Saturday, September 17, 2005

At war with an enemy of an unspoken name

When President Bush declared war on terrorism, he did not, legally, put the country on a war footing. Up until now, we have never accurately named the enemy or the danger. If the government can't speak the real name and nature of the enemy, it becomes impossible to explain, or even design, a policy for victory. What we need is a clear congressional declaration of war, as prescribed by the Constitution. Congress should declare war on the Islamist jihadists. The likely prolonged nature of this war should be a concern to everyone who values civil liberties. As long as we are inventing a new form of war declaration, put a sunset provision on it. Every two years, all exclusively wartime powers would be extinguished and need to be renewed by the next Congress. The FBI should not be intimidated into politically correct behavior that endangers security. But this is the natural outcome of policy that puts political correctness before common sense. To give extra scrutiny to Muslims in sensitive situations is not bigotry. In time of war, no loyal American citizen or peaceful resident should resent precautions taken for the common defense. We are at war again and need to treat border security as a necessity. We no longer can afford the luxury of not requiring national identification cards. But a defense of the West without the birthplace of the West -- Europe -- is almost unthinkable. If Europe becomes Eurabia, it would mean the loss of our cultural and historic first cousins, our closest economic and military allies, and the source of our own civilization. This is a condition Americans should dread and should move mountains to avoid. It bears repeating: An Islamified Europe would be as great a threat to the United States today as a Nazified Europe would have been in the 1940s. Even before Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt understood that a Nazi-dominated Europe would be more than a fearsome military and industrial threat. It would be a civilizational threat. Now we face another such threat in insurgent Islam.

7 Comments:

At September 17, 2005 2:49 AM, Blogger John Sobieski said...

I have been doing a lot of research about what is going on in our universities. Discover the Networks is a big help. Today a new 'dialogue' organization was funded by Qatar at NYU (see Militant Islam Monitor). Almost all of our universities are now controlled by paid apologists for Islam. This is where the leaders of the future are being indoctrinated with 'respect' and 'awe' for Islam. By controlling the universities, Islam gets incredible legitamacy and control of what is published and proposed by 'academic experts' on how to 'reconcile' the West with Islam.

All these interfaith dialogques are a red herring for the Infidels. The Muslims pretend and nod with the infidels, insist on watered down statements and action proposals that have no meaning or are harmful to the US, and snicker behind the Infidels' backs. But best of all, all these Infidels who join these boards rake in the fees and enjoy the spotlight and sound all self important while they lead America to the Butchers.



It's like a joke, but isn't.

http://www.militantislammonitor.org/article/id/1088

 
At September 17, 2005 6:11 AM, Blogger Dan Kauffman said...

"If the government can't speak the real name and nature of the enemy, it becomes impossible to explain, or even design, a policy for victory. What we need is a clear congressional declaration of war, as prescribed by the Constitution. Congress should declare war on the Islamist jihadists"

It is consistant of the Left to let us see by their continuous insistance that Al Quedar, being an NGO, we cannot wage War upon it and in any case we have not issued any formal Declaration of War.

By this they illustrate that they no absolutely NOTHING about the History of America or Constitutional precedents.

The first military land action by the United States after the Revolutionary War was against an NGO of Muslim terrorists called the Barbary Pirates, Thomas Jefferson, Alexander Hamilton and the Congress of the day debated whether a formal Declaration of War was required, they concluded it was not, more here
http://www.angelfire.com/ky/kentuckydan/CommitteesofCorrespondence/index.blog?entry_id=1084083

 
At September 17, 2005 11:45 AM, Blogger nalymov said...

It would be futile to expect any assistance from the USA to Europe, which is the immediate target of jihadists.

Experience shows that it is the goal of the USA to make Europe weak and engaged in domestic battles. This explains the support for Albanian Muslims against Christian Serbs. And this explains the American desire to make Turkey part of the EU.

 
At September 17, 2005 3:08 PM, Blogger John Sobieski said...

