Progressive moral equivalence

[Aufan59 62]

" For those who continually recite the mantra "Islam is not a religion of peace", it is important to note that Christianity has not always been "a religion of peace" either, in its actions or its Scripture. However the sins of one faith in no way exonerate the other. Nor do the sins of the past indict the present.

If your last sentence is sincere, why do you continue to harp on Christian misbehavior of over a 1000 years ago? Lets just look at what is happening NOW and call it like it is....Islamic extremists are insanely criminal animals that have absolutely no regard for human life.

I believe the point is that there is a culture of extremism with Islam that does not necessarily reflect upon all Muslims or Islam as a whole.

Just as there once was a culture of extremism with Christianity that did not necessarily reflect upon all Christians or Christianity as a whole.

[quietfan 233]

" For those who continually recite the mantra "Islam is not a religion of peace", it is important to note that Christianity has not always been "a religion of peace" either, in its actions or its Scripture. However the sins of one faith in no way exonerate the other. Nor do the sins of the past indict the present.

If your last sentence is sincere, why do you continue to harp on Christian misbehavior of over a 1000 years ago? Lets just look at what is happening NOW and call it like it is....Islamic extremists are insanely criminal animals that have absolutely no regard for human life.

I probably wouldn't use the term "harping, but: To make the point that it is wrong to condemn an entire religion or stereotype an entire people based on the misbehavior of a few. It is unfair to look at everyone of Middle Eastern appearance or Islamic faith as likely a terrorist or supporter of terrorism.

I agree that anyone who beheads innocent reporters, executes someone for their religious beliefs, or hijacks airplanes and blows up buildings killing thousands of innocent people for no purpose other than to propagate fear is an insanely criminal animal.

[WarTim 3,456]

The only problem is....while they are "evolving"...they continue to commit mass murder...

[TheBlueVue 177]

" For those who continually recite the mantra "Islam is not a religion of peace", it is important to note that Christianity has not always been "a religion of peace" either, in its actions or its Scripture. However the sins of one faith in no way exonerate the other. Nor do the sins of the past indict the present.

If your last sentence is sincere, why do you continue to harp on Christian misbehavior of over a 1000 years ago? Lets just look at what is happening NOW and call it like it is....Islamic extremists are insanely criminal animals that have absolutely no regard for human life.

I believe the point is that there is a culture of extremism with Islam that does not necessarily reflect upon all Muslims or Islam as a whole.

Just as there once was a culture of extremism with Christianity that did not necessarily reflect upon all Christians or Christianity as a whole.

And? You sticking with your 1000 year timeline here or what? I haven't seen anyone suggesting that Islamic extremists reflect on all Muslims. All Muslims, however, do believe their religion is THE religion and they have different views how they are going to take it to the rest of the world. In fact Islam is at least as much of a political movement as it is a religion because it promotes theocracy in the form of Sharia Law.

[Aufan59 62]

" For those who continually recite the mantra "Islam is not a religion of peace", it is important to note that Christianity has not always been "a religion of peace" either, in its actions or its Scripture. However the sins of one faith in no way exonerate the other. Nor do the sins of the past indict the present.

If your last sentence is sincere, why do you continue to harp on Christian misbehavior of over a 1000 years ago? Lets just look at what is happening NOW and call it like it is....Islamic extremists are insanely criminal animals that have absolutely no regard for human life.

I believe the point is that there is a culture of extremism with Islam that does not necessarily reflect upon all Muslims or Islam as a whole.

Just as there once was a culture of extremism with Christianity that did not necessarily reflect upon all Christians or Christianity as a whole.

And? You sticking with your 1000 year timeline here or what? I haven't seen anyone suggesting that Islamic extremists reflect on all Muslims. All Muslims, however, do believe their religion is THE religion and they have different views how they are going to take it to the rest of the world. In fact Islam is at least as much of a political movement as it is a religion because it promotes theocracy in the form of Sharia Law.

We see extremist actions being used to judge Islam all the time in the forum.

How many times do people here question that Islam is a religion of peace whenever an extremist does something not peaceful.

