Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Terrorism Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: The Coalition to Preserve Civilization
sofa    2/27/2007 11:27:35 AM
from:"http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/11/coalition-to-preserve-civilization.html" http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.com/2006/11/coalition-to-preserve-civilization.html Read the whole thing. excerpts below. --- The Coalition to Preserve Civilization by Baron Bodissey The Great Islamic Jihad is certain that Western Civilization is about to come to an end. Islamic Fascism looks forward to the rule of the new Caliphate, in which the whole world will swear submission to Allah and bow five times a day towards Mecca. It aims to kill or enslave every person who will not accept its twisted vision of Islam. With the help of its allies among the world’s dictators and within our own media, it is confident that it will achieve its goal. But even as this beast tears at our throats, a new defensive force is being born, a determination to preserve all that is good and right and true within the Western world. Even as we are abandoned by our leaders, by the sophists in our academies, and by the propagandists of our major media, ordinary people are connecting with one another, and are ready to stand up and defeat those who would destroy us. ... It’s time to wake up. There is no way to escape it, no matter what our policies, and whoever our elected representatives are. There is no escape because our enemies are fully committed to our destruction, and they will not stop until they have either destroyed us, or have been destroyed. That is our choice: we can win or lose, but we cannot opt out and walk away from the greatest threat and most resistant threat this country has ever faced.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT
sofa       3/18/2007 11:39:09 AM
Money and markets play a role within the larger strategy, but by themselves would be of little use. Islam can't be constrained by western money alone; Islam has people, and preaches that their lives are cheap and should be given for the cause.
 
Their tactics must be countered, not allowed to proceed unhindered.
Tactics to counter barbarism necessarily includes force.
Boots on the ground is a necessary and effective tactic in war.
 
Strategy includes information; getting the word out about the enemy that has chosen to kill you and end your civilization.
 
Listen when the enemy tells you why they are fighting, what their documented and stated goals are.
 
Is it simple and childish to hear what they say, see what they do?
"Look, the emperor has no clothes!"
"Look, it's barbarism and facism."
Fighting barbarism and facism isn't simple. It's necessary.
 
Ignoring reality is not 'grown-up'. It is foolhardy.
 
hearty and foolish.
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

sofa       3/18/2007 12:01:04 PM

The most we can expect from the soldiers, spooks and smart bombs is that they can hold the line until the geeks get in on the action.  Which they are doing, poorly.

Heart,

eu4ea

Saying we must resist is not chest-thumping. It's common sense.
 
Saying you should familiarize yourself with what the enemy says and does is an attempt to educate.
 
Belittling those who give you the right to bad mouth them ... is ... just dumb.


 
 
Quote    Reply

sofa       3/18/2007 2:18:07 PM

Solutions?  "Fighting Islam" is not one. Try "fighting judaism" or "fighting christianity" and see whether that leads to pacification. Which is not to say we dont need to carry out police actions and chase after the most radicalized and dangerous members - absolutely, we must. Just dont have any illusion that we're goign to "solve" the problem by doing that.

 

You see this as a policing action.
I see this as a war against facism attacking western civilization.
 
Judaism and christianity aren't attacking western civilization.
Judaism and christianity aren't political, econmic, legal, cultural systems of aggressive facism.
 
Comments comparing islam with western religions reveals that you don't know much about islam.  
And that's a frequent tactic of islam enablers; to compare a pebble and a gravel driveway and say they're the same thing.
Islam is islam.
 
Policing facism - naive and maybe suicidal
"stop mr terrorist while i read you you rights?"
 
heart, liver, spleen, toe nail
 
 
Quote    Reply

sofa       3/18/2007 3:15:31 PM
"However, the childish violence advocated here ..." - eu4ea
 
----
It's not me advocating it, I'm reporting that it's in the koran and hadiths.
Listen when the enemy tells you why they are fighting, what their documented and stated goals are, so you know what we're fighting, and why.
 
Re-read the thread. Encourage people to read history, read the koran and hadiths and contemplate how this manifests itself in islamic barbarity in the world today. 
And to dare to resist.
And to not let islam enablers off the hook.
 
The elephant in the middle of the room is barbaric facism.
The pip-squeaks in the room are islamic enablers, excusers of violence, and those who blame the victim.
 
No childish violence was advocated in this thread.
We higlighted several episodes of islamic violence.
Not childish violence. islamic violence.
 
Ignoring reality is not 'grown-up'. It is foolhardy.
 
 
 
Try reading koran and hadiths rather than calling people names (childish, simple, etc), or creating strawmen to attack (advocating violence).
 
 
heart, sphincter, boil and abcess
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

sofa       3/18/2007 3:18:31 PM
The most we can expect from the soldiers, spooks and smart bombs is that they can hold the line until the geeks get in on the action.  Which they are doing, poorly.

Heart,

eu4ea

 
poorly?
 
As a geek, I think the geeks are doing great. And we are in on the action across many fronts.
Just not the delusional oil dream you have.
 
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       5/6/2007 3:28:10 AM

Sofa you're point is wrong
Ottomans weren't trying to spread Islam and they weren't trying to destroy west
Ottomans didn't wipe out anyone either
Ottomans were just uniting people under their banner
+Ottomans were more advanced than west untill 1600s




---------------------------------------------------------------- Yes. No doubt they were extremely eager to be united under the Ottomans banner.
 
Quote    Reply

kane       5/6/2007 4:19:17 PM


Sofa you're point is wrong
Ottomans weren't trying to spread Islam and they weren't trying to destroy west
Ottomans didn't wipe out anyone either
Ottomans were just uniting people under their banner
+Ottomans were more advanced than west untill 1600s





----------------------------------------------------------------

Yes. No doubt they were extremely eager to be united under the Ottomans banner.

I didn't say that.This post simply shows your hatred.We're talking about medieval ages and it is pretty normal for state to expand it's borders.Same goes for all the states at that time, and they've did that.
Besides, they weren't unhappy under Ottoman rule either.Discuss this with someone who have studied Ottoman history.What I know is, Ottomans were mild, they weren't forcing people to convert.They were treating like they're their citizens.Thats why there wasn't any revolts untill 1700s, times when Ottomans began collapsing
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       6/14/2007 2:02:57 PM





Sofa you're point is wrong
Ottomans weren't trying to spread Islam and they weren't trying to destroy west
Ottomans didn't wipe out anyone either
Ottomans were just uniting people under their banner
+Ottomans were more advanced than west untill 1600s






----------------------------------------------------------------

Yes. No doubt they were extremely eager to be united under the Ottomans banner.


I didn't say that.This post simply shows your hatred.We're talking about medieval ages and it is pretty normal for state to expand it's borders.Same goes for all the states at that time, and they've did that.
Besides, they weren't unhappy under Ottoman rule either.Discuss this with someone who have studied Ottoman history.What I know is, Ottomans were mild, they weren't forcing people to convert.They were treating like they're their citizens.Thats why there wasn't any revolts untill 1700s, times when Ottomans began collapsing



No it doesn't show "hatred". It shows annoyance at minimizing Islamic Imperialism, especially when you would not let Western Imperialism off so easy. I don't "hate" Moslems for being the enemy of my ancestors any more then I hate Germans for being so-these things happen and at least make history more interesting(as the old Chinese curse goes "may you live in interesting times"). I don't even hate those Moslems who say that their religion demands that they conquer the world for saying so. I simply say that it is undignified to object when one gets it back. As for whether the present conflict is a continuation of the old one, well Islamiscists do in fact think so and in fact I don't mind it because a little deja vu gives some dignity to the dreary business of border war. To call it "hate" is an exaggeration-it is no more hate then Cambells and Stuarts playing pranks on each other at Highland Games is "hate". Generational feuds of the Balkan style are barbaric and in fact seldom take place in America though their are exceptions(notably the KKK). As for whether I am tempted to hate, yes I am sometimes. But I am not tempted to hate Turks who have not done as much as some to make me dislike them. And when I am tempted to hate it is because of the present not the past. As for whether the Islamistan vs Christiandom war is "only" a cover for dynastic wars, I might remark that people say only to often. It was dynastic wars, local tribal squabbles, and Islamistan vs Christiandom rolled into one. As for whether the Ottomans treated non-Moslems as equal, it is clear from history that they did not. And in point of fact the Janisary tax was diabolical. However very few at the time treated people who were not of the ruling caste as equal. The Ottomans treated their subjects better then some if only because they preferred to finance their empire from conquest leaving less taxes as long as conquest was easy.
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       6/14/2007 2:17:34 PM
Oh and as for whether the Ottomans were "more advanced" until the 1600's that implies that when Osman was a petty steepe warlord, he was more advanced then Constantinople or Venice. And of course a lot of those "advances" of the Ottomans came from the conquest of Constantinople. And of course Constatinople transplanted a little from others, including Moslems sometimes. And Venice being less hidebound transplanted more. All before the Ottomans arrived. Which is neither here nor there as cross-polination(sometimes by conquest)is an old means of advancing civilization and I am not so thin skinned as to worry to much about who borrowed most from whom, and when. However one can admit there are complications.
 
Quote    Reply

jastayme3       7/13/2007 3:16:07 AM

I never cease to be amazed with how childish Sofa's arguments can get.

Islam=root of all evil, coalitions of heroes to "defend civilization", etc. is a comic-book version of reality. No doubt satisfying in it's simplicity, but not related to actual reality in any substantive way.

I can already sense your reaction, so before you go there - hold your horses. I'm far from being pro-Islam. If anything I'd say the view of it that most closely mirror's my own is Ibn Warraq's (see his excellent book "Why I am not a Muslim").

However, the childish violence advocated here is in an entirely different category, right up there with other versions of similar violent prejudices fashionable at different historical times (Jews are evil, Sikhs are bastards, Christians are blasphemers, Atheists must all die or what-have-you).

The truth of the matter is that the rise of violent Islam has everything to do with a whole range of other factors, most of which are outside of Islam itself. The elephant in the middle of the room is oil - not the substance itself, but what it does to societies that happen to be unfortunate enough to have it under their soil.

Yep, you heard right: "unfortunate". The bottom line is that societies cursed with massive abundance of an exportable resource (whether it be oil, gold, diamonds, spices or whatever) have consistently been messed-up throughout history. That very abundance brings dependence, violence and governments that are not accountable to their subjects, because they are not economically dependent on them. Oil in the middle east is just the most radical example of an established common trend - so was Zambian and copper, sugar in Latin America, spices in the Pacific, just about every diamond producer, etc.

The predictable results are massive inequality, repression, violence, corruption, and disdain for productive activity, often coupled with overpopulation and an overabundance of unemployed, unemployable and disgruntled young males. Which happens to be precisely what we're seeing in the Middle East. Islam is the not the root but merely the mechanism for that to blow up.

Solutions? "Fighting Islam" is not one. Try "fighting judaism" or "fighting christianity" and see whether that leads to pacification. Which is not to say we dont need to carry out police actions and chase after the most radicalized and dangerous members - absolutely, we must. Just dont have any illusion that we're goign to "solve" the problem by doing that.

The actual solution is simpler, and more radical: Stop sending boatloads of money to the corrupt governments of the area. Achieve that, and we've won. Fail to do so and we'll continue to fight this nonsense indefinitively.

Is that easy? No. Is it achievable? Absolutely. In fact, it's the kind of thing we do best.

The "war on terror" wont be won by chest-thumping ideologues, foreign military adventures, spooks or military contractors. It will be won by the geeks and venture capitalists in Silicon Valley who are currently developing hypercapacitors, fuel cells, solar collectors, low-cost panels, microturbines, plug-in hybdrids and and genetically engineered bacteria that can produce cellulosic ethanol, to name just a few. It will be won by nuclear power plantt, mid-west farmers growing ethanol, and wind farms in Texas. American capitalism and not chest-thumping ideology is what's going to win this one.

The most we can expect from the soldiers, spooks and smart bombs is that they can hold the line until the geeks get in on the action. Which they are doing, poorly.

Heart,

eu4ea



Ok, I've heard "Jews", "Christians", and "Atheists" before. But where in the world did Sikhs come from?
 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics