Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire The Nut of the Matter: How Should the West Deal with Islam?

From another thread:



And I don't know what that is, for sure. But I suspect that the West is never going to be able to get a grasp on this problem until we change national and international policy regarding the definition of Islam.

Islam is not a religion. Islam is a political movement whose aim is world domination at any cost that masquerades as a religion. And the policy of Western nations--Western civilization--to be tolerant of Islam because we've been fooled into thinking it is a religion, is cultural suicide.

You have to look at the history of Western civilization from about 1400 onward to understand how this has played out. The religious conflicts between Catholic and Protestant Christians that started at that time and flamed across Europe for the next 300 years set the stage for a wholesale change in Western political philosophy regarding religion. Much of the so-called religious wars of Europe were actually political wars, with kings and popes using religion as an excuse to seize power and territory. By the time England was establishing colonies in America, anyone who wasn't a complete fool realized that the horrific costs of religious fighting weren't worth the gain.

So the United States, and most of the British Empire, was founded on the concept that "religious freedom" was a good thing. But this didn't mean just any religion was okay; as long as you were a Christian, you were okay. But Indians (east or west), pagans, Hindus, Muslims, etc, were all beyond the pale and everyone of European descent knew it. So as Europeans migrated to countries dominated by non-Christian religions, we wiped them out when we could and subjugated them when we couldn't kill them all. We made their religions irrelevant by politically dominating their societies. I'm not saying this was right, but it's what our European ancestors did, good or bad. And in the process, they founded this worldwide conglomeration of nation-states and economies that we now think of as Western civilization.

And as the conflicts with peoples of non-Christian religions faded away in the 19th and 20th centuries, we all "forgot" that essential truth: that when our Founding Fathers implemented freedom of religion in our Constitution, they did NOT include ANY religions that fell outside of the general scope of Judeo-Christian faiths (and the Jews were only just barely allowed in).

The European nations became religiously tolerant along about the same time, because it just made economic and political sense to tolerate other Christians and Jews, and because Europe learned the hard way that killing people because of religion is a nasty and nonproductive way to run a world. There were/are a couple of exceptions, though: The defeat of the Ottoman Empire in the Balkans in 1453, and the expulsion of the Moors from Spain under Ferdinand and Isabella. These wars, and the rejection of Islam from western Europe, preserved the integrity of Western civilization.

Fast forward to the present day, and we find that the world has largely forgotten the reason we have "religous tolerance" as we understand it, and why it should not be applied to Islam.

Western civilization is an outgrowth of western European Christianity, which in turn was formed from the traditions and institutions of the Romans, who adopted the Christian religion as a political tool in the 4th century. Whether we are all practicing Christians today is irrelevant; our civilization is fundamentally a Christian one. As such, citizens of Western civilization share common ethics and values that are unique to our culture. We can afford to be tolerant of each other when we disagree, because we agree on the important stuff on which our society is built.

We Westerners have come to accept these ethics and values as so commonplace and so natural for many generations that we not longer see them as human constructs. We don't see the forest for the trees. We live, breathe, eat, sleep, breed and raise our children in a warm sea of Western ethics and traditions. We take it for granted. The fruits of it are so manifestly obvious to us that we have to force ourselves to actually examine our civilization to see its wonders. (Sadly, due to our third-rate education system,most Americans lack the tools for such self-examination and self-awareness!)

Whether we love, hate, or are indifferent to the wonders of Western civilization, we almost all owe our very existence to it. The world's population of some 7 billion people could not be sustained without the advances in science, medicine, agriculture, and economics that have grown out of Western civilization. Without it, the world would be hard-pressed to feed one billion people. By some estimates, fully 9 out of every 10 people alive today would not have been born or lived past infancy without the comforts and structures of Western civilization.

(I sometimes wish I could remind the young people I know who are so angry at the status quo. They've been born on third base, and think they hit a triple; and in their youth and ignorance they think they know how to make a better game by tearing this game down.

But Islam is NOT a part of Western civilization. Islam does not share this ethical common ground with us. Islam is founded on different ideas and different ethics which are fundamentally at odds with the nature of Western civilization. Islam grew up in a hard, bitter place, where the ethics of the West made no sense and ran counter to survival.

Islam was and is founded on the idea that Allah wants every man in the world to submit to Islam, either as a faithful Muslim or a slave, or he must die. This is the central belief of Islam. If you think otherwise, you are a liar or an ignorant fool. (And I mean every man; women are property, not persons, in Islam.)

Islamists intend to destroy every country or institution that is not Islam. Islamists do not share Western concepts of ethics or culture that engender the tolerance that we so blithely insist are the common rights of mankind. Islam's clearly stated goal is to destroy Western civilization.

So Western civilization, and Western nations, cannot apply the same rule of "tolerance" toward Islamists as they can toward other Western (read, Christianized) societies and nations.

The simple truth is that our dynamic and powerful and successful Western civilization is a political system that is founded on a Christian religious base mixed into Roman law, and while it has evolved from those beginnings into something that is recognizable neither as Christian nor Roman, it is still fundamentally both.

We need to first acknowledge that fact if we are going to come to grips with Islam. Because Islam is not even close to being Christian, nor Roman, and as such is a complete ideological enemy to Western civilization.

Western nations need to wake up to this fact. They need to formally acknowledge it, and identify Islam as an enemy. Not just radical Islamists; ALL Islamists, and all of Islam. Then, the West must eliminate Islam from our shores. Move the Islamists back to their sandbox, and tell them to stay there. If they won't go voluntarily, then we need to move them by force. There is no rational way the West can "tolerate" the presence of Islam within our political or cultural boundaries.

So today, right now, I have to wonder what the government of France is going to do? From what I read and hear of European current affairs, Europe's leaders are already talking about these truths. They know that Islam is the problem, and they know it must be dealt with, sooner or later. They have to deal with the political realities of their people, though, and this is going to hamper them for a time. But sooner or later, the Western War Against Islam will have to be fought.

I have an idea who will win in the end, but I have only the vaguest idea of how or when. We do indeed live in interesting times.

Actually, I don't think the situation would be very difficult to deal with if America had a government that represented America.

The American government and it's military are now tools of the globalists.

,...and the farther it goes, the more it seems as if the globalists understand that America has to get used up. It's not in the interests of the globalists to maintain America as a superpower once Americans understand what has transpired.

Hence, 19 trillion dollars in debt and a flood of 3rd world refugees descending on America from all over the globe like a hoard of locusts.

Bristoe, I don't know that the globalists are that far-thinking. I think the destruction of America is not their goal so much as the inevitable by-product of their attempts to amass more wealth and power to themselves.

They are like a fungus. They cannot produce any wealth, food, or in fact anything of value, but they want to consume all of it.

And America is simply the richest food source for their greed they can find, and they will feed on America until they use her up.

I would like to believe that they're idiots.

But how much of an idiot does one have to be to make war against a culture, then allow that culture to flood into Western Europe and America?

What's going on in America and Western Europe isn't due to incompetence.

It's all by design.

The people who are causing it aren't fools.

I don't think it's a byproduct. It's an integral part of the plan.

One doesn't rape the most powerful nation on earth and then leave it in a condition that it can retaliate from.

No, I don't mean it's a byproduct. I'm saying it's inevitable collateral damage in the process they are engaging in. Their goal isnt' destruction of America, although that is an inevitable consequence. Their goal is amassing all the power and money themselves.

As for intent or intelligence, I don't believe it's random either. But I don't think the intelligence behind it is human.

I think about that also. I also occasionally ponder the word evil as being a noun instead of an adjective.

Wow Doc, sounds like you just want to fire up the ovens?

Why not support the reformers like the President of Egypt who's calling for a Muslim Reformation?

Who said anything about death camps, dude? Sometimes I wonder if your field of vision is any deeper than 1-2 microns.

Egypt's president (note the lower case, hmm?) can call for a reformation. He might have some success. But keep in mind that the Christian reformation took Europe 300 years and millions of lives to accomplish.

Day-um.

I am reminded that you and I are long overdue for a sitdown over a couple glasses of clear liquor.

You are the one who proposed rounding people up:
javascript: void(0)

[video:youtube]44vzMNG2fZc[/video]

A rational response to imminent threat is to take off the gloves, visit destruction upon those who provide sustenance to our enemy and lock them up in their sandbox in complete isolation.

Islam is not a religion.

Doc--great thread. But, here, you're missing something.

Their goal really is to destroy America, land of the free. Because, as long as there are FREE men, there will always be a force opposing them, the pure evil that would destroy us from within.

Doc

May I forward your posting to several of my friends?

Jim

It's a spiritual war between Satan and the Lord. The Lord will win but it's going to get very ugly in the meantime. We can fight it, and we should, but the non-muslims in this world are going to come under extreme persecution before it's over. It's a war that man alone can't win.

Excellent! You've proven you can cut and paste in this browser. Well done.

Please explain how my statements, quoted above, equate to establishing death camps and executing people and incinerating their remains, which is what you implied in your post:



Repatriating people to their country of origin by force is not equivalent to murder, by any twist of reason or logic, and I never implied it was so, nor that I would endorse such acts. Yet you leapt to that conclusion... how?

You do have some understanding of what "reason" and "logic" mean, I hope?