Master CraftsMon - Aired Monday, February 13, 2006 at about 11pm CST - Segment 3
Master CraftsMon - Aired Monday, February 13, 2006 at about 11pm CST
Segment 3
All of these things I would have debated in the pages of the letters of the editor of all the papers in Texas, because we have got to do something. The way civilized people in this country act when they are upset about something is that they debate, they do not use violence and threats of violence to settle their differences.
We are in a war against the Irreconcilables. In certain ways, the war is very like World War I. We are involved in trench warfare. The idea being that we fight at the first trench and then fall back to the second trench and so on until we are unable to fall back, because we are at the last trench and must die to the last man to protect our country. Except... The other side does not like to charge our positions head on. The Irreconcilables like to attack our will to hold that first trench. They want us to move back to the next trench without fighting much at all. They wish to use our compassion for their poverty and suffering under their rotten leaders to sap our strength and make us unable to hold to our beliefs... In essence they want us to give up many trenches without much of a fight.
This war is not exactly like any we have had. The Cold War is the closest we have ever had. The main difference is that the Soviets were not willing to die to the last man for their cause. The Irreconcilables are. Or rather the leaders of the Irreconcilables are willing to spend the lives of all their followers until they themselves are left... at which point they will call for a truce while they scramble to find other useful idiots to die for their cause. A very self-centered bunch, the leaders of the Irreconcilables. They worry about themselves, but everyone else is just a piece on the game board for them. If you think Osama bin Lauden cares for anyone, but Osama, you are sadly mistaken.
All I am saying is that we should be willing to fight at the first trench, not the last. If we fight over these cartoons, maybe the good Muslims will get the idea that it is in their best interest to rein in the bad Muslims. Probably not, because I don't think there is a single Muslim out there in the black who believes that we are that tough. They turn out in their mobs and chant their slogans and assume that it scares us enough to back off. When we DO back off and apologize and pay the equivalent of the dane-geld, then the Irreconcilables are heartened and assume that we will never stop giving up trenches.
I say that we have to turn and fight now instead of later. If we do not think that our country and Western Civilization is worth the trouble, then we should give up now, because fighting at the last trench is ALWAYS a bad idea.
If you fight to the last man at the first trench, then you have plenty of people behind you who can take over when you fall. Your logistics is still new and plentiful. Your second line troops are still fresh and can step up and take over. Your second line troops can carry the battle to the enemy's territory.
If you wait until you are at the last trench, you and the people in the last trench are it. There are no more people left to fight. Your logistics are worn and ready to break. Even if you do win, the enemy can still follow up and you are fighting on your own territory.
It is stupid to make a last stand at the last trench when you know you face people like the Irreconcilables. You fight them now or you fight them later. No amount of dane-geld will make them go away.
I want to bring up something I discovered in passing. During the 1930's there was huge disarmament movement in England. The disarmament movement believed that if England were to disarm, all the evil people of the world would leave England in peace. Their thinking went that since England would leave defenseless people alone, so would everyone else in the world. What it got them was World War II. Winston Churchill screamed against this train of events until he was blue in the face. No one listened. Neville Chamberlain went to Munich and got "Peace in Our Time" in September, 1938. A year later, Poland was invaded and World War II began.
Paul Harvey in one of his shows said:
We as a people are not fighting the Irreconcilables all out. Our newspapers, academic elites and various other groups are convinced that the Irreconcilables are just vandals who can be bought off with nice words and a pat on the head. I consider such people to be insane. The Irreconcilables mean it. They want to political entity called the Caliphate. This Caliphate would stretch from Algeria to Indonesia. The Irreconcilables desperately want this Utopian dream, because it will vindicate everything they see in the Qu'ran. Since the last Caliphate died in the 1920's in Turkey, the Irreconcilables see the fortunes of Islam to have fallen. Their belief is that a new Caliphate would be just one step to world domination. Anything less that total subjugation of the entire world is just unthinkable to them.
Again, saying someone wants to take over the world makes me sound crazy. I would just point out that just because it seems impossible, does not mean that the Irreconcilables will not give it their best shot.
My biggest problem with the Irreconcilables has always been that they moved too soon. Had they waited twenty years, they could have had Europe easily. I mean, in twenty years, Europe will be made up mostly of old White people and a plurality of Muslims young people. The best I can figure is that the Iranian hostage crisis where America was humbled, the withdrawal of America from Lebanon, the withdrawal of Russia from Afghanistan, the hasty withdrawal from Somalia, the bombings of our embassies in Africa and of course the first bombing of the World Trade Center made them think we would continue to give up without a fight.
