Definitions And Impressions
The news is a buzz this morning with the Administration subtly changing the nomenclature of the War On Terror to the War On Islamic Fascism. I’m never been really happy with the War On Terror thing, since Terror is a tactic. It is like fighting a War On Amphibious Assaults, or a War On Airborne Invasions. It really muddles the mind as to what we are trying to accomplish in this war.
Islamic Fascism, in my mind, is a completely appropriate term, as it identifies both the root of the problem (certain forms of Islam) as well as an ideology that should be familiar to anyone with a sense of history. While a lot of people are going to cringe at the idea of making this a ‘religious’ war, they should pause and consider that it HAS been a religious war for quite some time to the other side. They see at as the restoration of a mideval Caliphate, and will accept no other outcome.
CNN has a poll on their site today addressing the change in names. At the moment, 68% of people are opposed to the idea that we are fighting Fascism (CNN omits the Islamic part, which I consider a problem). I’d like to ask them – what do they think we ARE fighting?
Technorati Tags: islam, war, terrorism
Filed under: The War
Well, good question Todd. What exactly are we fighting? Is it just Islamic Fascism? How about non-Islamic sponsored terrorism? Non-Islamic Fascism? If so, why the invasion of Iraq – a country that until the invasion had no Islamic Fascist movement in it at all. Do we keep re-labeling our armed forces actions until we come across the right answer? I hope they settle on a permanant reason quickly – this hole we are digging is just getting deeper.
As I said many different times, I believe the real enemy is Islamic Fascism, and terrorism is just a tactic of a movement that would like to see the return of the Caliphate. At the moment, they lack the tools to accomplish this, but the prevalance of rouge states in the Middle East increases the chances of them obtaining WMD technology sooner rather than later.
I’ve been through the Iraq thing over and over again here, and my views should be known on that. Saddam wouldn’t have had a problem handing over things that can be used to harm the West. While he might not have embraced the Caliphate, a distracted or weakened West would have had a hard time responding to an Iraqi invasion of Saudi Arabia or other strategic locations in the region. Did we do the right thing in Iraq? I have no freakin’ clue. At the very LEAST, continued inaction would have further eroded an already pathetic image of the UN as being a mechanism to police proliferation attempts.
And sadly, the Iraqi people have essentially squandered any naive hope I might have had that suggested they wanted to leave a mideval theocracy. So given that, yeah, I wish we hadn’t bothered trying to HELP them and let them go on with their mass graves and police states and midnight knocks on the door and whatever recent and quaint horror the likes of Uday and Qusay could have conjoured up in their rape rooms. Forgive me for thinking that putting an end to all of that might have been a good idea….not when the higher ethic of ‘respecting the sovereign rights of nations’ might have been at risk. After all, all of that crap is just an internal matter to be left to the Arab world.
As for non-Islamic Fascism, care to offer any examples of that going on right now in the world? Do you know of any agressive expansionist aspirations on the part of a movement that includes the wanton slaughter of anyone that isn’t a member of the club? While the little gargoyle in North Korea is obviously completely insane, I’m not all that concerned about him having delusions on taking over the Pacific Rim and lopping the heads off anyone who doesn’t see him as the Son of God.
Same for non-Islamic terrorism. I’d like to see some examples of that animal that exceeds 0.1% of the totality of terror incidents in the world over the past twenty years. This might help. I haven’t noticed the IRA or the Basque Separatists working on the mass slaughter of civilians lately.
Should we not be concerned about a Nuclear Iran? Should we not be worried about a biochemical Hamas? Is a virally equipped Al Qaeda not something we should lose sleep over?
Because these things are coming. Non-proliferation does not work (see India and Pakistan). Sanctions do not work (see Russia and Iranian sanctions). These technologies are not mysterious. The means are available and inevitable.
What other movement in the world right now would provide the Will to the Means? The doctrine of Mutual Assured Destruction does not help when one side sees it as an INCENTIVE.
Sorry if I seem petulant. I’m tired and I’m sick and I’m unfathomably pissed at the world today. Every day is another mass killing somewhere in the Mideast, with some madman blowing up another collection of madmen over a bankrupt theology that embraces death just as much as the West embraces life. The daily killing in Baghdad continues, and the very victims do nothing to expose the killers in their midst. And before someone jumps in and blames our presence for the killing, know that Saddam was killing them in even greater numbers before we got there…he was just doing it quietly.
Is that how we are going to measure progress? Killing that doesn’t disturb our daily newspaper?
Call me a fool for ever thinking the Islamic World wanted freedom of any sort. I certainly am not going to be caught advocating help for them again. I’ve learned that lesson.
Well, as for me, I think it’s a good thing. I wrote a letter (which I should share sometime) to Mr. Bush explaining how afraid I am of the Islamic baddies.
Seems like he might have listened to me.