Jim Wright has produced what I think is an excellent article about the reality underlying the Paris attacks yesterday. In some ways he echoes my own perspective, but he has a rather grittier and more sanguine approach (the latter in the original meaning of ‘sanguine’, from the French word sang, meaning ‘blood’). Here’s a brief excerpt.
Terrorism grows like bacteria in warm agar, among the destruction and ruin of war. Terrorism grows in the gaps between civilization. And so what is the plan for after the war? After we’ve blown up the world yet again?
What comes after?
It does you no good to kill cockroaches if you don’t clean up the rot and mess and the filth they live on, if you leave chaos and darkness for them to breed in. More will always come in an unending tide.
So what’s the plan for after?
Paris was caused by Iraq. By Syria. By Afghanistan. By chaos and destruction and because the terrorists had nothing better, literally nothing better, to do with their miserable lives.
Unless we do something about that, then Paris isn’t the end, it’s just the beginning.
There’s much more at the link. Highly recommended reading.
A mess, but what else is new? Human history is one set of people making bad decisions as a result of dealing with the unintended consequences of the previous batch's bad decisions, and so on.
The idea that we can somehow "fix" a conflict that has been going on for 1400 years is little more than wishful thinking.
There are better and worse ways of dealing with it, but the idea that the basic cause – evil people concluding that violence is a successful way to get what they want – is somehow the fault of their victims, should be self-evidently ridiculous. So is the idea that there can be an end to it, any more than there can ever Ben an end to crime that would permit us to disband our police forces and pull down our gaols.
The motivation for these men can be laid fairly at the feet of Mohammed. It is he who proclaimed that Islam would rule the world and force everyone to bow to his god. It is he who set the example of violent conquest and endorsed murder.
It was Mohammed who promised poor men that fighting in his cause would either bring them loot and slaves if they lived, or a sexual paradise if they died fighting.
We cannot "fix" this.
It can only be separated from Islam when Islam accepts that Mohammed was wrong and that makes him a false prophet. Of course, hat would mean that they ceased to be Muslims.
How soon do you think that is going to happen?
I should add that terrorism per se, is not the result of war, it is the result of people who wish to CONTINUE an ancient conflict while knowing that they cannot currently win in open battle .
It is not the result of poverty, but the result of the same culture that has produced both poverty and violence in some of the world's most resource-rich nations.
Bin Laden was an educated man from a rich family, born in a relatively peaceful country. Many other of he most prominent terrorists have similar backgrounds.
The "offence" of which we are guilty – and have been for centuries – is refusal to submit to Islam. That is what their own scripture states.
Are you really in Papua New Guinea, Joe? Wow, this blog has a truly international readership.
Evil can never be eradicated from this world. Islam will be at war with us forever. All we can do is limit our losses and maximize the enemy's.
There is a lot of truth in Jim Wright's article. Even those terrorists who did NOT live in the shitholes of the Middle East, who were NOT unemployed and even lived in moderate affluence (e.g. London bombers 2005) were easy prey to the mullahs and rabble-rousers. Just because they had the strong feeling that the western "Invasions" in Afghanistan and Iraq were wrong. Every collateral damage of a drone attack, every innocent woman or child that is killed or maimed during the "War on terror" creates new recruits or supporters for the terrorist's case.
We may not like it, we may despise the voices of reason and common sense, but: The "War on terrorism" is exactly as futile as the "War on drugs". The latter has now raged for over forty years, has cost immense amounts of money and involves tens of thousands of agents. The result? The quality AND the quantity of the available drugs has risen and their price has fallen. Not only from the economical viewpoint this is a piss poor outcome of all that engagement.
May I encourage you to make a projection: the "War on Terrorism" is now in it's thirteenth year. Just ask the people of Paris, Boston, Bruxelles, Ankara etc. how they may judge the success of war, and add twentyseven futile years to get to the same point we see with drugs.