Most people don't know this, but the destruction of the World Trade Center was not what it seems. The Irreconcilables believed that by destroying the World Trade Center they could rouse Islam to their side. They perceived that, if the United States did nothing THIS time, surely the Muslims of the world would be convinced that they would win and would rally to the side of the Irreconcilables. It hasn't quite worked out that way.
I am quite certain that no one expected the cartoon jihad to be such a big hit in the world of Islam. I am also quite certain that the Irreconcilables are trying their best to keep the controversy going, so they can garner the maximum news cover.
The thinking in the press here and in Europe is that if we let it die down the problem will go away. I don't believe it. If we do not fight now, we shall have to fight later over something more important. If we fight right now, the other side will be so surprised they might lose face with their followers. At least that is what it looks like to me. This multiculturalism is the equivalent to disarmament. It only works if the other side believes that their culture is as good as ours.
They don't.
The Irreconcilables believe that their culture is superior to our culture. They cannot comprehend that anyone would not agree with them. What kind of fascinates me is that the United States believes that WE have the best culture on the face of the earth. The difference between the two beliefs is that they have nothing to back up what they believe except feelings. We have something solid to back up our beliefs.
Which belief is correct? If you believe that God guide your every movement, the Islam is the path for you. If you believe in free will, then our way is best. If you want absolute certainty in your life, then Islam is best for you. If you can handle some risk, then our way is best.
Which side will win in the end? I don't know. I would pray it is the side of Western Civilization, but we could still lose if we do not commit ourselves to fight.
Segment 3
All of these things I would have debated in the pages of the letters of the editor of all the papers in Texas, because we have got to do something. The way civilized people in this country act when they are upset about something is that they debate, they do not use violence and threats of violence to settle their differences.
We are in a war against the Irreconcilables. In certain ways, the war is very like World War I. We are involved in trench warfare. The idea being that we fight at the first trench and then fall back to the second trench and so on until we are unable to fall back, because we are at the last trench and must die to the last man to protect our country. Except... The other side does not like to charge our positions head on. The Irreconcilables like to attack our will to hold that first trench. They want us to move back to the next trench without fighting much at all. They wish to use our compassion for their poverty and suffering under their rotten leaders to sap our strength and make us unable to hold to our beliefs... In essence they want us to give up many trenches without much of a fight.
This war is not exactly like any we have had. The Cold War is the closest we have ever had. The main difference is that the Soviets were not willing to die to the last man for their cause. The Irreconcilables are. Or rather the leaders of the Irreconcilables are willing to spend the lives of all their followers until they themselves are left... at which point they will call for a truce while they scramble to find other useful idiots to die for their cause. A very self-centered bunch, the leaders of the Irreconcilables. They worry about themselves, but everyone else is just a piece on the game board for them. If you think Osama bin Lauden cares for anyone, but Osama, you are sadly mistaken.
All I am saying is that we should be willing to fight at the first trench, not the last. If we fight over these cartoons, maybe the good Muslims will get the idea that it is in their best interest to rein in the bad Muslims. Probably not, because I don't think there is a single Muslim out there in the black who believes that we are that tough. They turn out in their mobs and chant their slogans and assume that it scares us enough to back off. When we DO back off and apologize and pay the equivalent of the dane-geld, then the Irreconcilables are heartened and assume that we will never stop giving up trenches.
I say that we have to turn and fight now instead of later. If we do not think that our country and Western Civilization is worth the trouble, then we should give up now, because fighting at the last trench is ALWAYS a bad idea.
If you fight to the last man at the first trench, then you have plenty of people behind you who can take over when you fall. Your logistics is still new and plentiful. Your second line troops are still fresh and can step up and take over. Your second line troops can carry the battle to the enemy's territory.
If you wait until you are at the last trench, you and the people in the last trench are it. There are no more people left to fight. Your logistics are worn and ready to break. Even if you do win, the enemy can still follow up and you are fighting on your own territory.
It is stupid to make a last stand at the last trench when you know you face people like the Irreconcilables. You fight them now or you fight them later. No amount of dane-geld will make them go away.
