Nothing to See Here, Just Another Terrorist Attack

Fighting an ideology is extremely difficult…as you know obviously.

I think one of the things we need to do is bring back the Teddy Roosevelt idea of assimilation. Too much multi-culturalism breeds this sort of thing–and that doesn’t mean that things have to be “WASPY white culture”. Note to raj: I am not talking about killing off all immigration.

Part of this process means we have to name our problem–that’s the first step and all too often an issue with politicians and those concerned with being politically correct.

3 Likes

Agree, immigration has to be slow and methodical, particularly with an ideology that is so different from ours.

1 Like

Import more muslims because by halting muslim immigration we are only radicalizing local muslims.

/sarcasm

1 Like

We fight it in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Sudan and every where they are able to gather. We beat the shit out of them and humiliate them and the people on the outside have nothing to pledge their support to.

Because obama does not believe in decisive victory and battle with an objective, they have had the time to build up an exportation of their terror.
Why are these videos on the web? Why hasn’t the US taken them down? This is a war and these videos are weapons of war, not free speech.

We reacted too slowly and we are paying the price, hardcore.

Obviously fighting an ideology is difficult. However, destroying the the people, where they pool their ideology together is not. We can destroy the groups who export the ideology and they will not be sharing their ideology with anyone anymore.

I am for war. All out, take out ISIS and Syria.
Nobody to take power, fine we can occupy it for a while until a suitable leadership coelesses.

This idea Bush had about fighting them over there so they don’t come here was not a bad idea. None of this shit happened, or it happened very little under his watch.

Obama pulls all the troops out and all hell breaks loose. We have terror attacks weekly. AND NOBODY CARES ANYMORE!

The biggest problem is nobody cares. How much are we going to take? OR are we just going to accept it? The price of accepting it is to give them their world wide caliphate. A world in subjugation to islam.

1 Like

Agreed. The price of political correctness is a big stack of bodies. PC isn’t free speech is restricted speech. It’s a means to shut up your opponent by labeling them a bigot.
If we abolished the 1st amendment the first words to ban would be: bigot, racist, homophobe, islamaphobe, xenophobe… basically anything that ends in 'phobe. These are all words to stifle honest conversation.

3 Likes

You mean Saudi Arabia? They are financing and recruiting ISIS fighters…

You know that most of the ISIS fighters in Syria are either illiterate goat molesters who joined for the killing and rape or foreigners from countries like Belgium, France, Algeria, Tunisia and Russia…

So who are you supposed to be taking out?

I’ll throw Saudi Arabia in to the mix, fuck 'um.

I can’t put up a link to this without hitting a paywall. Bolded sections are things that really stood out to me.
Is Europe Helpless? by Bret Stephens July 25, 2016 WSJ
A civilization that believes in nothing will ultimately submit to anything.

At last count, members of the European Union spent more than $200 billion a year on defense, fielded more than 2,000 jet fighters and 500 naval ships, and employed some 1.4 million military personnel. More than a million police officers also walk Europe’s streets. Yet in the face of an Islamist menace the Continent seems helpless. Is it?

Was France helpless in May 1940?

Let’s stipulate that a van barreling down a seaside promenade isn’t a Panzer division, and that a few thousand ISIS fighters scattered from Mosul to Marseilles aren’t another Wehrmacht. But as in France in 1940, Europe today displays the same combination of doctrinal rigidity and loss of will that allowed an Allied army of 144 divisions to be routed by the Germans in six weeks. The Maginot Line of “European values” won’t prevail over people who recognize none of those values.

So much was made clear by French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, who remarked after the Nice attack that “France is going to have to live with terrorism.” This may have been intended as a statement of fact but it came across as an admission that his government isn’t about to rally the public to a campaign of blood, toil, tears and sweat against ISIS—another premature capitulation in a country that has known them before.

Mr. Valls was later booed at a memorial service for the Nice victims. It would be heartening to think this was because he and his boss, President François Hollande, have failed to forge a strategy to destroy ISIS. But the public’s objection was that there hadn’t been enough cops along the Promenade des Anglais to stop the attack. In soccer terms, it’s a complaint about the failure of defense, not the lack of a proper offense.

Then there is Germany, site of three terror attacks in a week. It seems almost like a past epoch that Germans welcomed a million Middle Eastern migrants in an ecstasy of moral self-congratulation, led by Angela Merkel’s chant of “We can do it!” Last summer’s slogan now sounds as dated and hollow as Barack Obama’s “Yes we can!”

Now Germany will have to confront a terror threat that will make the Baader-Meinhof gang of the 1970s seem trivial. The German state is stronger and smarter than the French one, but it also surrenders more easily to moral intimidation. The idea of national self-preservation at all costs will always be debatable in a country seeking to expiate an inexpiatable sin.

Thus the question of whether Europe is helpless. At its 1980s peak, under François Mitterrand and Helmut Kohl, the European project combined German economic strength and French confidence in power politics. Today, it mixes French political weakness with German moral solipsism. This is a formula for rapid civilizational decline, however many economic or military resources the EU may have at its disposal.

Can the decline be stopped? Yes, but that would require a great unlearning of the political mythologies on which modern Europe was built.

Among those mythologies: that the European Union is the result of a postwar moral commitment to peace; that Christianity is of merely historical importance to European identity; that there’s no such thing as a military solution; that one’s country isn’t worth fighting for; that honor is atavistic and tolerance is the supreme value. People who believe in nothing, including themselves, will ultimately submit to anything.

