The existential war has finally arrived

We here at the Bookworm Room have said for some time that the West is engaged in an existential war with Islam. Unlike past wars with Islam, though, our leaders refuse to acknowledge that there is an enemy doctrinally focused in our conquest and enslavement (not to mention death for the “lucky” Jews and gays among us, people too debased even to live in the new Caliphate).

Yesterday, on my “real me” Facebook, I linked to the Daily Beast article saying that the Kurds offered long ago to help engage and destroy ISIS, but the Administration completely ignored the offer. A far Left high school friend of mine semi-jokingly said that it was the military industrial complex, anxious for the profits of endless war, that was behind the administration’s inaction.

Both Danny Lemieux and Charles Martle, who are friends of mine in both the real and cyber world, explained to this man the nature of the existential battle between Islam and the rest of the world.

With perfect timing, the Daily Mail published today an article identifying the worldwide fronts on which Islam is waging its jihad.

This is a war we should all recognize and we should stand shoulder to shoulder to fight. Islam is antisemitic, anti-Christian, anti-Buddhist, anti-Hindu, and anti-“you’re the wrong type of Muslim,” not to mention homophobic and misogynistic. DemProgs need to figure out that we have met the enemy and it is not us.

(Written on an iPhone and not proofread. Please pardon mistakes.)

Be Sociable, Share!
  • qr4j

    Great post — and so on the money in every respect. I struggle with knowing what “standing shoulder to shoulder against Islamofacism” means. I know what it does NOT mean. It does NOT mean acting as Obama and company have acted. In very practical terms, it means not ignoring people like the Kurds.

    However, I am torn when it comes to identifying an appropriate response to Islamofacism. Part of me says we should shoot to kill and ask questions later as we well know these ISIS types are up to everything evil and nothing good. Part of me wonders whether there is a better way to combat this evil. Is there a higher, nobler way to defeat evil? Is there a way to combat evil through peaceful means?

    No, I am not a Lefty by any stretch of the imagination. I do teach Sunday School. And I loathe death. I don’t like war. I don’t like killing.

    I am reminded of a line from the hymn, “Lead On, O King Eternal”: “For not with swords loud clashing, nor roll of stirring drums; in deeds of love and mercy, the heavenly kingdom comes.”

    Is there a way besides war to defeat the evil ones? I suppose you first have to recognize them as evil — which is not something Obama et al are likely to do. Republicans? Now they’re evil, says the Big ZerO. But not the ISIS crowd.

    • SADIE

      Turn the other cheek, but don’t turn your back on madness. I think we all can forgive the small slights we all feel from time to time and can and do turn our cheek. I just wouldn’t attempt turning if the other guy was coming to take my cheek along with my head.

    • Ymarsakar

      Hussein and the entire Left are evil.

  • Earl

    This is the part of that article that impressed me:

    “Andreas Kreig, a Middle East security analyst at King’s College London in Qatar, said he had noticed a rise in extremism in recent weeks and months, but said Islam wasn’t to blame.

    “He told MailOnline: ‘All the empirical evidence shows that it is on the rise. You’re seeing it in all the headlines, then you’re looking at Iraq, you’re looking at Syria, you’re looking at Nigeria.

    ‘”But in all three cases this has nothing to do with Islam. I think people in the West may think it is because they feel alienated by Islam. There is alot of Islamaphobia.’

    With all due respect to Mr. Kreig, someone whose loved ones have been murdered by terrorists shouting “Allahu Akbar” might be forgiven their “Islamophobia”, since they have only the immediate data to go on, and no chance to sit in a faculty lounge, sipping tea and debating the finer points of the theology of the situation.

    And I’ll stand with the victims, rather than with the academics who only serve to empower the evildoers.

    @qr4j: The Bible is pretty clear that is the obligation of a Christian to stand between evil and the innocent, and if that requires violence, then so be it. Further, Christ Himself told his disciples, as they set out to spread the Gospel of love and peace, that if they had a sword they should take it along, and if they did not they should sell their coat and buy one.

    It appears to me that this is better guidance than any hymn, even one I love as much as Lead On O King Eternal, which I’ve sung all my life.

    • qr4j

      Earl, I agree with you. Actually standing between an innocent and a bully — especially a violent bully — is a deed of love and mercy. Your comments have helped me re-focus. Thank you.

      The back story of my comments — well, part of the back story — is that there have been two shootings in my neighborhood within the last two nights. Last night’s shooting resulted in a 26 year-old man’s death. All this went down as part of retaliation for robbery or something. Last night’s shooting occurred within a football field’s length of my home. Fortunately I have a privacy fence and a railroad track to serve as barriers.

      I am just so sick of violence. But my being sick of it does not relieve me of my duty to protect the innocent and stand for the right. I am damned sick of the nonsense!

      • Earl

        Amen to all those sentiments, my friend…..we live in a war zone (the Bible is pretty clear about this, too), and the consequences of that are distasteful in the extreme.

        We are blessed to live in a (relatively) peaceful part of California, yet even here, a couple of years ago a young Hmong man was murdered at random as he stopped at a red light on his way to work. It was late at night and a sniper shot him from an ambush off to the side of the road. No clearer warning about the reality of our situation could be given.

        Despite what I wrote so confidently, I’m torn about what I know to be true. We own a handgun and a (single-shot) .410. I don’t think these are sufficient for home defense, but have had a terrible time getting busy and doing what I believe to be right and proper. This world is not our (true) home, and I find myself “pretending” that we’re already in the Better Land. Not Biblical, and not a good idea.

        No one who unlawfully enters my home has any reasonable expectation of safety, and I need to get prepared to protect those for whom I’m responsible.

    • Ymarsakar

      I have a sword, literally.