When the fugitives started coming to Europe we had a discussion in this forum. Lots of people warned us Europeans from the "Muslim terrorist sleepers" invading our countries. Well, there may be some. Won't make a big difference. Europe has de facto open borders. But may I remind you that the vast majority of these fugitives are running away from war and exactly that form of terrorism we saw in Paris.
Would it be helpful against terrorism to simply reject millions of refugees FROM terrorism? Or would it further alienate the people of the middle east and Europe. Or in other words: create new cannon fodder for ISIS, al-qaeda etc.????
I am also experiencing a warm and happy feeling every time some Osama or Jihadi John is shot to pieces, but it won't help. Jim Wright's comparison with cockroaches simply nails it.
Please don't forget: less than 0,001 % of all Muslims are terrorists.
Please don't forget: less than 0,001 % of all Muslims are terrorists.
And the rest are their supporters and funders.
If it was just collateral damage that would be great, we can fix that. But its not collateral damage, its wishful demented thinking with a prophets help.
We never, ever could be these zealots friends. We are not of their religion, their tribe, their clan and their family. By their definition we are the enemy. They may use our resources, accept our money but we can never be anything but the enemy.
Yes, our government did create the vacuum that allowed the spread of their victim basis recruitment. Yes, our government did try an create a governmental system that was totally alien to their upbringing. But please explain how we brought poverty, ignorance, and disease to the AFPAK area and Iraq when it has been that way since before the time of Alexander the Great.
Lastly, I come from a group of people who understand the terms tolerance and acceptance. This group within Islam do not have those words in their vocabulary. Who's problem is that?
Sam vfm #111:
There once was a small austrian underdog with the same kind of simple thinking (just replace "muslims" with "jews" or "untermenschen"). He succeeded only once in his life: being able to persuade the Germans that the Jews were responsible for every grievance including ingrown toenails. The rest is history.
It is NOT comforting to see that there are still so many people unable to draw the simplest conclusions from history. By the way, how many years of history lessons did you have in school? How many books did you read? Have you ever been to a "muslim country"? Did you have muslim friends or colleagues? Ah, I thought so…
Sometimes I'm unable to decide who may be the worst danger for humanity: The Russians with a shrinking economy under Putin, or the Americans with a shrinking economy under Trump.* Oh, and by the way: I do NOT see terrorism, either islamic or other, as the main risk.
The REAL danger lies in OUR reaction on terrorism. If we turn into a bunch of spying, torturing murderers, we will be like them. Hey, guess what – exactly THIS might be the objective of islamic terrorism! They want to alienate the western world and their modern and moderate people. Congrats for being the willing little helper of this terrorist scum, Sir!
* – P.S. Peter gave me back a little confidence with his last bloggings. He may not be a born american, but he lives and thinks as one. And he is able to see the real "evil"…
And his blog has a lot of followers, even in PNG 🙂
Gerry (I am assuming you are American):
"We never, ever could be these zealots friends."
Just two simple questions:
1) Which country is the home of wahhabitism (most extreme and medieval form of islam). Little help: Most of the 9/11 hijackers AND Osama himself came from there)
2) Which country is the biggest friend and international supporter of this country?
you truly have a large audience of people who believe in Simple truthes and simple solutions.
Keep up the good work to enlighten these poor souls a little bit…
It is no shame to have a lack in education. It is not contemptible to never have traveled. It is no crime to get all one's information only from U.S.-TV.
But it IS disputable NOT to listen to a man who, like Peter, has experienced War, Apartheid and lots of crime – and learned a lesson or two from it…
1) Saudi Arabia.
2) The US for the last 60 years.
Having spent time in the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar you may notice I did not as all Islam. I said these zealots.
And yet, the pro-war-any-war crowd will DEMAND we send in more planes, more cluster bombs, more troops. They have a hammer, and the Middle East is just a bunch of nails.
"Paris was caused by Iraq. By Syria. By Afghanistan. By chaos and destruction and because the terrorists had nothing better, literally nothing better, to do with their miserable lives"
I think you and Jim Wright are full of chit, Peter. Wherever they go, those moslem animals take their violence and stupidity with them. Many of them today come from prosperous backgrounds and families where they can do anything they want with their lives and yet they choose to carry out sneak attacks on unarmed men and women that have shown them every sort of courtesy and welcome.
Sometimes your enemy IS an animal Peter – and needs to be treated like one.
Article is surface.
Lots of Islamic terrorist attacks pre 9-11.
Why the increase in terrorist attacks? Israel shut down terrorist attacks pretty much. Dissolution of ussr.
And rise and spread of Wahhabism through schools and mosques world wide. Lower cost of world travel. Easier communication.
Bin laden came from a very rich family.
9-11 were middle class. Leader was going to be a civil engineer. Well educated. But Saudi educated…
As someone who lives in Europe, it is my sad duty to report that people like Hansjörg — educated, self-confident, eloquent, preaching a counsel of defeatism — while they are not the majority of the population, are well ensconced not only in the halls of academe. They also hold the levers of power in politics and in the media, with few exceptions. And there is at least one of them in every informal gathering, quick to paint any critic of Islam with the Nazi brush (as Hansjörg did above). That is why people feel they can no longer speak openly. Notice that he is not worried signing his full name, he knows the state is on his side.
"The idea that we can somehow "fix" a conflict that has been going on for 1400 years is little more than wishful thinking."
Oh, I dunno. The "North" (self styled "radical" Republicans) demonstrated a process called "Reconstruction" that ran for two generations. Not perfectly, and walked back by (southern Democrat) Woody Wilson as soon as the imperfectly reconstructed leadership of the South was allowed significant power. But still and all those who believe in the narratives like "Arc of History" and "March of Human Progress" have an example to follow.
Which, follow they did, in the Philipines, Japan, South Korea… Go, take territory, build military bases, target guerilla resistance, and pour money and technical expertise INTO an agricultural backwater to raise the standards of living and expectations of the public.
It is arguably a historical pity that the U.S. did not take as 1950's "war prizes" the territories now among those called Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and environs. Oil was too easy to pump without local labor, I suppose. No point in training up a local middle class. Or perhaps the policy was there, but not publicized so not mourned when abandoned. Such appears to have been the case when the US abandoned treaty partners and former allies in South VietNam, and the trade partners under the Shah of Iran. Not that the Shah, or Nguyen Thieu, were the "good guys" in the "March of Progress" — any more than Nathan Bedford Forrest during Reconstruction. But to abandon the projects after 20 years each rather than running them for the empirically-demonstrated-effective 40+ years certainly seems to have resulted in a vast waste.
Oh well, we are coming up to the 16 year mark in Kosovo (Camp Bondsteel) — which is about one-third longer than the US tried reconstruction in Vietnam ( 9 years, '64-'74) and also now more than 1/3rd the estimated required time to reconstruct and turn over self-determination to a backward and benighted area. If the current and next U.S. presidents will only continue to allow inertia to guide his actions in this area, the milestones of a civilized nation may continue to pile up. (membership in IMF, Olympics, Regional Cooperation Treaties, Transport Unions, Mafia-membership for drug-trafficking…)
Oh, here they are: the anonymous heroes of underground resistance.
Barking up the wrong tree, as usual. Let me tell you:
I do not hold any levers of power.
I am continuously criticizing my state's policies, if I see something wrong. It's nice to be able to do so.
Just ask those who aren't allowed. Russians, Saudis, Turks, Chinese or North Koreans.
And, if people like you would – god forbade – get political power – your country too.
I'm far, far away from leftist or SJW.
I just use my brain. Try it yourself. It is really helpful.
But, because any brain is only as good as the information it has gathered, do it with a critical distance to anything – especially politics and religion.
Little tip: read different sources, hear different opinions and come to your own conclusions. Takes a lot of time and open-mindedness, but it may help you in the end.
You, Sir, sound just like a a vile fearmonger. But, hey: I will advocate all my life for the right of free speech (including vile little fearmongers). 'Nuff said!
Lessons learned from history and current events: Every place, in every time, where Islam meets another religion, there is violence. The violence continues until Islam prevails, utterly destroying or enslaving the other religion, or until the Islamists are themselves destroyed and rendered powerless. The only times where there has been peace on the frontiers of Islam have been those times when they were recovering from the previous spate of violence, or when they were preparing for a more powerful attack in the future.
Peace between Islam and the rest of the world is an aberration, seldom lasting more than two generations – the time it takes to rebuild the war-fighting population.
And this is all our fault? Only from the Muslim point of view – for failing to convert to Islam, submit to them as slaves, or die.
The issue of Islamic terrorism is pretty easy to solve. Its called borders.
Do not allow Muslims or anyone from the Middle East or mainly Muslim area who can't be fully vetted as not being a Muslim entry into your land save for diplomatic staff .
As for the existing problem, deport all of them revoking citizenship as necessary. To reduce the temptation to abuse it to take assets, they can keep whatever they own.
So long as we stop meddling in their lands and keep this up, you'll have very little Islamic terrorism in the West.
And yes this includes Turks and you might consider the same with Black Africans or any other troublesome crime prone groups as well.
And yes it will make softhearts like Merkel feel bad and feel terribly dirty and all xenophobic but it will not only make Europe safer but will increase the cost of labor and reduce unemployment which are good things
This US has a slightly different problem, we have an unstable hollow state to the South of us, we should control immigration and repatriate I guess about 50 million or so but those people at least are Christian and mostly decent after a fashion and work.
Do these things, stop picking fights with other peoples and our internal problems will fix themselves, this might be involving lampposts and rope which is part of the reason for mass immigration (it breaks solidarity) but still, its pretty easy to solve.
And I don't blame our host one bit for not wanting war, no one sane does. The problem is that war wants you.
Nihil sub sole novum ita sic vis pacem para bellum
We cannot civilize barbarians. That is beyond our power. We can only kill them. Which, when you think about it, is the primary purpose of civilization in the first place.
The article you linked has some seeds of truth, but is naive and misguided in thinking that we can solve the problems if we just put enough money and effort into it. It also makes the mistake of assuming that terrorism and other problems are caused by the environment rather than the people.
As other people have commented, many of the terrorists are from relatively well-off families. They most certainly have NOT become terrorists due to a lack of anything better to do with their lives, rather, their belief system has assigned glory to committing these acts and they are pursuing them for fame, recognition, and divine favor. They have consciously rejected western civilization. It's not a lack of opportunity that caused this choice, it is the logical outcome of their beliefs. Spending more money to give them more access to jobs and opportunities that appear better from our perspective won't change that fact. In fact, if you look at Tehran, Baghdad, Beirut, or Kabul in the 1950s, they looked like westernized cities. Their populations threw that away intentionally, and there's a strong likelihood they would do it again.
We do cause problems when we come in and destroy infrastructure, inflict "collateral damage" on civilians, and so forth. We ALSO cause problems when we claim to be the saviors who will solve their problems just as soon as they reject their religious beliefs and start acting just like us. The latter might even be more dangerous, and that's what the linked article is proposing.
There is no solution to evil men committing evil acts. All we can do is try to protect ourselves with reasonable measures and find and punish those who commit these acts. Even that isn't always possible.
It's a wonderful article! Of COURSE American Christians (and their/our "small, mean God") are equivalent to the (PHD-holding) bastards that lead ISIS. Of COURSE the poor folks of Afghanistan and Iraq were doomed to be terrorists because we didn't undertake the "white man's burden" enough to fix their nations for them (because obviously they aren't -in the article authors opinion- capable of doing so themselves)! It makes so much sense now. #sarcasm.
There are useful bits in this little screed, but the hate-filled excrement makes them hard to find. Sorry Mr. Grant, I love reading this blog, but…yeah.