Storing up pain for future release
Posted by aogMonday, 19 February 2007 at 20:14 TrackBack Ping URL

Power and Control has a post about possible terrorists in Georgia. I am skeptical but it’s hardly outside the realm of possibility.

But that’s not what’s interesting. I take it as a given that if this isn’t the real thing, we’ll see it some where in CONUS in the not too distant future. It will also almost certainly be Islamic in nature. There are some who worry about the USA buckling under in the face of such a threat, but I suspect that instead we’ll revert to the brutality that has marked so much of our history. Put that together with incidents like this and you can’t help wondering if you’re seeing an ideology writing itself in to the dust bin of history as thoroughly as the Heaven’s Gate cultists did.

Comments — Formatting by Textile
erp Tuesday, 20 February 2007 at 08:55

A variation on Golda Meir’s quip that peace will come to the ME when Arabs love their children more than they hate Jews. “Moderate” Moslems will speak up when they love their children more than they fear their co-religionists.

Annoying Old Guy Tuesday, 20 February 2007 at 09:25

I don’t think it’s that for Muslims in the USA. I think it’s much more cocoonish, where this kind of unpleasant outcome isn’t even conceivable. After all, if one looks out over the last 20-30 years, has this supremacist approach worked? It is not as if such a belief has no basis in fact.

I am reminded much of the poor in Venezuela, who continue to support Hugo Chavez even as he leads them in to an economic collapse which will make them even poorer. It’s worked for them so far, as Chavez sells off the seed corn for bread and circuses.

I don’t like to be downbeat, but I don’t see anything on the horizon that seems likely to change the catastrophic outcome I forsee.

erp Tuesday, 20 February 2007 at 10:57

AOG, The very few Moslems here in the U.S. who have spoken up have been harassed with who knows what threats. If it’s true that most Moslems don’t support terrorism, what other reason would they have to demur.

The catastrophic outcome you foresee? I hope you mean in Venezuela.

Annoying Old Guy Tuesday, 20 February 2007 at 12:24

erp;

Yes. The link in the post is a classic example of that sort of harassment.

It may be that most Muslims in America don’t support terrorism, but my point would be that I don’t think it will take much more Islamic terrorism before the citizenry just doesn’t care about such subtlies. I can’t help but note the difference with, say, the Japanese of WWII, who made such efforts to demonstrate loyalty. I have no doubt that the American Street will also note that difference.

As for catastrophic outcomes, the answer is “both”.

Ali Choudhury Tuesday, 20 February 2007 at 12:43

It’s not as if moderate Muslims don’t speak out against terrorism. Scanning through a typical newspaper or blog from a Muslim country would demonstrate that. Terrorists couldn’t give a crap about what moderates say since they don’t rely on them for funding in the first place.

Annoying Old Guy Tuesday, 20 February 2007 at 13:13

You mean like the Imam in the linked story who was booted from his job for speaking out against terrorism? That’s the image that Islam is acquiring on the American Street and articles from a typical newspaper or weblog in other countries isn’t going to have any effect.

Steven Wood Wednesday, 21 February 2007 at 13:54

AOG,

If you think muslims have an image problem in the US - imagine the image problem the US has in the muslim world. Here in the UK, the islamic community has been under a lot of pressure since 7/7 to integrate better etc. So far I don’t see evidence of hugely increased “paki bashing” up here, although the odd isolated incident has always gone on. The “left” as you would call ‘em in this country have been telling us all for years that we’re intolerant and racist anyway (you can hardly move without seeing a scottish exec. advert about scotland being “no place for racism”). However I’m proud that our country has not resorted to vilagante attacks and do not treat muslims as a homogenous group. I actually have faith that the “American Street” would demonstrate the same civilised response. Although it has to be said there are many people who seem only to keen to big up the idea that we are in the midst of a clash of civilisations. Terrorists should be treated like common criminals, and punished under the laws of the country.

Annoying Old Guy Wednesday, 21 February 2007 at 15:03

Mr. Wood;

imagine the image problem the US has in the muslim world

Why? The USA could exterminate Islam tomorrow, but the Ummah can’t do much of anything to the USA unless we permit it. We permit a lot of stuff now because we’re fat and lazy, but if we get upset enough to get off our couches and do something, it’s game over for whoever we decide to do it to.

So far I don’t see evidence of hugely increased “paki bashing” up here, although the odd isolated incident has always gone on

True, but the UK has experienced a sharp rise in anti-Jewish crimes. I think that’s also true in the USA. Interesting, isn’t it, that after the 11 Sep and 7 July attacks, hate crimes against Jews increased? And despite all those posters!

I actually have faith that the “American Street” would demonstrate the same civilised response

I don’t.

I am also not sure that one should characterize our current response as “civilized”, given that the normal behavior for prior civilizations has been more in line with ethnic cleansing. One need merely note that one of the most revered American Presidents is the one who put hundreds of thousands of people in detention camps while expropriating their property for no more reason than their ethnicity. At the very least, it doesn’t seem to have stained his national reputation nor, as far as I can tell, his international one.

But what strikes me as odd is that the USA is so readily portrayed as this rapacious, callous, mass murdering society yet when one suggests that it live up to its reputation, the very idea is mocked. Just think of what you claim the USA has done in Vietnam and Iraq. Why do you then expect the American Street to behave in a “civilized” manner?

erp Wednesday, 21 February 2007 at 15:06

Mr. Wood, I for one couldn’t care less what Moslems think of us and you have the situation 180 deg. wrong.

There have been no vigilante attacks on Moslems, Moslems are the attackers and killers of innocents as the most recent killing spree in a Utah shopping mall has shown. The media are reluctant to assign the correct motives to these killers and they are frequently not identified as Moslem or if they are, they are depicted as depressed, despondent, not that they are killing in the name of Allah even though witnesses at the mall heard the killer shout Allah Akbar while shooting his fellow human beings.

The American Street has been the soul of patience. Even after provocation, after provocation, we haven’t risen up and demanded to be rid of these killers in our midst. Should the violence here escalate to an intolerable level, I think the people will demand draconian measures to maintain our security. It’s up “moderate” Moslems to police their community, if they don’t want to suffer the consequences of an enraged and outraged populace.

One thing is certain, we won’t pander to the Moslem population’s ever escalating demands, as the Scots and the English are doing.

Michael Herdegen Thursday, 22 February 2007 at 12:04

Arab Muslims don’t really have an “image problem” in the U.S. - they have a “reality problem”.

We see all too clearly what they are, what they’ve let themselves become, and that clear vision is shared by the Islamofascists. That’s one of the reasons why they’re so hopping mad.

Thought experiment: It’s 2075. The Middle Eastern oil has run dry. How are the nations of the M.E. supporting their populations? Are they supporting their populations, or, as Yemen is now, are they impoverished and hungry?

erp Thursday, 22 February 2007 at 14:14

Michael, I don’t think it’ll take that long. Israel will be running things and the whole region will be bursting with peace and prosperity.

Annoying Old Guy Thursday, 22 February 2007 at 15:48

I doubt it. I expect that it will be like the situation of the USA and Mexico, except Arabia will be much poorer and more violent.

Steven Wood Friday, 23 February 2007 at 13:25

But what strikes me as odd is that the USA is so readily portrayed as this rapacious, callous, mass murdering society yet when one suggests that it live up to its reputation, the very idea is mocked. Just think of what you claim the USA has done in Vietnam and Iraq. Why do you then expect the American Street to behave in a “civilized” manner?

Because the people who hold power in the US and decide such expeditions are a great idea, don’t really represent the feeling of the average US citizen.

The USA could exterminate Islam tomorrow

Dream on buddy.

Michael Herdegen Friday, 23 February 2007 at 13:30

Is it your contention that Islam would survive the destruction of Mecca and all major cities in majority-Muslim nations ?

Annoying Old Guy Friday, 23 February 2007 at 13:40

Mr. Wood;

Yet those “unrepresentative” people have been in power for what, 50 years? How really unrepresentative can they be? Moreover, when and why do you expect this unrepresentativeness to change?

erp Friday, 23 February 2007 at 17:12

Mr. Wood,

We, the People are the American Street and we expect we will act in a civilized manner because we are civilized. What evidence do you have to the contrary?

You obviously don’t live in the U.S. or you’d know we don’t have posters or PA’s on radio and television, or ads in the newspapers and magazines exhorting to not kill our Moslem neighbors. The notion is ludicrous.

As for wiping out Islam, I can only quote that famous American super hero, Jack Bauer, who once said to a bad guy, the only reason you’re still alive is because I don’t want to carry you.

Every Moslem in the world could be dead by the beginning of next week if we get tired of carrying you. Think on that while you wallow in the excruciating sweetness of the world’s weak and effectual hate and resentment and how little we care about it.

This subject is becoming very tedious.

Steven Wood Sunday, 25 February 2007 at 04:18

Even after provocation, after provocation, we haven’t risen up and demanded to be rid of these killers in our midst. Should the violence here escalate to an intolerable level

Like the violence in Iraq, Palestine or Lebanon for example ? Would you consider that to be “intolerable” ?

I for one couldn’t care less what Moslems think of us and you have the situation 180 deg. wrong

That’s why your country will continue to be the most unpopular in the world and why your countrymen will be at risk of being murdered whenever they go to the middle east, just as you would quite clearly love to see the “American Street” murder these stinking muslims. Because you don’t care, and the situation is fine as it is, and nothing to do with us. So long as you beieve that no body has any reason to dislike your country because your country’s the best in the whole world at everything it does and the rest of the world is unsreasonable and should try to be more like you, then the situation will only worsen. That’s sensible logic. Tell you what why don’t we treat the “muslim world” as a homogenous group at the same time, and blame the actions of a vast minority of extremists on the wholes lifestyle and beliefs. That’ll really bring them into the fold. But of course, as you all say, you don’t want them in the fold anyway.

AOG

Moreover, when and why do you expect this unrepresentativeness to change?

I don’t really know. How many people who are eligible to vote actually bother in your beacon of democracy ? How many new political parties would stand a chance of making inroads or even getting their message heard without the mass backing of big business which the others all ready have ? The american political landscape is now set in stone, and there are two choices. You may think this represents the entire nation and that most peoples views, not just domsetically, but internationally are represented by this system, and that’s up to you.

As for wiping out Islam, I can only quote that famous American super hero, Jack Bauer, who once said to a bad guy, the only reason you’re still alive is because I don’t want to carry you.

Every Moslem in the world could be dead by the beginning of next week if we get tired of carrying you.

Carrying who ? Didn’t you just say that it’s because you don’t want to carry muslims that they are still alive. ergo - if you kill ‘em all, you’ll need to carry them. Idiot. You’ll need to elaborate on how you’ll manage to kill them all anyway in the space of 7 days erp, cos there’s a lot of ‘em and they are widely dispersed. Did I say Idiot ? let me say it again…Idiot.

Annoying Old Guy Sunday, 25 February 2007 at 07:40

Mr. Wood;

I would argue that it is representative enough, or it would change. Even if I grant your case, what would it matter what the American Street really thinks if it doesn’t think that strongly enough to change American policy?

I also think you’re mistaking indifference for hostility in your discussion with erp. It is because the American Street isn’t completely indifferent that we are in Iraq and Afghanistan. True indifference would be bombing from 30,000 feet or from off shore missile boats until the rubble bounces to make the problem go away (cf. Japan, 1945, Serbia, 1999). Hostility would be nukes.

Michael Herdegen Sunday, 25 February 2007 at 16:23

Hmmm. Poor Stevie seems to be losing it.

Assuming, of course, that he ever had it to begin with, which is unlikely, but I’ll give him the benefit of the doubt, since he was good enough to keep coming back and posting his unintentional humor.

Jeff Guinn Monday, 26 February 2007 at 05:14

Mr. Wood:

So long as you beieve that no body has any reason to dislike your country because your country’s the best in the whole world at everything it does and the rest of the world is unsreasonable and should try to be more like you, then the situation will only worsen.

Two points here. First, most Americans don’t give a tinker’s darn what other countries think. And for those few who do care, many would conclude that is the price of true leadership.

Second, in material terms, the rule of law, private property rights, free markets, and limited government seems an unbeatable combination. In other words, that works better than anything else that has been tried. So, to the extent that countries adopt anything else, whether it be stulfifying bureaucracy (EU) or the dead hand of conformist theology, the results will be worse.

As uncomfortable as the conclusion may be, then, in relative, if not absolute, terms, being less like the US is the path to material inferiority.

Carrying who ? Didn’t you just say that it’s because you don’t want to carry muslims that they are still alive. ergo - if you kill ‘em all, you’ll need to carry them. Idiot. You’ll need to elaborate on how you’ll manage to kill them all anyway in the space of 7 days erp, cos there’s a lot of ‘em and they are widely dispersed. Did I say Idiot ? let me say it again…Idiot.

As a hypothetical, assume some Islamist group manages to detonate a purloined nuclear weapon in a US city.

Do you think American’s will wring their hands over what the world will think of a devastating response?

Oh, and one other thing. Your manners are atrocious.

Steven Wood Monday, 26 February 2007 at 14:26

Do you think American’s will wring their hands over what the world will think of a devastating response?

That’s an interesting question. What is obvious is that no country would own up nor claim to support such an attack so targets would be need to be selected. Whether the majority of americans would support nuking several middle eastern cities based on intelligence that the governments of those countries helped in some way to support the group who commited the crime is another question.

Even if I grant your case, what would it matter what the American Street really thinks if it doesn’t think that strongly enough to change American policy?

Both the wars in Iraq and Vietnam show that the everage US citizen does indeed care about these things. The draft was deeply unpopular and were young americans facing the draft to prosecute the wars you glory in I’ll bet they would be a whole lot less so.

True indifference would be bombing from 30,000 feet or from off shore missile boats until the rubble bounces to make the problem go away (cf. Japan, 1945, Serbia, 1999).

Not sure what you’re getting at here re. Japan unless you think that the war in the pacific was an example of an “indifferent” response to Japanese agression.

Annoying Old Guy Monday, 26 February 2007 at 15:35

Mr. Wood;

I believe that the American Street would likely support nuking Middle Eastern cities simply because the terrorists who detonated the bomb in the USA claimed to be doing it in the name of Islam.

Both the wars in Iraq and Vietnam show that the average US citizen does indeed care about these things.

There was a lot of buyer’s remorse here after the Vietnam war. In large parts of the USA the objection to the war is that the USA isn’t fighting hard enough.

As for your final point, Japan was a bad example. Strike it and reconsider the statement. The point is that when the American Street truly gets tired of fighting in Iraq, the withdrawal won’t be because the USA thinks it has lost, but so that our troops don’t get hit by the flying rubble.

The Serbia example is the one to bear thinking of, because that was the response of the Democratic Party to a problem — bombing of civilians and civilian infrastructure without even a gesture at UN approval until the target population gets the message “submit to the USA or die miserably in the rubble of what used to be your nation”. That’s what the “anti-war” types are going to get for Iraq if they achieve their goal and, I can only presume, how you think the USA should conduct itself.

Post a comment