| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
Lt. Col. Joseph Myers bucks the establishment. "Army Colonel Says U.S. Needs Better Focus in the War on Terror," by Matt Korade for CQ Politics, May 15:
To better understand the Quranic basis of jihad as practiced by extremists without sifting through a library of interpretations, you should read one book above all others, says Lt. Col. Joseph Myers.“The Quranic Concept of War,” by Pakistani Brig. Gen. S.K. Malik in the late 1970s, isn’t much studied in the West.
But it should be, Myers said, if America, and more specifically, the U.S. military, wants to gain a better understanding of the enemy in the war on terrorism.
Yes, Malik's is a very important book. I discuss it in my 2003 book Onward Muslim Soldiers.
Malik attempts to teach his readers about the doctrinal aspects of “Quranic warfare,” said Myers, who wrote a paper on the subject published in Parameters, the Army War College quarterly, and delivered a presentation at the Association for the Study of the Middle East and Africa annual conference in April.This is the religious definition of war as outlined by Malik with explanations from the Quran, and it is “infinitely supreme and effective,” the general wrote.
Because the West does not associate war with the divine, however, Western interpretations of the motivations for jihad are unaccustomed to the general’s Quranic view; the ideas, for example, that “tumult and oppression [of Muslims] are worse than slaughter,” and that because of this, “war must be waged ‘only to fight the forces of tyranny and oppression.’ ”...
Myers explains:
The reason I studied this work, once I was able to find it, is because I had heard or had read in an article that nowhere in our military education institutions are we studying the campaigns of the Prophet Mohammed in any similar way that we studied military campaigns that are famous and popular in Western military history. And I know that to be true because I do work in the military professional education system. Generally speaking, I believe that to be true.So Malik’s treatise is an important contribution to what I think would be called the canon of strategic jihad studies, jihad, the Quranic and Islamic approach to warfare. It’s not widely read in the West, but then you could argue that a lot about Islam and understanding the war-fighting doctrines in Islam are not widely studied in the West, or studied at least professionally.
You asked the question about the divide between, let’s say academia, and a lot of debates over what is the meaning of the threat we’re facing in the war on terror. Who are they? What are their roots? For me professionally, as a military officer, I think our process for doing threat analysis is fairly straightforward. We have our own doctrine for it, it’s called [the] intelligence preparation of the battlefield process. Step three is evaluate the threat. If you go to the army FM [field manual] on the IPB [intelligence preparation of the battlefield] process, it will tell you that the doctrinal assessment of your enemy is based on how your enemy expresses his doctrine to you, based on the way he sees it, says it, writes it, reads it orients on it, and organizes around it. The enemy we’re facing in the war on terror, al Qaeda, says they are fighting a jihad against the West to establish the faith of Islam. Now, if that’s their doctrine, then arguably that is the doctrine that we template, irrespective of whether their interpretation of jihad or their discussion of Islam within the theological community of Muslims is correct or incorrect; that is irrelevant to our discussion and understanding of how the enemy presents his doctrine to us, and it is his doctrine that we template over the terrain....
Read it all.
Posted by Robert at May 19, 2008 7:44 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
How long before he is removed from his position?
Anyone this close to the truth will have the Saudi's putting pressure on to have him gone, reassigned or ostracised.
Posted by: Borg![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 19, 2008 8:11 AM
"Lt. Col. Joseph Myers bucks the establishment. "Army Colonel Says U.S. Needs Better Focus in the War on Terror,"
I wish we had more officers like Col. Myers. We've been operating in a dream world for too long now.
You can't expect to win a war if you don't uderstand your enemy -- especially his dictrine and motivation for waging war.
Unfortunately, our whole society, political and military has been infected with the notion that there is no greater sin than to offend others, and if that means ignoring the obvious truth, than so be it.
Posted by: rational
at May 19, 2008 8:29 AM
By jove I think he's got it!
He must have been visiting this site.
Posted by: StephenA55 at May 19, 2008 8:30 AM
And, arguably, maybe Americans aren’t fully confident in who they are anymore as a people and a nation -
Not just American's-all the multiculti west.
I am concerned about foreign influences and foreign funding in our academic programs across the country. Dr. Walid Phares mentioned once that [a high percentage] of our Middle Eastern studies programs are being funded by the Saudis.
Now, I would argue, go back to the Cold War and imagine if 90 percent of our Russian studies programs were being funded by the Soviets. I mean, there’s potential implications in terms of strategic influence that I think needs better scrutiny.
-Bingo. He's got it.
Posted by: Borg at May 19, 2008 8:40 AM
"The enemy we’re facing in the war on terror, al Qaeda, says they are fighting a jihad against the West to establish the faith of Islam."
It's such a simple concept, isn't it?
Now, if only our President would get it.
Posted by: darcy at May 19, 2008 8:42 AM
Borg
"And, arguably, maybe Americans aren’t fully confident in who they are anymore as a people and a nation -
Not just American's-all the multiculti west."
How true. We have been convinced that our civilization is so faulty, disgusting and beyond hope that it isn't worth fighting for.
Many thanks to the leftist media for starters.
Posted by: Gramfan at May 19, 2008 9:08 AM
Lt. Col. Myers is a brave man, with real principles.
Unfortunately, his military career is over.
I don't know anything about the man, other than what it says in the article, but I know how our military operates.
By saying this, Lt. Col. Myers has effectively ended his career. He will not be kicked out immediately, but he will never again be given an assignment involving any responsibility, and he will never again be promoted. Eventually, when he has been passed over for promotion enough times, he will be forced to retire.
But, getting back to bravery and principles, he had to have known this beforehand, yet he chose to speak the truth anyway, willingly accepting the consequences.
