Another Hundred Years War? I’m sure the Three Amigos* would like that, but

Romney aside, Obama aside, serious things appear to be happening.

The usual noise machine is going all ‘we can’t let this stand’. I assume they want to shoot someone.

Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Libya, Tunisia . . . shall we wage war on all of them? (Hey, war with a billion people would be awesome!)

War with a billion people who mostly don’t want war with us.

War with a billion people because of the actions of  a hundred thousand? A few hundred thousand? The militants among the billion? The Islamists amongst a billion Muslims? Wage war on a billion people?

If the neo-con dreams come true, that’s what we’ll have. And Saudi Arabia couldn’t stop it; the Saudi royal family would probably be wiped out early on. They’ve been in Al Qaeda’s gun sights for some time.

You think it can’t happen? Check out the 11th and 12th Centuries.

* Messers McCain and Lieberman and Ms. Graham of the United States Senate.

16 responses to “Another Hundred Years War? I’m sure the Three Amigos* would like that, but

  1. I’ve seen far right folks post videos and such that basically suggest:

    1. Muslims are required to kill infidels by the Koran;
    2. Muslims are to lie about this if necessary and tell you they love peace per the Koran.

    The implications would seem to be we non-muslims have to kill all Muslims in self defense before they kill us, though when I’ved asked if that is what folks who state 1 & 2 believe I’ve been answered with silence. I haven’t found anyone who thinks (or at least admits they think) we have to kill all the Muslims yet.

    The bible has portions that seem to suggest wiping out infidels as well, but I think most Christians don’t in fact believe they should kill all those who don’t share their faith. Shouldn’t it be obvious that Muslims are no more inherently violent.

    But I think many right wing Christians believe anything but that Muslims are mostly peaceful, and if you really believe 1 and 2: I’m not sure what the logical implication is other than global religious war to the death with Islam.

    Good sense, and a reading of the Bible or Koran in full context in my view can’t support global religious war in my view, and to undermine the like of Al Queda its seems we have to separate and isolate those with such bloodthirsty views.

    The way that the like of those who can’t seem to get enough of war with Islamic nations seems to be to see the Muslim world as a big undifferentiated mass of haters and enemies of the US and west. They seem to either believe my points 1 & 2 and the implied need bloodbath, or at least the west needs to intimidate the Muslim world by force. Even the approach of intimidation will do nothing but breed enemies faster than we can kill them I think.

    The reaction to this incident make me fear that endless war is where we may go.

    Like

    • Sure you have, Bruce. Me. I firmly believe that the only road that might lead to world peace – a long shot in any event – has to start with the extermination of the Muslim vermin or, at the very least, the removal of their capacity to be a threat to normal people, which amounts to close to same thing as culling their numbers dramatically and keeping the remnants left in bondage of some sort would be needed to do that.

      Like

      • I sincerely hope that this comment was grounded in sarcasm.

        Like

        • Nope, no sarcasm involved. It was grounded in both history and current events. Of course, don’t let that imply that it’s a pleasant solution; necessity does not equate pleasure.

          Like

          • If it was truly grounded in history and current events you would know that societies that have endured long periods of internal upheaval, foreign political rule, economic deprivation, and general misery, develop a few unavoidable side effects. One of these, is an impoverished, uneducated underclass susceptible to brainwashing and control by resentful members of the elite that remain outside the political system. These masses of brainwashed mobs and jihadists are motivated by pain, misery, and hatred – and it is the power-hungry clerics that focus their desperation against the enemies of the dispossesed elite.

            The source of Islamic emnity against the West is not fundementally based upon religion, though religion can be interpreted as a means of justifying any means for the clerics to gratify their own power lust. It is based on the state of Islamic society, which has historical, political, and sociological roots. Ransack the literature of all nations; you will find that wherever similar conditions exist, political or religious extremism and terrorism also exists.

            The answer to our troubles with the Islamic world is not to further interfere and wage war upon them, but to abandon them to their own devices. Once they have established the social and political order that they want, as opposed to what a small minority of them in conspiracy with foreign powers want, then they will gradually develop the peace and order that is necessary for both prosperity and ultimately for peace with their neighbours.

            Like

            • A hundred years or so ago your idea would have worked. We’re all too globally connected now for the “leave them to their own devices” to be workable now though. There’s just no way to quarantine them – or, for the Dhimmis here, quarantine us – anymore.

              Like

              • Of course there are ways to quarantine them. Take away their access to wealth(as in dont buy their oil) and you would severely limit their ability to wage anything. What we are witnessing right now is the price of what “cheap” oil really costs. The fact is, if we decided to develop new methods for driving our cars and fueling our homes they would probably go back to being Camel herders. But as we both know jonolan, the military industrial complex would bite back hard. The enemy isnt some little jihadists. The enemy are the ones who bankroll them. Unfortunately they are a little closer to home. 😦

                Like

  2. Buce, to see you write that you fear endless war makes me afraid. You’re not one who rushes to judgement. I joke about this stuff and about McCain/Liieberman/Graham and their endless calls for war, but then I see that Romney has people like John Bolton advising him .. .

    Like

  3. History speaks volumes. Are we starting to see the decline of the present day empire?

    Like

  4. One factor in the madness that is not much discussed is the Arab meme that media products like movies and political cartoons are de facto condoned by the source’s government. That is said to be behind the mobs in Cairo now. Such ignorance is the soil of future wars.

    Like

    • Jim, ignorance is always the ground where wars grow. Just look at the anger today at Libya, which, unlike Egypt, mostly got in on the side of protecting hte Americans. A number of Libyan police or troops or whatever were killed too.

      Like

  5. Excuse me , but I am tired of the false argument that Conservatives are at war with all of Islam . We have our Muslim allies in the Middle East . They want us to be strong and support them . Strength is not wanting to fight a hundreds years war .

    The Cold War should have taught us something . You guys do remember that we won that, doncha ? You have to be strong militarily and be willing to show that you will use your strength . If you don’t you can’t negotiate peace .

    Like

  6. (1) Careful about mixing your metaphors there, Moe. The Hundreds Years War was between two claimants to the French throne, one of whom was the King of England. Nothing to do with a crusade,

    (2) There is a crusade story that fits the “perpetual war” theme very well. Richard the Lionhearted was afraid to take Jerusalem because his troops were all sworn to take Jerusalem. That means they would all quit as soon as it was taken, and he’d have nothing to hold it with. There’s gotta be a good analogy in there somewhere. Something about keeping fear alive so more money can be made from the “threat”.

    Like

    • Actually mudge, I used the ‘hundred years war’ simply for it’s descriptive nature of how long such a thing ccould go on. My historical reference (in my own mind and very poorly presented here) was of course the Crusades.

      Those who think any kind of war could possibly make things better are utterly deluded.

      TFT put it very well above pointing out that we finance these people. Bin Laden railed against Western society indeed. But what he actually wanted was for us to get the hell out of Saudi Arabia, home of the Muslim holy cities. THAT was got him motivated. We wouldn’t so he sought to hurt us.

      And we don’t get out because we’re careless and glutonous and beleie we are entitled to all the oil we want and we dont have to even try to conserve. And so we protect our gluttony with soldiers who die, in land where they’re not welcome. And where we wouldn’t otherwise be.

      It’s always one word: OIL.

      (yes, we have other legitimate interests in the region, but nothing that requires us to support dictators so we can maintain access to our drug)

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s