[WarTim 3,456]

Just a quick question,,,,WHERE are all of these peace loving muslims stating there total loathing for the radicals?....anyone? ANY O N E?.....I rest my case.

[homersapien 11,371]

Just a quick question,,,,WHERE are all of these peace loving muslims stating there total loathing for the radicals?....anyone? ANY O N E?.....I rest my case.

Apparently, you don't know how to conduct independent research. Go to a search engine and type in "Muslims for peace" or "Muslims against terrorism".

Just because it's not being fed to you on Fox or Townhall Meeting doesn't mean it isn't happening. :-\

[TheBlueVue 177]

Just a quick question,,,,WHERE are all of these peace loving muslims stating there total loathing for the radicals?....anyone? ANY O N E?.....I rest my case.

Apparently, you don't know how to conduct independent research. Go to a search engine and type in "Muslims for peace" or "Muslims against terrorism".

Just because it's not being fed to you on Fox or Townhall Meeting doesn't mean it isn't happening. :-\

The problem is anyone can criticize those committing these heinous acts..even fellow Muslims. The problem is that Islam itself does peaceful existence, it promotes jihad. Even a producer of a Michael Moore film on Islam has changed his view after interviewing Imams who are their leaders in America. Worldwide, 2 out of 3 Muslims cannot read or write and they don't really know what Islam is all about...these would be the peaceful devotees of the religion. They're trapped in it because the penalty for apostasy is death in their world

[AUUSN 823]

http://www.blueforcetracker.com/article/ISIS-primitive-destructive-Islam-the-coalition-and-the-presidency

ISIS, 'primitive destructive Islam,' the coalition, and the presidency

No apologies are offered or needed for the use or the phrase Primitive Destructive Islam (PDI), because normative Muslims recognize that ISIS has hijacked Islam, and non-Islamic believers use the phrase with semantic precision and without religious offense.

Veterans are well positioned to provide leadership for informed discussion that could lead to a counter-international terrorism/ISIS strategy because they have acquired conflict experience. Also, veterans are patriots, and they can be a force to revive bipartisan political support for national security issues. The discussion universe involves PDI, the coalition, and the dual presidential/commander in chief constitutional responsibilities based on Article II, Section 2.

Disciplined discussion begins with citizen information, screened evidentiary facts, and understanding emerging patterns. Ultimately, gut common sense and respect for diverse opinions are the fundamentals for creating a beneficial strategy.

The threat to the U.S. homeland and its interests abroad is based on international terrorism. ISIS is an example and it is certain that when ISIS fades it will be replaced by other terrorist organizations. There will be armed conflict for many future generations. The goal of destruction of ISIS and diminution of their threat to the U.S. is still feasible. However, there is no likelihood of traditional “victory” over international terrorism. Ongoing, long duration conflict is our lot.

ISIS leadership and strategy are brilliant and deserve recognition as a worthy, but vulnerable, adversary. Their strategic objective is to achieve a “Global Islamic Caliphate.” Their resources are: funding through bank burglaries, oil sales at discounted prices (Turkey), and acquisition of heavy weapons (U.S.-made). ISIS has utilized television and social media for its highly successful recruiting program.

The US needs to assess ISIS’s strengths and vulnerabilities through the lens of complementary strategy: understanding their strategic objectives and their tactical implementation plan. ISIS has become a de facto quasi-state. This may be their strength; however, it may be their enduring weakness because of over-extended logistics. These issues must be integrated into U.S. planning and framing of our strategic objectives, developing a tactical implementation plan, and allocation of our available resources – economic, diplomatic, weaponry, and deployment of military personnel.

U.S. conflict resources are finite. Thus, we must build a coalition to protect U.S. interests in the ISIS-controlled Mideast region. The U.S. can create a “Fortress America” to protect our homeland. This policy is illusory, however, because U.S. homeland protection must begin with the Kurds and Iraqis, who face an imminent threat from ISIS, and with local Sunni tribal leaders in ISIS-controlled territory who are the first line of U.S. homeland defense.