Lt. Col. Myers deserves our respect and our prayers.
Posted by: shortfattexan at May 19, 2008 9:15 AM
What person or what agency is the best to either write or e-mail in support of this Colonel?
Posted by: darcy at May 19, 2008 9:52 AM
"To better understand the Quranic basis of jihad as practiced by extremists without sifting through a library of interpretations ..."
Just read Jihad Watch every day--the sifting is being done here by true scholars with integrity. There are always plenty of authoritative links to verify every word, to satisfy any skeptic, and to serve as the basis for further research. The analysis is always based on what the Muslim combatants and the Islamic thinkers say in their own words, as derived from their own doctrines.
Some day the truth will out. But you can read it here, now! You can prepare yourself to understand the enemy's thinking, to understand his behavior, to predict his actions and responses.
It will take brave soldiers to buck the current Newspeak within the Department of Defense. As suggested above, any soldier who speaks the truth is risking his career--witness Air Force major Coughlin, who is also doomed to obscurity.
A reckoning with the truth is coming, sooner or later. The main military question is will there be a national homeland disaster first--a new Pearl Harbor. Apparently, 9/11 was not sufficient to wake people up--to make them accept the reality of Islamic jihad.
Maybe by speaking out within your circle of influence, however modest, you can tip the balance and change the course of history. It's worth a try. The future of our nation depends on it. The survival of the Constitution, as a guarantee of liberty, depends on it. Remember your oath--to defend the Constitution--against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Jihad is a threat to the Constitution if ever there was one. You owe it to your country and to your nation and to previous generations who fought and died for liberty to understand jihad, with clarity and completeness and without varnishing, however well-intentioned.
Posted by: Stendec at May 19, 2008 10:35 AM
darcy,
Sure it's simple but our president has based all of his policy on something even simpler. Our president is more concerned with the message from Jesus to "love your neighbor as yourself". He probably has "All you need is Love" on constant replay in the Oval Office.
If we just show the world how much we love them then maybe they'll love us back.
Three thousand Americans (had their plans been fully realized it would have been thirty thousand or more) were murdered without warning by foreign terrorists who had been welcomed into the US and what was his first message to the Muslim world: we love you and we don't blame you. Love is such a simple concept.
If Saddam had not tried to kill Bush's dad, which made it personal, he'd probably still be running Iraq today.
at May 19, 2008 10:42 AM
PMK,
I hope you don't personally attribute that sappy, super-selective summary of Christian "doctrine" to Jesus. I do agree that Bush is probably infected with it, as are millions of Americans. The Gospel is for salvation, but it is also for judgement, and there comes a time to declare "You brood of vipers", dump over money-changing tables in the temple, and to shake the dust off of your shoes as you head for the door.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen at May 19, 2008 12:10 PM
Sounds like a prime candidate for a tour in a reeducation camp,er "diversity/sensitivity seminar".
Much like some West Point cadets, who emerge from such sessions run by snakeoil salesman, uttering phrases like "awesome." The level of infiltration of the military industrial complex is alarming.
Posted by: We need G.C. Scott at May 19, 2008 12:23 PM
"Loving your neighbor as yourself" does not include lying for your neighbor when he wants to slaughter you and enslave and rape your women and children.
Jesus exposed and condemned evil, and He never lied.
Posted by: Amillennialist at May 19, 2008 12:47 PM
We may have reason to hope that many more officers will follow in Lt. Col. Myers' footsteps by bucking the party line on islam and essentially committing insubordination against the de jure commander-in-chief. Yes, Myers is risking career suicide for his efforts. But self-sacrifice is part of the military culture, so let's hope more follow after him. BTW, if there's a medal for valor in battle, shouldn't there be a medal for the valor that Lt. Col. Myers is currently demonstrating?
Posted by: sheik yer booty at May 19, 2008 1:36 PM
Sometimes I think that greatest "enemy we’re facing in the war on terror" is ourselves.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen at May 19, 2008 4:03 PM
God bless this man. But as a country it is amazing how foolish we are. STOP KISSING ISLAMIC ASS, IT WILL NOT CHANGE A THING.
Posted by: Exposing Islam at May 19, 2008 4:53 PM
Concerned Citizen,
What are you talking about? The only "doctrine" I referred to was Christ's directive to love your neighbor as yourself. It is in the first three gospels and Jesus says it is the foundation for everything else.
I was TRYING to show how that is interpreted by some people, to our detriment. You have that Beatles song, and American history is filled with people asking why the world doesn't love us. Of course it was sappy! It was meant to be. Of course it was selective. The people who preach that we should love our enemies rely on these verses. Those who say we shouldn't retaliate when we are attacked also point to them.
The gospel references are listed:
Matthew 22:36-40 (text below),
Mark 12:28-34,
Luke 10:25-28.
Teacher, he asked, which is the greatest commandment in the law?
Jesus answered, "Love the Lord your God with all of your heart, with all of your soul, and with all of your mind." This is the greatest and most important commandment. The second most important commandment is like it: "Love your neighbor as you love yourself." The whole law of Moses and the teachings of the prophets depend on these two commandments.
at May 19, 2008 7:13 PM
PMK,
Didn't mean to p_ss you off, but rereading my post, I can see why you were. We're on the same page. My apologies.
Posted by: Concerned Citizen at May 20, 2008 1:12 AM
Lt. Col. Joseph Meyers for President.
Posted by: thelittlegreekwoman at May 20, 2008 1:16 PM
PMK,
Since you didn't point this out, I'd like to add that the command to love one's enemy is directed to individual believers, not to government.
Government's job is to defend its citizens' God-given, unalienable rights against all enemies, foreign and domestic.
Posted by: Amillennialist at May 21, 2008 5:32 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)