Date: 23/10/2019
Name:
Email: Keep my email address private
Reply:
**Your comments must be approved before they appear on the site.
Authentication:  
8 + 7 = ?: (Required)
Enter the correct answer to the math question.

  
clear
You are posting a comment about...
Not a War On Terror, But...

"War on terror" was always an unhelpful phrase, but the British government's decision to drop it is for the wrong, not the right, reasons.

The right reasons are to identify not a tactic of the war ("terror") but rather, the nature of the war, the ideological promptings of that war, the varied instruments of that war now being waged -- because after centuries of weakness oil revenues and Muslim migrants settled deep inside the West provide the main wherewithal -- on Infidel peoples, Infidel legal and political institutions, Infidel states, all over the world.

Islam inculcates in its adherents the belief in the duty of a "struggle" or Jihad to spread Islam, and then to insure the dominance of Islam, everywhere. The means chosen may vary. At the moment the most effective means is not "terror" but, rather, deployment of the Money Weapon (which can do a lot, including buying real weapons), campaigns of Da'wa, and demographic conquest within the Infidel lands. Islam, in other words, insists that between Believers and Unbelievers, Muslims and Infidels, there must be a state of permanent war -- though not necessarily at all times of open warfare -- until all barriers to the dominance of Islam, and rule by Muslims, have been swept away.

How should this be described? The word "Jihad" exists. The problem is that Infidels are not making war on Islam. They are lavishing every kind of benefit on Muslims, in the vain hope that those who are impoverished (but what of all the Muslims who are fantastically rich, and yet seem even more hell-bent on supporting the Jihad?) will somehow be less rigorous in their beliefs, and in also attempting to transplant democracy (for "ordinary moms and dads" as Bush said in his best saccharine manner) to the stony soil of Islam.

But apparently we have all agreed that under no conditions must be call this a "war against Islam" even though the Jihad is a central duty of Muslims. Very well then. Call it a "war of self-defense against the Jihad." Call it a "war against Islamic supremacism." But for god's sake call it something that makes clear that the war is one being waged on us, and that war has been prompted not by a search for new resources and markets and Lebensraum (Nazi Germany, Imperial Japan) but by a search for more places that can be forced to succumb to Islam.