A coalition is fundamentally inefficient because of the members’ diverse self-interests. They are based on domestic politics (for example, the reaction of their public “street”), and their reluctance to allocate resources and make contribution commitments for troops, military equipment, and money.

The U.S. is the only state that is well positioned to form and lead an anti-ISIS/counter-international terrorism coalition. Indeed, the U.S. has highly competent military leadership and intelligence assets. However, based on the perspective of potential coalition members, U.S. presidential leadership is dubious because of past performance declarations such as: meaningless “red lines”; leading from behind; weak American public support; and the “no American boots on the ground” policy constraint.

President-bashing is self-defeating as the U.S. prepares for a long-duration conflict. Confidence and trust in presidential leadership must be restored. Veterans have a phrase that reflects weak leadership: “lead, follow, or get out of the way.” Regrettably, President Obama has bashed himself by attempting to shift blame to the intelligence community for its purported failure to warn him of the rise of ISIS. Historians will examine the Obama ISIS-related presidential policy legacy, and they will conclude that it was politically expedient and partially “bull****.”

Within the past two months, an informal national security group was formed, resulting in a welcome reversal of presidential policy. This is a regency (caretaker), similar to the British Regency during the period 1814 to 1821 when King George III was declared bonkers and unfit to serve. The contemporary regency group objective is not to remove the president from office, but rather, to provide policy guidance, and prevent him “from doing something stupid.”

The American public will elect the next conflict president/commander- in- chief in November 2016. The model for the next U.S. president may be George Washington. Following are 21 counterterrorism markers for the American voters that are criteria for their choice of the next president.

Markers for the next U.S. president

• Give credit to Obama for partially reversing his policy and establishing the anti-ISIS coalition.
  
• Rescind the Obama national security doctrine: passivity, leading from behind; no boots on the ground; and the great irony, “don’t do anything stupid.”
  
• Re-establish the primacy of the National Security Council as the liaison between the president/commander in chief and the national security team.
  
• Secretaries of the Department of Defense, Department of State, CIA, USHDS, and the heads of other national security agencies.
  
• Limit and restrain the White House national security staffers to liaison, rather than policymaking roles.
  
• Re-establish a positive working relationship between the joint military and intelligence communities, and the commander in chief.
  
• Encourage the application of the U.S. military doctrine of asymmetric warfare and counter-asymmetric warfare.
  
• Acquire an understanding that strategy is paramount, and recognize the distinction between strategy and tactical implementation.
  
• Enhance the U.N. role as a debating society, by invoking the “hot pursuit” charter provisions to enable cross-border attacks on terrorists.
  
• Redefine the mission of NATO to enable it to participate in out-of-area military operations. This could be done by imposing a levy on the 28 NATO member states involving troops and weaponry. However, U.S. leadership of the NATO military is imperative.
  
• Adapt international law norms to the reality of international terrorism by re-examining sovereignty incursion constraints that provide safe havens for terrorists.
  
• Consult with congressional leaders on overall national security strategy and policy issues, but protect presidential/commander in chief authority for military strategy and tactical implementation.
  
• Communicate with the American public regarding national security strategy: that there will not be traditional “victory” over international terrorism; that conflict will be the long-term norm; and that boots on the ground and loss of blood and treasure is the price that will be paid for protection of the U.S. homeland and its interests abroad.
  
• Communicate with the Islamic world, particularly with young Islamic males.
  
• Communicate with young American male Islamic citizens that terrorist affiliation will result in loss of U.S. citizenship.
  
• Reach out to the U.S. Muslim community and support their community-based counterterrorism efforts.
  
• Maintain the Guantanamo Bay prison facility for long-term incarceration of convicted terrorists—keep them off American streets.
  
• Resolve the trial venue for terrorists—Military Commissions or Article Three federal courts.
  
• Reach out to China and India, which have large Islamic populations, and encourage them to integrate their domestic Islamic policies to suppress the potential for internal and international acts of terrorism.
  
• Focus on Pakistan and assist them to become a great state regional power, because they have been most adversely affected by acts of terrorism and they have acquired substantial counterterrorism experience.
  
• Focus on Israel and integrate their counterterrorism experience.
  
• Encourage the relationship between the civilian “regency movement” and U.S. counterterrorism policy and regard the movement as an intellectual policy resource—the loyal opposition.
  

ISIS and U.S. national security policy need to be placed in perspective. National security is one of several other critical issues to be addressed and resolved. Indeed, ISIS and international terrorism are important. However, we need to retain a balance between national security and equally important domestic issues. Veterans have military experience and, in time, they will acquire domestic experience at the elected local, state, and congressional level, where they can strengthen and protect America.

[AUUSN 823]

"In his annual Haj sermon on Friday, Saudi Arabia’s top religious figure termed the extremist Islamic State militants as Khawarijites and the enemies of humanity.Addressing millions of Muslims from around the world gathered in Makkah for the Haj, the Grand Mufti of the Ka'aba Sheikh Abdulaziz al-Sheikh said that conspiracies were being hatched against Muslims, and that some movements in the Muslim world were enemies of humanity. He urged Muslims around the world to avoid sectarianism, which he said was weakening the religion. Referring to acts to terrorism by extremist militants, he warned believers against the spilling of innocent blood."

http://www.dawn.com/news/1135961/

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

A fellow Muslim who attended the same mosque as the Oklahoma beheader has been interviewed and said when there were no visitors around there were teachings on doing terrorist acts. So how does anyone know what is really going on in your neighborhood mosque?

[homersapien 11,371]

You must have left off a page USN.

I didn't see the recommendation that we simplify, consolidate and expand our definition of the enemy to include all of Islam, period.

It's much easier to understand and it (apparently) already has a base of support! :-\

[japantiger 4,051]

AUUSN: thanks for posting the article...a few comments:

Much is made of the fact that the Islamic threat will not go away; in other words, if we defeat ISIS, some other bad guy Jihadi will replace it. This is often used as an excuse for not getting involved. I don't really see how these circumstances are any different than the Soviet threat we faced for 60 years; other than the Soviets terrorized with nuclear weapons. They were a virulent ideology and attempted to subvert democracies and impose their brand of "ism" on the world weary from "50 years of ism's" being forced on them. They weren't going away, they moved from place to place stirring up trouble, enslaving, causing war, they had a vital social media (propaganda) capability, lots of weapons, etc., They were with us for 3 generations and their collapse happened pretty darn fast. I think we can learn much from our Cold War experience:

1) Our strategy should reflect the long war; not be viewed as a series of isolated events

2) Focus on containment (since there will likely always be some group of nutcases coming out of the woodwork since they have for the last 100 years)...aggressive containment backed by real threat of force

3) Fight when We have to; but use surrogates whenever possible; support these surrogates with weapons, aid, training, etc.

4) Make it clear to surrogate regimes that it is in their interest to support us; or they can be replaced by someone more compliant.

5) When we do fight; fight to win that effort and leave a force behind to consolidate and nurture the gains made

As to President bashing; not sure what this group would recommend when a president is derelict in his/her duty. There's not much else an informed public can do but use lawful, peaceful means to voice their displeasure. If they mean it shouldn't be necessary; I couldn't agree more. But when leaders won't lead; and protect their people, the people have to take the initiative. And I would also say his response was complete, not partial, bull****. He only responded because he thought he needed to to raise his poll numbers...not because his policies were a failure and he had a genuine interest in protecting us. The reason his polls numbers haven't responded, is because everyone knows he's a "tool"; and that he still doesn't have a plan...so he won't get any credit until he actually does something besides fundraising and golfing and comes with a strategy that is credible and the public sees as protecting our interests

As to the list of markers...I'd limit to only 5:

• Several of these callouts are nothing more than saying, get the political operatives out of the business of setting policy. We should let the cabinet members, the constitutional officers confirmed with the advice and consent of the senate, recommend, confirm and carry out a well defined policy. This admin has implemented a Soviet style administrative model where the political flunkies run the show.
  
• US foreign policy should reflect our interests 1st; be clear on what that is to the American people. If the strategy makes sense the American people will suport it.
  
• Muslim community outreach is vital..there needs to be a full PR campaign aimed at making it abhorant to aid, fund, support the Jihadi's. This should be followed up by aggressive enforcement against groups that support the bad guys. The Jihadi's must be made pariah's in the Islamic and in the public more broadly. Stop walking on eggshells. e.g., Go straight at CAIR on this...put them on the defensive.
  
• Israel, they are our only ally in the region...aid them, support them, arm and re-arm them. A critical part of our Iran (and broader Middle East) strategy needs to be Israel. Tell the crazies in Tehran two simple messages..."Israel can defend itself against your surrogates; Hamas, Hesbollah, and whatever group you support. We will support all their efforts to defend themselves ($$, weapons, et al). We will support them in the UN. Second, you can build nukes if you want to; frankly, we don't care...but if you do, we will support unilateral action by the Israelis to defend themselves against your nukes; we will be very public in our support, we will support them at the UN, we will use our Security Council pulpit, we will arm them, rearm them and support their actions unequivocally...good luck with your nuke program".
  
• Final point, not sure I know what the "regency" movement is described in the article. It is not a substitute for putting competent people in key leadership positions and then listening the Chief Executive actually listening to them. Having someone in the room to play devil's advocate is just smart decision making.
  

War Eagle, Beat LSU.

[AUUSN 823]

Great post and all valid. Obama is a politician and is executing the strategy he said he would. I blame the Flag Officers currently in career preservation mode at the five sided circus for not being the voice of reason and looking out for us. Where is today's Billy Mitchell?

[AUUSN 823]

ISIS Fantasies of an Apocalyptic Showdown in Northern Syria

The meadow outside the small village of Dabiq, Syria is a strange setting for one of the final battles of the Islamic apocalypse. Although close to the Turkish border, “Dabiq is not important militarily” observed a leader in the Syria opposition. And yet the Islamic State fought ferociously to capture the village this summer because its members believe the great battle between infidels and Muslims will take place there as part of the final drama preceding the Day of Judgment.

In a prophecy attributed to Muhammad, the Prophet predicts the Day of Judgment will come after the Muslims defeat Rome at al-`Amaq or Dabiq, two places close to the Syrian border with Turkey. Another prophecy holds that Rome’s allies will number 80. The Muslims will then proceed to conquer Constantinople (

).

The Dabiq prophecy has not figured prominently in the Islamic State’s propaganda until recently. Abu Mus`ab al-Zarqawi mentioned it as the ultimate destination of the spark that had “been lit here in Iraq.” The first head of the Islamic State, Abu Umar al-Baghdadi, quoted the prophecy in one of his statements. But it was not until this year that the Islamic State really began to focus on the Dabiq in its propaganda. An Islamic State spokesman mentioned the ill-fated village in a statement in April, and in July the Islamic State released an English-language magazine named “Dabiq.” The editors, calling themselves the “Dabiq team,” explain why they adopted the name for their magazine: “The area will play a historical role in the battles leading up to the conquests of Constantinople, then Rome.” But first the Islamic State had to “purify Dabiq” from the “treachery” of the other Sunni rebels who held it and “raise the flag” of the Caliphate over its land.

A few weeks later, Islamic State fighters took the village from Sunni rebels, killing forty and capturing dozens. Setting up snipers and heavy machine guns on the hill overlooking Dabiq, they repelled an attempt by the Free Syrian Army to retake the area. Islamic State supporters were jubilant, tweeting pictures of the Islamic State’s flag from the hilltop together with quotes from the prophecy.

Jihadi tweets about Dabiq spiked again last month when the United States began to consider military action against the Islamic State in Syria. Islamic State supporters counted the number of nations who had signed up for the “Rome’s” coalition against the Islamic State. “Thirty states remain to complete the number of eighty flags that will gather in Dabiq and begin the battle.” Yesterday, after Turkey’s parliament approved military operations against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq, the jihadi twittersphere applauded “Turkey’s entry into the war will permit the foreign invasion of northern Syria, meaning from the plain of Dabiq. The battles (of the End Times) have grown near.” “#Turkey_commitedsuicide,” tweeted another. “In Dabiq the crusade will end.”

