Amillennialist

Proportion?

In Uncategorized on July 20, 2006 at 3:26 PM

A brief response on a good article by Hugh Hewitt:

What has Islam done without military superiority?


9/11.

Madrid 3/11.

London 7/7.

Mumbai 7/11.

An Intifada (the latest one).

Indonesian Christian schoolgirls beheaded.

Sudanese Christians and animists slaughtered and enslaved before anyone noticed Africans Muslims being mistreated by Muslim-Arab supremacists.

Egyptian Copts are routinely persecuted, including daughters being kidnapped, raped, and forced into Muslim marriages. One distraught father was told by a police chief, “Don’t worry; she’s in the arms of Islam now.”

In Ethiopia, Nigeria, Somalia, Denmark, France, Thailand, Philippines, and everywhere else Muslims have any sort of numerical significance, intimidation and murder in the name of Allah follow. Theo van Gogh, anyone?

Is there any doubt that Islam would behave “disproportionately” if it actually had a military advantage?

Israel needs to do what it must. The West still has much to do to properly identify and deal with those in our own lands who support Islam’s goal to subjugate the world to Allah.

Advertisements
  1. The problem with the theory of proportionality is that it leads to never-ending conflicts. One side can always tailor it’s actions to a level which will not bring a crippling response. Instead, you end up with a constant cycle of suicide bombings which are replied to by counter strikes against terrorist leaders. The death toll goes up but nothing changes. It would be like bombing a Japanese fleet base after Pearl Harbor and saying that everything is even.

    Instead, what is needed is the cessation of hostilities theory. With this theory, you don’t respond in kind, you respond with the force necessary to end the conflict. So, if Hamas wants to launch rocket atttacks on Israel from Gaza, then Israel has the right to forcibly remove people from the area in question to create an appropriate buffer zone. The same would hold true in Lebanon. The theory would still hold that you don’t nuke a city because someone launched a conventional rocket attack, but it gets rid of the tit-for-tat cycle.

    Personally, I think Israel should evict all of the Muslims from Gaza and the West Bank, create a buffer zone in Lebanon, and take control of Jerusalem only allowing for Muslim pilgrims. Muslims hate Israel already. They might as well do what they need to protect themselves.

  2. The problem with the theory of proportionality is that it leads to never-ending conflicts. One side can always tailor it’s actions to a level which will not bring a crippling response. Instead, you end up with a constant cycle of suicide bombings which are replied to by counter strikes against terrorist leaders. The death toll goes up but nothing changes. It would be like bombing a Japanese fleet base after Pearl Harbor and saying that everything is even.

    Instead, what is needed is the cessation of hostilities theory. With this theory, you don’t respond in kind, you respond with the force necessary to end the conflict. So, if Hamas wants to launch rocket atttacks on Israel from Gaza, then Israel has the right to forcibly remove people from the area in question to create an appropriate buffer zone. The same would hold true in Lebanon. The theory would still hold that you don’t nuke a city because someone launched a conventional rocket attack, but it gets rid of the tit-for-tat cycle.

    Personally, I think Israel should evict all of the Muslims from Gaza and the West Bank, create a buffer zone in Lebanon, and take control of Jerusalem only allowing for Muslim pilgrims. Muslims hate Israel already. They might as well do what they need to protect themselves.

  3. Well said, Chris.

    How do you defeat a brutal totalitarian ideology with a billion adherents?

  4. Well said, Chris.

    How do you defeat a brutal totalitarian ideology with a billion adherents?

  5. I don’t think we try to eliminate Islam through force. I believe we should contain it and not let it expand. If Islam were forced to live on it’s own without the technological aid of other countries, it would collapse upon itself. Basically, let Islam wither on the vine.

  6. I don’t think we try to eliminate Islam through force. I believe we should contain it and not let it expand. If Islam were forced to live on it’s own without the technological aid of other countries, it would collapse upon itself. Basically, let Islam wither on the vine.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: