Iraqi jihadists threaten Christians: "Leave Iraq immediately or you will be killed by us"

Whilst agreeing with your sentiments they are not feasible. The Muslims do not want Christians in thier (stolen) lands should the Christians rebel they would slaughtered even faster. What it would take is for the MSM to publicise the victimisation of the Christians that they will not do because they are afraid of upsetting the muslim scum. The Pope could do something but isafraid of upsetting the Muslims and of setting off wars of retribution where Christians are in the majority. Nobody but us cares and we are powerless. Personally I think that Muslims should be kicked out of Europe altogether and we should concentrate our efforts on re-settling our Christian Brothers and Sisters to replace these scum.

Yes. We need an 'Operation Magic Carpet' or 'On Wings of Eagles', like the Israelis ran for 40 000 Jews from Yemen in the 1949-50.

Let's get them out. They're more good to the world alive than dead.

If one looks at the USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Western Europe, one sees that if all of us acted together, we would easily be able to fit in the surviving Assyrian Christians, Catholic and Orthodox, both from Iraq itself, and from Jordan, Syria and Turkey to which many have fled and where they are currently eking out a wretched existence, marginally safer than in Iraq but still trapped within dar al Islam and with no guarantee that the regimes that grudgingly tolerate them today will not flip into mass-murder mode tomorrow or the day after.

I think asking the Iraqi Christians to stay where they are, today, especially given that they are a scattered and unarmed population, hopelessly outnumbered, with no experience whatever of defending themselves and no clearly defined defensible territory they could stake out is the same sort of thing as it would have been for someone in 1938 to tell the Jews of Germany and Poland to 'have faith' and stay put.

(I have exactly the same feeling about the Copts of Egypt. I think Egypt has a 'pre-pogrom' or 'prelude to genocide' atmosphere about it, today, in terms of the actions and rhetoric being directed against the Copts. I'd like to see a major effort to fast-track the escape of the Copts. Jesus himself tells his disciples in the Gospels: 'if they persecute you in one city, flee to the next').

And, frankly, if we stood up for the Assyrians *and* the Copts and charitably offered them asylum, it would send the Muslim world a much-needed message about KAFIR solidarity.

Totally agree with your view on deporting non-citizen Muslims from the West at the same time.

If we rescue traumatised dhimmis from out of the Predator Pit that is dar al Islam, the last thing we want them to be faced with, here in our own countries, is ...swarming, swaggering mobs of malevolent Muslims, just like the ones who've been persecuting and killing them in the places from which they have fled.

I have a friend who, in Sydney, had two sets of neighbours, who had both come to Australia from Bangladesh. One family was Muslim, the other Hindu. My friend told me that the Hindu family seemed to want nothing whatever to do with the Muslim family; she was rather puzzled by this. I explained to her that the Hindu family were *frightened* because of what the Muslims, in Bangladesh, had done and were still doing to Hindus; that they had good reason not to trust their Muslim neighbours.

Some Christians in the West don't like the idea of bringing the remnant Christian populations out of dar al Islam. My own feeling is that right now those people are nothing more than hostages or human shields, that the Muslim world uses to extort the silence and even the cooperation of Christian leaders in the West. "Unless you do what we want, we will KILL ALL THE CHRISTIANS". If the Pope didn't have to worry about what Muslims might do to the Eastern Catholics in Mesopotamia, he'd be a lot freer to publicly criticise Islam. If we get the Christians out then we deprive the Muslims of one of their main psychological weapons.

I suspect that after the vast majority of the Jews from Muslim lands (e.g. North Africa, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Persia, Yemen) left or were brought out, and came to Israel, or to the West, Israel achieved much greater potential freedom of action in her self-defence against Jihad - for she could act against the Muslims without having to worry about what sort of revenge Muslims might wreak in return on the helpless dhimmi Jewish populations.

Its much more difficult to kill the armed than the unarmed. If you're going to try to kill an armed person, you have to put your own life on the line, whereas it is no contest against the unarmed. It is pretty obvious that the only things that will save the Christians are machine and sub-machine guns, snipers rifles, RPG launchers, explosives, timers, blasting caps, the abilty to rig cellphones to IEDs, and millions of rounds of ammunition, the knowhow to make the best use of them, plus the skills and ruthlessness of the partisan outfits of World War II like tha Maquis, Serbian and other Eastern European partisans, plus the old 18th Century Chouans, not to mention Geronimo's Apaches of an earlier era. Iraq's (and the rest of the Islamic worlds Christians) must learn how to kill with gun, knife, bow and axe, make booby trap bombs, plan ambushes and learn partisan tactics, and not be afraid to exact revenge on those who brutally slay their loved ones. They live in an area where it is the law of the jungle, and it certainly is kill or be killed. If they're not prepared to kill their killers, then they are indeed doomed. As they say the best defense is the best offense.

dumbledoresarmy wrote:

"And, frankly, if we stood up for the Assyrians *and* the Copts and charitably offered them asylum, it would send the Muslim world a much-needed message about KAFIR solidarity."