The alternative is a recognition that Europe’s long peace depended on the presence of American military power, and that the retreat of that power will require Europeans to defend themselves. Europe will also have to figure out how to apply power not symbolically, as it now does, but strategically, in pursuit of difficult objectives. That could start with the destruction of ISIS in Libya.

More important, Europeans will have to learn that powerlessness can be as corrupting as power—and much more dangerous. The storm of terror that is descending on Europe will not end in some new politics of inclusion, community outreach, more foreign aid or one of Mrs. Merkel’s diplomatic Rube Goldbergs. It will end in rivers of blood. Theirs or yours?

In all this, the best guide to how Europe can find its way to safety is the country it has spent the best part of the last 50 years lecturing and vilifying: Israel. For now, it’s the only country in the West that refuses to risk the safety of its citizens on someone else’s notion of human rights or altar of peace.

Europeans will no doubt look to Israel for tactical tips in the battle against terrorism—crowd management techniques and so on—but what they really need to learn from the Jewish state is the moral lesson. Namely, that identity can be a great preserver of liberty, and that free societies cannot survive through progressive accommodations to barbarians.

4 Likes

Now that is a great assessment of the European problem. Thanks for posting this Puff…

2 Likes

I’m putting this here because this should also be a thread about scattering these assholes across the desert like a Jackson Pollock drawn in meat. I’m also putting it here because almost nobody follows it (in fact, almost nobody knows what “Inherent Resolve” is), and it’s important for us to understand every term in the equation.

http://www.inherentresolve.mil/News/StrikeReleases/

http://www.inherentresolve.mil/Portals/1/Documents/Strike%20Releases/2016/07July/20160727%20Strike%20Release%20Final.pdf?ver=2016-07-27-065437-237

http://www.inherentresolve.mil/Portals/1/Documents/Strike%20Releases/2016/07July/20160726%20Strike%20Release%20Final.pdf?ver=2016-07-26-070003-970

3 Likes

24,000 of these assholes dead, and counting. If only Obama were willing to say the words radical Islamic terrorism. Say what you will about Bush, but he would never say “Islam is peace”.

NEVER EVER.

(And the real question is: was that softness too? Or maybe are there a bunch of military and strategic advisors who have for decades, literally since before the 9/11 rubble stopped steaming, been aware of the ideological component of this war? I admit that I’m skeptical that this has much real-world, material benefit, and I further admit that I have an Orwell-level commitment to plain speech, but I am not willing to lie about what motivates the rhetoric. Actually I don’t even think most Americans are lying. I think they just don’t have the slightest curiosity beyond what their gut and favorite propaganda website say.)

1 Like

Communism is an ideology and we had the will to defeat them in Russia and Eastern Europe. That was when we had a belligerence nuclear armed enemy bent on global domination. I’d say the Soviet Union was a worse, yet different, enemy than ISIS, but still it was an ideological war which we won. If he had the motivation, the heart & the will, I believe we could defeat them ideologically, yet no plan to do so seems in place.

I mean, it’s not exactly the same thing and we didn’t really defeat communism so much as communism defeated itself (to an extent. It still exists after all). If you want to boil a complex situation down to simple terms, economically speaking we were just stronger and the U.S.S.R’s spending was unsustainable. So is our’s, now.

Also, Russian’s didn’t buy into communism across the board. They were forced into it at gunpoint. That is not the case for radical Islamists. In reality is the opposite. They’ve bought into radical Islam as hard as our Founding Fathers bought into Liberty and freedom. You can’t simply outlast or kill that.

Defeating ISIS and to a much larger extent radicalism is a very different ball game. Don’t get me wrong, we should kill every member of ISIS in any and all regions of the world, but that in and of itself is not going to kill the movement. Certainly, fear mongering rhetoric doesn’t help either.

2 Likes

We have to beat them decisively first. It really does need to be ugly. And the innocent will die with the evil. Not something I am happy about, but we cannot let human shields be the reason we do not stop world wide terror.
We need to officially declare war and invoke article 5 of NATO. It will take that. Like Pope Francis has said, we are already in a piecemeal world war. It’s the denial of that fact making it more dangerous for Joe Q Citizen of the world.

Changing political ideology and religious ideology are 2 vastly different things. We have to have a world that is safe for the moderate muslims interested in reform to operate and do their work. Nobody outside of islam is going to change their ideology.

We cannot have a place where moderate muslims are in fear for their life and have fatwa’s taken out against them, secularists butchered with machetes, people in their own communities afraid to speak out. Muslims can change muslims, outsiders cannot.

I can speak to that directly being a child of the Cold War from inside the Iron Curtain. My grandfather was jailed for going to church. My grandparents we taken out of their professions and thrown on to a state farm because they would not renounce their faith and join the Communist Party. My grandfather was a MD and grandmother a teacher. Then they were farmers. My mother grew up in extreme poverty. Communism was hammered into people in school, but nobody actually believe it. They nodded their heads and said nothing to stay out of jail.
Communism was not an idea the population agreed with or embraced. They acted out of fear. There were no ‘true believers’ outside the Communist Party. There were players and victims.
Once Russia fell, communism was dismissed immediately with no help from the outside.

These radical muslims are true believers and there is A LOT of them. There is a big difference.

1 Like

Some would argue that Russian communism won (in destroying Judeo-Christian morals) and Putin and company are waiting (im)patiently for their plan to play out, with the politically correct progressive agenda undermining the West: