthened, their internal divisions overcome, their resources marshaled, and orthodoxy imposed throughout their realm"
It is if its currently disorganized state is facilitating its dangerousness to us through being able to plausibly hide behind the ostensible diversity and lack of cohesion, further enabled by PC MC which persists in wanting desperately to believe there is no concerted threat from Islam, and from most Muslims.
"...in the vain hope that the Western public will somehow then find its bearings..."
It won't find its bearings "somehow" -- it will find them precisely in reaction to a crystallized, visible threat in the form of the Caliphate. One of the main reasons why the West has not woken up to the danger is that Islam remains atomized. The West is programmed to believe that only nation-states can be enemies on a scale that warrants a war: currently, Islam lacks a sufficient appearance of being an entity. We either go after what we define as rogue elements in a shadowy global police action against guerillas who keep popping up here and there around the world (including within the West), or we designate a nation or two to bomb (Iraq, Afghanistan). Meanwhile, the bulk of Islam and all its vast capability of networking jihadists internationally remains elusive -- elusive not merely "over there" in far-flung lands, but also in the form of deep infiltration into our societies and our institutions. The Caliphate will provide the glue to turn this atomized amorphous "not a monolith" Islam into a sociopolitical entity where responsibility is shared among its followers much more clearly. The ensuing belligerence -- both in rhetoric and action -- by Muslims under their Caliphate will then provide the evidence that this entity is the enemy. Furthermore, there is textual evidence in the blueprint of Islamic supremacism that once they have a Caliphate, there will be more incentive for Muslims to move from stealth jihad to overt offensive jihad. Whether or not Muslims will be able to curb their appetites for offensive jihad because they continue to perceive their own military weakness is not necessarily dependent upon their actual weakness at that juncture, for people (especially Muslims) don't always behave rationally. The mere massive fact of a joyously successful revival of the Caliphate could well tip many Muslims over the edge, and within a few years we might see mainstream news outlets unable to avoid reporting hundreds of clerics vociferating the need to renew offensive jihad to finally finish the job Mohammed started, augmented by mass demonstrations of ordinary Muslims in various cities (including Western) agitating for same.
"the same Western public that has suffered the most heinous mass atrocities in modern times and yet still clings stubbornly to a fictional narrative that Islam is peace."
I'm not gauranteeing a quick and easy process. If a Caliphate was revived, there would likely be a time period too laggard for jihad watchers to be patient with, during which time the West would try to continue to deny: but I believe the spectacle of an trans-national Nation ratcheting up the bellicosity may well do the trick of waking up the West. Again, the persistent refusal by the West to connect the mass atrocities you mention to Islam has been facilitated by the amorphous nature of Islam, enabling all to easily the argument that the atrocities are only being perpetrated by rogue elements who have no collusion with their vast majority of brethren.
"the Caliphate is our worst nightmare...the stepping stone to Islam's world conquest. We should be doing everything in our power to stave off such a development."
I agree that we should -- but only under the condition that we do so in a state of having woken up to the danger of Islam. Without that state of awareness, we continue to conduct ludicrous exercises in nation-building, hearts-and-minds-winning, democracy-fostering, bridge-building, while our intelligence agencies throughout the West run around whacking moles and swatting the mosquitoes that pullulate out of an Islam that is denied to have any connection to all those moles and mosquitoes. Thank God we have been successful in routing the planned attacks thus far. The stakes are too high to continue to depend on this half-assed strategy, given the unique degree of ultra-fanaticism of Muslims, our difficulty in pinpointing those on the front lines since they blend in with their surrounding sea of "harmless" Muslims, and the potential for WMDs to be deployed by them.
It is precisely our myopia that makes necessary the extraordinary measure of enabling a Caliphate revival. An analogy would be -- on a microscopic scale to be sure -- when law enforcement agencies wanting to take down big fish in a crime organization or drug cartel allow a situation where the criminals are aggrandizing and gaining more temporary power in a sting operation, in order to be able to swoop in with the SWAT teams and take down those big fish -- rather than continue to go chasing after the small fry in a situation where the crimes continue to fester and grow because their source is not crippled. Such sting operations often put people in danger in the short term, but law enforcement usually believe they are worth it in the long term.
Consider my idea to be a "sting operation" on the grandest scale possible.
efoc
I went and had a look. I see what you mean about the psychos.
Wellington,
Your perception of Russia constantly reinventing its ineptitude is spot on, so they seem to undo progress as soon as it begins. I've always wondered why a nation of such intellectual stength, most Russians I met are bright and well educated people, could not produce a sophisticated civilization, other than the arts and literature, to remain backwards in their history into the modern era. Something is missing in their collective psyche, which may have to do with their Byzantine roots. They never really had a Reformation (same as the ossified backwardness of Islam), so could not achieve the West's freedom of inquiry and freedom of speech, two fundamental freedoms so necessary for advancement. They seem to remain frozen in some Feudal paradigm keeping their civilization stunted by mafia-like power structures and corruption powered servitude. Freedom has not yet come to Russia, or even Ukraine, and their lamentable state of things remains into modern times of free flow of information and ideas, so they suffer. When will they break out of their regrettable servile mode? Erdogan is tapping into that flaw in the Russian psyche to advance his Caliphate ambitions, unlikely to succeed IMO, but he sees them as a kindred spirit. I hope Russia will one day surprise and prove him wrong. Seventy years of Communism stunted their progress as well? They may have to undo that damage first before they can join the First World. Regardless, Russia and Turkey make strange bedfellows.