I want to bring up something I discovered in passing. During the 1930's there was huge disarmament movement in England. The disarmament movement believed that if England were to disarm, all the evil people of the world would leave England in peace. Their thinking went that since England would leave defenseless people alone, so would everyone else in the world. What it got them was World War II. Winston Churchill screamed against this train of events until he was blue in the face. No one listened. Neville Chamberlain went to Munich and got "Peace in Our Time" in September, 1938. A year later, Poland was invaded and World War II began.
Paul Harvey in one of his shows said:
"Following New York, Sept. 11, Winston Churchill was not here to remind us that we didn’t come this far because we’re made of sugar candy. So, following the New York disaster, we mustered our humanity. We gave old pals a pass, even though men and money from Saudi Arabia were largely responsible for the devastation of New York and Pennsylvania and our Pentagon. We called Saudi Arabians our partners against terrorism and we sent men with rifles into Afghanistan and Iraq, and we kept our best weapons in our silos. Even now we’re standing there dying, daring to do nothing decisive, because we’ve declared ourselves to be better than our terrorist enemies -- more moral, more civilized. Our image is at stake, we insist. But we didn't come this far because we're made of sugar candy. Once upon a time, we elbowed our way onto and into this continent [by giving small pox infected blankets to native Americans. Yes, that was biological warfare!] And we used every [other] weapon we could get our hands on to grab this land from whomever. And we grew prosperous. And, yes, we greased the skids with the sweat of slaves. So it goes with most great nation-states, which--feeling guilty about their savage pasts--eventually civilize themselves out of business and wind up invaded and ultimately dominated by the lean, hungry up-and-coming who are not made of sugar candy."
We as a people are not fighting the Irreconcilables all out. Our newspapers, academic elites and various other groups are convinced that the Irreconcilables are just vandals who can be bought off with nice words and a pat on the head. I consider such people to be insane. The Irreconcilables mean it. They want to political entity called the Caliphate. This Caliphate would stretch from Algeria to Indonesia. The Irreconcilables desperately want this Utopian dream, because it will vindicate everything they see in the Qu'ran. Since the last Caliphate died in the 1920's in Turkey, the Irreconcilables see the fortunes of Islam to have fallen. Their belief is that a new Caliphate would be just one step to world domination. Anything less that total subjugation of the entire world is just unthinkable to them.
Again, saying someone wants to take over the world makes me sound crazy. I would just point out that just because it seems impossible, does not mean that the Irreconcilables will not give it their best shot.
My biggest problem with the Irreconcilables has always been that they moved too soon. Had they waited twenty years, they could have had Europe easily. I mean, in twenty years, Europe will be made up mostly of old White people and a plurality of Muslims young people. The best I can figure is that the Iranian hostage crisis where America was humbled, the withdrawal of America from Lebanon, the withdrawal of Russia from Afghanistan, the hasty withdrawal from Somalia, the bombings of our embassies in Africa and of course the first bombing of the World Trade Center made them think we would continue to give up without a fight.
Most people don't know this, but the destruction of the World Trade Center was not what it seems. The Irreconcilables believed that by destroying the World Trade Center they could rouse Islam to their side. They perceived that, if the United States did nothing THIS time, surely the Muslims of the world would be convinced that they would win and would rally to the side of the Irreconcilables. It hasn't quite worked out that way.
I am quite certain that no one expected the cartoon jihad to be such a big hit in the world of Islam. I am also quite certain that the Irreconcilables are trying their best to keep the controversy going, so they can garner the maximum news cover.
The thinking in the press here and in Europe is that if we let it die down the problem will go away. I don't believe it. If we do not fight now, we shall have to fight later over something more important. If we fight right now, the other side will be so surprised they might lose face with their followers. At least that is what it looks like to me. This multiculturalism is the equivalent to disarmament. It only works if the other side believes that their culture is as good as ours.
They don't.
The Irreconcilables believe that their culture is superior to our culture. They cannot comprehend that anyone would not agree with them. What kind of fascinates me is that the United States believes that WE have the best culture on the face of the earth. The difference between the two beliefs is that they have nothing to back up what they believe except feelings. We have something solid to back up our beliefs.
Which belief is correct? If you believe that God guide your every movement, the Islam is the path for you. If you believe in free will, then our way is best. If you want absolute certainty in your life, then Islam is best for you. If you can handle some risk, then our way is best.
Which side will win in the end? I don't know. I would pray it is the side of Western Civilization, but we could still lose if we do not commit ourselves to fight.
posted by aRandomTexan at
12:44 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home