It would send a message of kafir cowardice and weakness, particularly when it's happening while American forces are still there. Look at all the might of the west and all it could do is offer a shelter to the Christians fleeing from Muslim harassment = the west is really a paper tiger - if the kufar were "men enough" they would have stood up for their rights in the land = Islamic spirit and persistence can erode and beat even the greatest physical power on earth.

Look, this neighborhood has different rules. They don't think like Euros think today, right? Maybe they think like Euros used to think in medieval times. So standing up for the Assyrians, Copts and other Christians here - most of which non-Arabs who predate the Arab-Muslim conquest of the Middle East - doesn't mean letting the Muslims expell them from their homelands and thus finalizing the conquest and religion-based cleansing of the conquered land, it means standing for their rights here, it means telling the Muslims that either they'll treat them with respect or else. That "else" doesn't have to be military - there are enough financial and political prices they could pay. For instance, the US gives Egypt financial aid which the US can withhold unless the Egyptian government makes sure the Christians are treated with respect. And I won't even start with Iraq. Do you realize how humiliated the west would look (humiliated here means weak - only defeated people would not make you pay for abusing them, let alone for killing some of their own - turning the other cheek means you will be slapped on the other cheek as well) if all the "Crusader war" would have achieved is the cleansin of the Christians and Iraq turning into an Iranian satellite? The "Crusaders" then would have only advanced Allah's cause and Allah's rule. A sign from Allah this is the right path and a great victory for revolutionary Islam. That would embolden them.

This is not like the rescue missions Israel organized for Jews because the Jews, while well-rooted in their countries and while most communities predate the Arab conquests and while suffering a huge trauma and losing all their property, were still returning to their ancestral homeland where they became sovereign. Now these Jews and their descendants make about half the Jewish population in the only "infidel" state remaining in the Middles East. These Jews have beaten the Muslims in wars and prevented them from taking their country, so this is a totally different situation.

What the west should have done is stand up for Lebanon and Lebanese Christians. Lebanon was the second "infidel" state in the Middle East, it had a Christian majority and was the most successful "Arab" state (don't think most Lebanese Christians consider themselves Arabs). Israel is a tiny country, and Lebanon is HALF the size of Israel, but obviously even that was too much. Now Lebanon is majority Muslim. There's a division between Sunni and Shiite Muslims and the Sunnis are currently on the same side as the Christians. But that is all evaporating now that the US lets Iran consolidate its position as the regional power.

There is another thing you can do, which is to support the Kurdish cause providing they'll reach an agreement with the Assyrians, that is support both a Kurdish state and an Assyrian state, pending on them reaching an agreement between them. Part of the land the Kurds claim is also claimed by the Assyrians, but I believe both would compromize if they had a real chance at statehood. A small Assyrian state and a larger Kurdish state (there are many more Kurds than there are Assyrians). Don't forget there is also a national issue here and not just a religious issue.

OK, OK, I know it's a dream. Maybe it doesn't have to be so since the Kurdish region in Iraq has become almost a de facto state under the American administration, but in the current political and ideological climate it will probably remain a fantasy.

That, D&G, is a far more eloquent explanation than I in my annoyance made.

I don't want to see anyone die for a religious cause but neither do I want to see people jettisoned from their homeland because it suits one of the groups.

It's madness to further delineate this battle by removing a cadre of potential fighters.

Hello Gloomdoom - The course of action vis a vis captive Christian communities in Mid-East countries that you urge is certainly an alternative to airlifting them all out of there. You advocate govt.s of U.S. and others to put the screws to those moslem govts and convince them of serious repercussions if they don't do what we Western countries tell them to do. That would indeed be good and it's not out of the question. We (the U.S. etc.) could even expand our level of control and dictate other policies the Muslim world must comply with or else. And we do have the powers & capabilities to do to them lots of bad things. No doubt about that. But it would always only be a temporary policy for us. Every four years we have a new executive. The whole policy even if once acheived, could be abrogated in an instant with the shifting whims of the political class and/or the American people themselves. But evacuating and resettling Arab Christians into America would be permanent, unchangeable, once done.

Apology not accepted.