Hesperado,
I am of split mind on your 'epiphany' that it would benefit our fight against Islamic Jihad if they consolidated their Caliphate, since it would give us one enemy instead of a fight against an atomized enemy in the Islamic multifaced "sudden jihad syndrome" mode we must fight now. In some ways, dangerous as allowing a calipha-united Islam could be, there is merit to fighting a well defined enemy. We can bomb their seat of power, but then we're once again forced to fight the same amorphous Jihad we started with, since this is an ideological war as much as a material one. Back to square one, so nothing really achieved.
I cannot help but remember Caesar's Gallic Wars, which described in Wiki was this strategy:
"The Roman success in the Gallic Wars was due to a combination of clever politics, effective campaigning and greater military capability than their Gallic opponents. Caesar pursued a policy of "divide and conquer" to pick off his enemies, siding with individual tribes in disputes with their local rivals. He systematically gathered intelligence on the Gallic tribes to identify their characteristics, weaknesses, and divisions, thereby being able to dispose of them in turn."
A 'combination of clever politics' and intelligence combined with military power is pretty much how we had been fighting this war thus far. It worked before, keeping mutually hostile tribes fighting each other, so why not exploit this strategy to the fullest now? (Hugh had written about this before, to encourage Islamic infighting to serve our purpose.) But today we do not seem to have the leadership of a Caesar, or a Winston Churchill, to execute this strategy effectively, so we seem as divided as our enemy in the war effort. We know the UN is useless, and our present administration has yet to prove its leadership, not too optimistic here either. So what would serve us best in the war against Islamic empire expansionism?
If there was a well defined enemy camp in the form of the Caliphate, would their clerics and jihadists really be more vocal in their hatreds of Western civilization, any more than voiced already, to finally convince the West of their threat? No, I don't think so. We've got to work with what we've got, and they have already provided us, even if fallen on deaf PC MC ears, all the rationale needed to fight this regressive Islamic barbaric enemy. Think of all those Islamics as splintered tribes similar to the Gallic tribes, which will cry and beg when beaten, but regroup and attack when strengthened. This is what Caesar had to deal with, but he remained dry eyed and understood his enemy full well, so kept up the pressure on them. This is how we must fight this primitive enemy, keep them splintered and press them at every turn. The closest we will have to a one faced enemy is not the Caliphate but Iran with its nuclear ambitions, and them we will hit hard. But the remainder of the war will be against disorganized and inept primitive tribes running around causing mischief and mayhem, which the Arabs are good at, and we must ignore their cries and pleas when we hit them. Keep pressing them, though it drains our resources, apply legal pressures against their seditious activities at home, and military pressures against them abroad, and we will wear them down. Then look for an opportunity to finish them with a killing blow, Iran may give us that, to totally demoralize these ignorant, superstitious barbaric Islamics into full submission. Sure it could be a hundred years war, but it only took 70 years to collapse Communism, and with modern flow of information and ideas, Islam may topple sooner. We just can't take our eye off the ball, stay mindful of the big picture, and keep hitting them without PC MC stymied mercies. (Isn't it ironic that 'mercy' is paradoxically a Christian sentiment used by the PC MC crowd?) This is firstly an ideological war, and having a Caliphate will not improve our chances for success. A steady harassment of their divided tribes will work better.
I suspect this is the war our Western strategists have in mind, working secretly behind closed doors and dimmed war rooms poring over computer data, in how to tackle the problem of Islamic empire expansionism. But there is a parallel world we are fed by media and government for public consumption. That to me is puzzling, as to why we are being told one thing while actually doing another. Or perhaps that too is strategy, to keep the enemy always off balance. Taqiyya can work both ways. ;)
Battle_of_Tours,
"it would give us one enemy instead of a fight against an atomized enemy in the Islamic multifaced "sudden jihad syndrome" mode we must fight now. In some ways, dangerous as allowing a calipha-united Islam could be, there is merit to fighting a well defined enemy. We can bomb their seat of power, but then we're once again forced to fight the same amorphous Jihad we started with, since this is an ideological war as much as a material one. Back to square one, so nothing really achieved."
I'm not advocating a return of the Caliphate necessarily because it will make it that much easier tactically to fight Muslims; I'm advocating it because of its effect on the PC MC West: it will help to catalyze more quickly the inevitable transition the West will make from being PC MC to being Islamorealist. I argued various features of this in my preceding two posts -- all speculative to be sure, but I think logical.
Hesperado, the OIC is coalescing into an entity that may catalyze a response in the West.