Nalymov, I would like to comment on your statement about Albania and America's desire to have Turkey join EU.

I was opposed to both from the beginning. This is what I believe happened. Clinton was fooled into 'saving' the Albanian Muslims by Muslim agents in the Administration. It was stupid, as is the Iraq war. Bush, likewise has been manipulated by Muslim agents and apologists that getting Turkey in the EU is the best thing for America. He couldn't be more wrong. I have to admit I voted for Bush, but only as the best of two bad choices. I now wonder if that was the correct thing to have done.

I have kept the following testimony from Milosevic at his Intl Court of Justice trial because of its bitter irony:

At the opening of the trial when Milosevic presented pictures of beheaded Serbs and Judge May said that is irrelevant. Milosevic said:

"It's not on the screens that the public sees. Right. I see it on this screen now. But this internal screen only. So he is holding a head, the head of a Serb that he cut off. So those are the 20.000 Mujahedin that were brought to the European theatre of war through Clinton's policy, and most of them remained there and some went to America and to other countries, and they went all around Europe. And then when they start beheading your own people in wars to come, then you will know what this is all about."

This is all Clinton's doing and the blame for this terrorism in Madrid, Kosovo, Baghdad and many other parts is his appeasement of the Osama's friends.


Bush has forgotten the first rule of war: KNOW YOUR ENEMY, and for that, I will not forgive him.

The best strategy to destroy Islam is to promote division and internecine fighting in Islam. Divide and weaken your enemy. That is the exact opposite of what we are doing in Iraq.

 
At September 17, 2005 6:27 PM, Blogger Pastorius said...

Nalymov,

I hope you are not right, but sometimes I fear that you are. Especially in this war, our interest is in helping Europe. Europe is our brother. We should always want to help.

Axis,
Don't you think we have started internecine squabbles in Iraq. The Sunni insurgency has shown the sickening reality of Jihadi ideology to the Shi'ites and the Kurds, and in recent months they have been doing most of the fighting.

As far as I know the battle of Tal Afar (spelling?) was fought 90% by Iraqi troops.

Am I wrong?

 
At September 17, 2005 11:07 PM, Blogger PD111 said...

From the article:The likely prolonged nature of this war should be a concern to everyone who values civil liberties. As long as we are inventing a new form of war declaration, put a sunset provision on it. Every two years, all exclusively wartime powers would be extinguished and need to be renewed by the next Congress.

What is not stated is how long the war is likely to be. The reality is that as long as muslims are here in rhe West in sufficient numbers, the war is likely to be till Judgement Day. How on earth is Congress to provision for a war, that is going to last say a hundred years. Besides, no matter the number of islamists thrown out, the muslim population will cointinue to expand demographically due to birth rate alone. The problem is going to get more severe with each successive year. Then there is the matter that as muslim populations expand beyond a critical mass, they will be able to elect sufficient number of muslim congressmen, who will thwart any extension of war powers to the President, if that is, the President is still an infidel.

The tragic fact is, there is no real humane alternative to a policy that limits the West's muslim population initially, and then reverses the growth. This to be done at the same time as rescueing Christian populations in muslim nations, as they would be murdered anyway if that is not done. All other scenarios merely prolong the agonsy and make a global civil war inevitable, with all that entails.

In passing, it is worth noting, that the first shot in this new world war began in Sarajevo. Interesting.

DP111

 
At September 18, 2005 5:49 AM, Blogger GunJam said...

fjordman: Great post! This is one of my biggest bugaboos with President Bush. Apparently, he has a mental block?

I have this (fictitious) mental image of his going before a microphone and saying:"My fellow Americans, we are now at war with Isl..., Islam..., Islami.... We are now at war with Islamic. ... Oh, hell! We are now at War with Terror!"

I mean, give me a BREAK! REFUSING to mention the enemy by name? This speaks of FEAR! Dumb!

 

Post a Comment

<< Home