  • Charles Martel

    There are many types of warfare, so the question about how to war on Islam—and war we must—has several answers.

    For one thing, I think we can deal some heavy blows against Islam without resorting to mass killing. For example, a US administration led by adult patriots would immediately strike and destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities as well as disable its armed forces. Secondly, the US would extend assurances of all-out support to Israel. and tell Hamas and the PLO in no uncertain terms that Israel’s post-1967 borders will stand inviolate.

    The US would supply arms to Nigeria, the Philippines, and other countries facing jihadist movements. We would offer direct military assistance in annihilating Boko Haram and telling the world that we will cut off the heads of like movements whenever they rear.

    At home, criminal and conspiracy charges could be lodged against CAIR and other Islamist fellow travelers. Immigration from Muslim nations would be halted until governments there have successfully reined in (destroyed) their jihadist movements. The federal government would pass a law prohibiting the exercise of sharia law anywhere in the United States. Ritual mutilation of girls would earn years in prison for both parents and honor killings would be categorized as capital crimes.

    On the economic front, the U.S. would develop its vast reserves of fossil fuels and cut the Arabs off at the knees by destroying the foundation of their wealth and political power. Islam would return to the path it was on before the discovery of oil, namely, a slow decline into terminal rot and irrelevance.

    • raymondjelli

      Excellent suggestions Charles. I would also add that on the international front the USA should recognize any NGO that gives security to non-Moslems in areas where a traditional government has shown it can not or will not be able to provide safety. That would allow the USA to supply weapons, training and trade through private and government means and prevent Islamists swallowing whole countries by just attacking the governments. Anyone, anywhere wishing to stand up to Jihad should have the opportunity.

      • Earl

        Yes to (almost) ALL of the above — what IS the matter with those wimps we send to Washington, D.C.? They’re going to get a lot of us killed.

        One caution: Any entity to whom we provide weapons would have to be CAREFULLY vetted, lest we get punked and end up providing materiel to our enemies. Are we prepared to allow our government to take this on?


        • raymondjelli

          I thought about that but our government is doing a better job of arming the enemy than a private organization ever could. We are also forgetting about Fast and Furious. I would rather trust a Nigerian Christian group self-organizing and being trusted with weapons than I would trust Obama. I bet the Jihadist would fear a private soldier that could not be as constrained by USA’s rules of engagement than they would be by a government. Fight fire with superior firepower.


    Don’t you just wish you could hear this again and then have everyone believe it. (((sigh)))

  • David Foster

    Paul Reynaud, who became Prime Minister of France shortly before the German assault of 1940, tried to explain to people why the stakes were so much greater than in the previous war:

    “People think Hitler is like Kaiser Wilhelm. The old gentleman only wanted to take Alsace-Lorraine from us. But Hitler is Genghis Khan.”
    (approximate quote)

    And in 2006, Ralph Peters, the writer and former army intelligence officer, said:

    “One of the most consistently disheartening experiences an adult can have today is to listen to the endless attempts by our intellectuals and intelligence professionals to explain religious terrorism in clinical terms, assigning rational motives to men who have moved irrevocably beyond reason. We suffer under layers of intellectual asymmetries that hinder us from an intuititive recognition of our enemies.”

  • jj

    With no respect whatsoever to Mr. Ktrig, I’m really bored by the whole topic. If you continue to have your cranium wedged up your fundament on the subject of Islam, then there’s nothing I can do for you, and I have nothing to say to you. (Not nothing ‘further’, just… nothing.)


    Just took a look at the twerp. Off-hand, he doesn’t look a day over thirty. Blitz”Kreig” anyone? ☺

    Dr. Krieg is happy to provide insight, analysis, background or informed reaction to issues relating to current Middle East affairs, civil-security sector relations or security sector reform.




  • Pingback: Wednesday afternoon round-up and Open Thread()

  • Ymarsakar

    “A far Left high school friend of mine semi-jokingly said that it was the military industrial complex, anxious for the profits of endless war, that was behind the administration’s inaction.”

    Like Diane Feinstein and other Democrats those hypocrites like and support?

    They’re the ones shifting military contracts to their husbands and friends. Military industrial complex their arse.

  • Danny Lemieux

    We can’t and we shouldn’t interfere as Shias (Iran) gear-up for an epic confrontation with Sunnis (Saudi Arabia). Other parties, Kurds and Turks, will get pulled into the fray. In my humble view and given our current leadership limitations, the smart thing to do would be a 3-step plan:

    1) Bolster our friends and get out of the way in the fray.

    2) Put a tight embargo on radicals from the Middle East and radically root them and their supporters out from our society (I am confident they are already very well-established in this country).

    3) Elect an administration that will do everything it can to put U.S. (and European?) gas and oil production in hyperdrive so that we crash the price of fuel and starve the jihadi economies.

    Let God sort them out.

    • Ymarsakar

      God’s going to produce 1 billion more JIhadis in the next few decades.

      Anyone that counts themselves as America’s friend, will be the first one America helps to destroy.

    • Earl

      Danny said: (I am confident they are already very well-established in this country).

      “…in this (Administration)” would be more like it, I’m afraid.

      If America survives this era, it’s going to make interesting reading for people looking at our history in a hundred years or so…….

  • David Foster

    In 2006, I visited an old industrial facility which had been restored to operating condition. One of the machines in this place is an attrition mill. It consists of two steel discs, rotating at high speed in opposite direction and crushing the substance to be milled between them.
    I immediately saw this machine as an excellent if very depressing metaphor.

    Western civilization is caught in a gigantic attrition mill, with one disc being the Islamofascist enemy and the other being the “progressive” movement within our own societies. The combination of these factors is far, far more than 2x more dangerous than either by itself would be.

    • Ymarsakar

      An apt depiction of metaphysics.