The last time the Turks invaded Dabiq, things did not go well for the Arabs. The Turkish Ottoman sultan, Selim I, defeated the slave armies of the Mamluk Sultanate in the meadow of Dabiq in 1516, which gave them the eastern Mediterranean and eventually Egypt and the Hijaz, inaugurating 500 years of Ottoman rule over the Arabs. His grandfather Mehmed II conquered Constantinople from "Rome," the Byzantine Empire and his son Suleiman the Magnificent would go on to conquer large swathes of eastern Europe.

The fact that Turkish Muslims, not infidel Romans, control Constantinople today and are working with the infidel Romans against the Islamic State makes the Dabiq prophecy a poor fit for contemporary events. The inevitable defeat of the Islamic State at Dabiq, should it ever confront “Rome,” would also argue against the prophecy’s applicability. But in the apocalyptic imagination, inconvenient facts rarely impede the glorious march to the end of the world.

http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/iran-at-saban/posts/2014/10/03-isis-apocalyptic-showdown-syria-mccants

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

AUUSN....I find it incredible that you blame the flag officers who have served their country for years and support a CIC who IMHO is an incompetent boob without an ounce of military experience.

And you don't think he is desperately trying to protect his career (legacy)?

[AUUSN 823]

AUUSN....I find it incredible that you blame the flag officers who have served their country for years and support a CIC who IMHO is an incompetent boob without an ounce of military experience.

And you don't think he is desperately trying to protect his career (legacy)?

Spare me your lofty statements. I meant what I wrote.

Oh and I'm not alone:

http://www.washingto...of-seni/?page=2

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

My statement was not lofty, it was on the ground floor. And I mean what I said too.

I'm entitled to my opinion just as you are. I don't need your approval. As far as the link, whom do you think is responsible for their political correctness?

[AUUSN 823]

My statement was not lofty, it was on the ground floor. And I mean what I said too.

I'm entitled to my opinion just as you are. I don't need your approval. As far as the link, whom do you think is responsible for their political correctness?

And while you're riding high in lofty statementville, try giving Secretary Gates book a read and see what he wrote about those flag officers in the Pentagon. Meanwhile, here's another for you:

Should this country regain enough political sanity to elect a Republican president in 2016, high on that president’s list of things to do should be a clean sweep of the Pentagon, starting with the service secretaries, then the Joint Chiefs, the service chiefs of staff, their staffs, and then all the generals and admirals advanced to major commands around the world appointed by this corrupt Obama administration. They should then be replaced with warfighters who recognize that their sworn loyalty is to the Constitution, not the tenets of political correctness. Pick leaders who fully comprehend that the primary mission of our military is to defend our nation, not to be an incubator of socialist experimentation. The process should be dubbed Operation Spinal Implant.

http://thisainthell.us/blog/?p=49668

[autigeremt 6,609]

Great post and all valid. Obama is a politician and is executing the strategy he said he would. I blame the Flag Officers currently in career preservation mode at the five sided circus for not being the voice of reason and looking out for us. Where is today's Billy Mitchell?

Well stated!

[Aufan59 62]

Just a quick question,,,,WHERE are all of these peace loving muslims stating there total loathing for the radicals?....anyone? ANY O N E?.....I rest my case.

Where are the loving Christians stating their total loathing for the WBC?

I haven't seen them. Granted, I haven't looked, but I rest my case.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

AUUSN....sounds like you are just an unhappy sailor who got passed over for promotion.

[japantiger 4,051]

Great post and all valid. Obama is a politician and is executing the strategy he said he would. I blame the Flag Officers currently in career preservation mode at the five sided circus for not being the voice of reason and looking out for us. Where is today's Billy Mitchell?

Well stated!

Yep...same should have happened in Vietnam. Now I'm sure, they can find some General or Admiral to take their place; but, for example, having the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs step down due to significant policy differences would highlight the toolishness of this admin's policies. And I agree it is time for a good cleaning out...but, I would do the State Department 1st. That's a snakes den of every politically correct, liberal, jackass view of the world imaginable.