I woke this morning to the following message on FB:“ALEXANDER Scipio, you are a morally despicable advocate of treason and mass murder.”
Since this represents the kind of ignorant, fuzzy “thinking” of the Left, and a fairly widespread belief not only among the Left but among those on the Right in positions of authority, I have chosen to respond to it publicly.
Let’s parse the three accusations and address them in reverse order: Mass murder, treason and morality.
1. I advocate “mass murder.” Doubtless this is predicated on my frequent observation that the only way to stop the murderous death cult of islam is to annihilate it. This is true. Is doing so “mass murder?” Of course not. They are at war with us. They are waging war in ways not seen for, literally, millennia. Can they be stopped other than through annihilation? No.
Islam is a death cult. They worship death. They crave death. They teach death. They strap bombs on their 3-yr-old kids to cause death. Teenage girls and boys willingly detonate themselves to kill other teenage boys and girls. They murder their own 2-yr-old kids for “apostasy,” as though a 2-yr-old has enough intellect to have absorbed their superstition and act accordingly. They murder hundreds of their own: wives, daughters, sons, brothers – just because. Using swords and knives they slice in-half children, women and men with whom they disagree. They ceremoniously behead captured enemies. This is pre-modern barbaric behavior that will not stop because some stupid American college girls wash the feet of muslims in some idiotic display of “respect” that muslims see only as obeisance by lower life forms.
One cannot “coexist” with those who demand you convert or die, and who are acting on this dictum globally.
The idea that these people can be reasoned with, that they act as they do for reasons of economics, political participation, nationalism or simple anti-colonialism that ended a century ago, is absurd. Not only is it absurd, it is the height of what the left ignorantly fantasizes itself not to be: monocultural. A Left projecting “root causes” and respect, and “coexistence” is projecting Western cultural values onto non-Westerners at war with us BECAUSE of those values. It is the height of ignorance to project one’s values onto one’s opponents and fantasize that one is anything but a monocultural Westerner.
Conversely, those who understand the culture of islam, those who recognize it IS a different culture, those who SEE multiple cultures and act accordingly, are those acting in a true multicultural way. And who are these true “multiculturalists?” Simple: Those of us who understand that only one winner will emerge from this clash; that their culture means death to all other cultures; that using Western norms to deal with a non-Western culture is absurd.
How do we want to deal with islam? By using the language their culture respects and understands: Force. And what kind of force must be used? Total force. Annihilating force. Total War.
This is true multiculturalism: Recognizing their culture for what it is and what it respects, and accommodating their belief system. Strong horse. Dead Horse.
Which do you want to be? For there is no “third way” in which we all get along.
A “Third Way” requires rationality. It requires the concept of win-win, requires rejecting their culture and imposing our cultural norms; Western cultural norms.
“Coexistence” itself is a WESTERN precept. It does not exist, even philosophically, within islam. To force islam to accept a multicultural world is the antithesis of multiculturalism; it is forcing OUR culture on THEM.
And as long as their god is ordering them to kill all non-muslims, projecting our values onto them cannot – and will not – win.
Why must total war be used? Because anything less is unserious. Because anything less is a fantasy that not killing them can get their god to stop telling them to kill us. Because “limited war” never has, and never will achieve victory. Because only in victory lie peace and freedom.
Because “limited War” sacrifices intelligent, educated, pluralistic, modern, post-Enlightenment young men in bullet-exchanges with illiterate, uneducated, totalitarian, pre-modern, pre-Enlightenment savages.
Newsflash to the Left: We are NOT “all equal.” Those who read and teach and create and raise families are vastly different than those illiterates who kill and destroy and behead and murder their own wives and children.
There is no comparison of value: Westerners are valuable to the future, muslims are not. As Winston Churchill noted, islam is “the most retrograde force on the planet.” Nothing has changed since he made that observation other than that they have MORE power, are committing MORE barbarism, have enslaved MORE people, and are the cause of every single shooting war on the planet except Ukraine.
Muslims are acting on what they see as divine direction to kill all not in complete accordance with their view. Shia kill Sunni due to a disagreement over succession over a thousand years ago. And both kill Christians and Jews and Hindu and Buddhist just because their deity orders them to through some book of barbaric savagery written by a warlord any modern person would recognize as a “monster.”
One cannot argue with god’s will, or with one who acts because of his interpretation of the will of his god. Rationality has no place. Simply, rational (Western) arguments are won through the use of facts and logic to convince one’s opponent he is mistaken, but argumentation also requires an opponent whose mind is open enough to listen to, and understand facts as presented. When one’s opponent has no free will, no concept of reason or logic, no cultural room for disagreement with his deity, then one cannot win an argument with him, one cannot convince him to change his ways. Even attempting to do so is ignorance itself. The only way, then, to get him to stop killing you – is to kill him first.
This not only is logic and rationality; it is history itself: The West exists today because islam was stopped at the Gates of Vienna – twice – in the Middle Ages. Had it not been stopped, we ALL would now be living in the pre-modern savagery of sharia. Fact. Like it or not.
This is where the West finds itself with islam: At war. Islam is not going to change. There are no “moderate” muslims; if there were, we’d be hearing of them from themselves, rather than only through fantasy delivered by our media.
There are only muslims. And if you don’t want to take my word for it, fine. The leader of Turkey, Erdogan, recently exploded regarding “moderate” islam, saying there is no such thing; “there is only islam.”
Which leaves an existential clash between islam and not-islam. This is, like it or not, where we find ourselves. And the only way to stop it is to annihilate islam, to remove it from the world stage, to destroy it root and branch. To end it permanently and forever.
Anything less – ANYTHING LESS – only is kicking the can down the road for future generations to deal with. For MORE Western kids to be sent out to die piecemeal for an ideology that will not die piecemeal, but must be utterly destroyed if the future is going to be free and rational.
And, why is kicking the can acceptable to Democrats? Acceptable to the Left, the multiculturalists who are anything but multicultural?
Demographics. The left is not having kids – globally. There is not one single Blue political unit with fertility above replacement. Not anywhere on this planet. The idea that the Left cares about the future is sentimental projection by an ignorant Right, and a Center not being taught the demographics of voter behavior by a truly, abysmally stupid GOP.
And both the rejection of the future so permanent as to not populate it, and the refusal to understand that rejection, are why the West finds itself today where it does. The Left cannot conceive of a future they care about, and the Right cannot conceive of people who don’t care about the future.
So, because the Right cares about the future, because we are tired of our kids being killed in useless infantry exchanges with this pre-modern enemy of civilization, which is exactly what islam is, because we see no reason not to destroy islam now rather than to continue to poke at it for centuries – “the long war” – it must be recognized that the utter destruction of islam is the only way forward.
We find ourselves in nearly the same position, only the timeline differing, as did Truman in 1945. Millions of people are dying and being imprisoned to the barbarity of pre-modern shariah. Unless it is stopped it will only accelerate. In 1945, the Dept of the Navy and the Department of War estimated that 5-9M Japanese would die in any invasion of Japan. Along with 1M Americans. Seeing this, Truman dropped nuclear bombs on Japan. And saved millions of lives.
Not only did he save lives, he made their future better in unimaginable ways. Ask yourself this: 20 years post-hostilities, who was better off? Who was freer, more literate, wealthier & better educated than they had ever been, and a political, military and economic ally of the modern world? Japan in 1965, or Vietnam in 1995? Japan in 1965 or North Korea in 1973?
Total war by Western powers historically has achieved two ends: defeating the enemy utterly and making him dependent on his conqueror (“winning”), and improving his lot exponentially. This is what Rome did. It’s what America did – until 1950.
Total War – WORKS. Limited war – FAILS. Every single time.
And no one – NO ONE – on the planet is better off for America abdicating its responsibility to use total war when war is called for.
(The other advantage of using total war is the ability to NOT use limited war because it has become so easy. When going to war means instantly annihilating one’s opponent, serious thought and debate will proceed doing so. BECAUSE we have rejected total war, we have become what Robert E Lee warned us about: “It is good that war is so horrible. Otherwise we should learn to love it too much.” Look around at the militarization of our society, at the constant commercials on TV to get young men and women to join the military, at our over-militarized police forces, in our constant overseas combat deployments, and deny that we have not grown “to love it too much.” Counterintuitively, using nuclear weapons, using total war when war is called for, would create a much more peaceful world with far less militarization. At a much lower cost in lives and dollars. If opponents know they – instantly – will be annihilated, they won’t cause problems. Or will do so only once in a test from which all others will learn.)
The ONLY logical answer to the existential fight with islam is to use nuclear weapons on islam, to eradicate it just as we eradicated Imperial Japan. Incinerating and destroying Mecca, Medina and the Zamzam Well would end islam as a force within a generation. A culture respecting the “strong horse” would have seen – unquestionably – that it was NOT islam.
Religion is passed to future generations by believers. Erase the shrines of this pre-modern ideology and it goes the way of Zeus, Jupiter and Odin.
Either the West believes in freedom and liberty and peace and modern civilization – or it does not. If it does, it will do what is required to achieve it: Destroy the death cult of islam. And if the West does NOT destroy islam – islam WILL destroy the West – BECAUSE the West proved it did NOT believe in freedom, liberty and peace.
This is not hyperbole. It is not a stretch of the imagination. ISIS/Islamists/MB dedicate themselves not to nationality, not to a nation state, not to a region. They dedicate themselves to global dominance. And they are winning.
In no part of the world outside remote rural Afghanistan, Yemen and Saudi Arabia did sharia exist 35 years ago. My brother travelled safely throughout Afghanistan with the Peace Corps in 1977. Today Sharia covers an expanse larger than the combined maximum extents of NAZI Germany and Imperial Japan – and it is more savage and brutal than NAZIs ever were. Sharia is not slowing down; the velocity with which it consumes new territory and enslaves and kills new non-muslims is increasing. The longer we wait to eradicate it, the more costly in lives and dollars doing so will be.
So – does demanding the eradication of a pre-modern barbarism that demands our death make me a “mass murderer?” No.
On the contrary, those rejecting the annihilation of islam are participating through omission in, effectively sanctioning, the mass murder by islam of islam’s enemies: The entire non-islamic world. It is those rejecting modern weapons who are getting civilians beheaded on internet video. It is those fantasizing we can get along, that we can “coexist,” who are sending out our young men to die – but not to defat our enemy.
It is the Left refusing liberty for others, refusing freedom for others, refusing peace for others, going along with Obama’s childish “containment,” as though only Western lives matter, that as long as the head-hacking is locally or regionally contained, and only happening to “people of color” it’s OK. (Note how he only responded when White guys started getting beheaded. Jessie? Al?)
It is the “multicultural” Left deciding that these people are unimportant, and, as long as we here in America are not hacked, that’s cool. And when we are hacked by islamofascist terrorists shouting “allah is great,” it’s just “workplace violence,” and so OK, too.
It is NOT OK. It is an affront to modernity and to the civilized world.
And the ONLY way to stop it, to end the fanatic god-based drive to kill all their god tells them to kill… is to annihilate those whose god is commanding their savagery.
Islam and the West cannot coexist. Coexistence is a Western precept that would require islam to BECOME Western to respect.
There will be only one winner. And not to use Information Age weapons on exsistential opponents is absurd.
2. I advocate “treason.” The assumption in my response is that my constant call for the dethroning of Obama somehow is “treason.” Which, among other things, means the accuser doesn’t understand the meaning of the word.
But as others in the public sphere fantasize that calling for the removal of a tyrant acting lawlessly and above the Constitution is “treason,” this:
Merriam Webster defines “treason,” as follows: “the betrayal of a trust: treachery: the offense of attempting by overt acts to overthrow the government of the state to which the offender owes allegiance or to kill or personally injure the sovereign or the sovereign’s family.”
Again, let’s parse them and deal with one at a time.
“Betrayal of a trust.”
In calling for the overthrow of Obama, have I betrayed any trust? No. In fact, as I am a veteran and have sworn to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, NOT calling for his ouster would betray a sworn trust and oath required of me by the US government on appointment to the US Air Force Academy in 1972.
Is Obama an “enemy”? Of course.
Back to Webster. An “enemy” is, “someone who hates another: someone who attacks or tries to harm another: something that harms or threatens someone or something.”
Does Obama hate America? He’s said so in so many words in his books, and his actions around the globe have indicated the same. His policies have destroyed trillions of dollars of Middle Class wealth, destroying or limiting their future and the futures of their children. The average Middle Class household has lost 1/3 of its value/wealth under Obama, and he has two years to go and Obamacare will be stealing yet more wealth beginning next month. What is America without a Middle Class? Nonexistent. Destroying the Middle Class (the first move of all Communist tyrants, from Lenin to Stalin to Mao to Pol Pot) is exactly what Obama is doing.
THIS makes him our enemy.
Has he tried to harm “someone or something”? Article II of the Constitution, the “Supreme Law of the Land,” states the duties of the president explicitly: “to faithfully execute the law.” Beginning with his refusal to prosecute a federal law because he disagreed with it, he has harmed our Constitution and thereby our nation, of which the Constitution is our charter. And in harming it, ignoring it, he has to all intents and purposes acted to overthrow the government of our State, which IS that Constitution.
Bombing Libya without bothering to respect the Constitution and doing the same bombing Syria. Refusing the oversight responsibility of the Legislative Branch – a branch Superior to the Executive Branch as it is where are made the Laws he is tasked with enforcing – on IRS, F&F, Benghazi, FEC, etc., is further harm to our Constitution, our nation and our people. Using the IRS blatantly to harm the speech of those with whom he disagreed was acting to harm another, a clear act of an enemy. All these are acts designed to overthrow the Rule of Law, to overthrow the government as defined by our Constitution.
It is Obama whose acts are “treasonous,” and not to grasp that is appallingly stupid.
Treachery. Webster: “Harmful things that are done usually secretly to a friend, your own country, etc.: an act of harming someone who trusts you.”
IRS. F&F. Benghazi. ALL were “harmful things … done secretly to [his] own country.”
Obama’s economic policies – and the utter contempt with which Reid has, on Obama’s orders, stalled House changes thereto – have harmed, above all else, those who trusted him in that Blacks and Women have been hurt by them far more than any other groups. They trusted him and THEY are out of work at record levels as a result, harming them and their descendants.
Whether Obama is a domestic or a foreign enemy I’ll leave for others as it is immaterial to this discussion. But Obama – without question – is an enemy of the United States of America, its people and our Constitution. By ANY definition.
That being the case, calling for his ouster is not “treason;” NOT calling for his ouster is treason.
Obama clearly is an enemy of our Constitution who has committed lawless acts under the color of authority in blatant disregard of his sworn oath to our Constitution. He has acted without authorization in ignoring domestic law, in ignoring the Constitutional requirement that Congress be consulted prior to entering combat in foreign lands, in ignoring Constitutional oversight of his actions by Congress. In doing these acts he has caused Americans to die (Terry; the Benghazi Four), foreign nationals to die (Mexicans killed by F&F guns, Libyans, Syrians and Iraqis), and the law to be ignored. He has turned America into a country under the Rule of Man and away from what it has been since its founding, and legally remains: The Rule of Law.
He IS an enemy. And he MUST be stopped.
3. I am “morally despicable.” This is but one of the problems facing America, and the West, today: The inability to disagree without being called names. Another is the fuzzy thinking in which the Left engages in the pretense of mature thought.
Is it “morally despicable” to note that not destroying an existential enemy will result in our destruction, and to demand we destroy them first? No. It would be morally despicable to do otherwise.
Is it morally despicable to grasp history, to acknowledge the history of islam and the West, and to understand that, regardless of what ignorant people feel, islam and the West CAN NOT coexist?
No. It is morally despicable not to educate oneself so that this historically correct understanding is understood and accepted.
Is it morally despicable to reject exchanging bullets on battlefields with savage barbarians, rather than just annihilating them at no cost to the civilized world? Nope. It is morally despicable to send our guys out under suicidal ROE both to kill and to die in combat our CINC does not want to win.
It is morally despicable for our JCS and Service Chiefs to continue to do so rather than quit en masse or mutiny; to refuse to send out our kids to die for nothing.
It is morally despicable that the flag officers involved in Benghazi – Ham & Gaouette – have not volunteered to be put under oath and told us what really happened that night.
Is it “morally despicable” to note that those we have annihilated with total war have ALL been better off for our having utterly defeated them? Nope. It’s honest history.
It is morally despicable to continue to kill them and kill them and kill them yet refuse to conquer them and remove them from the intellectual and moral squalor in which they demand they live.
NOT defeating them is the “morally despicable” choice. And it is “morally despicable” for the Left to refuse to grasp this historical fact.
The West, since 1945, like it or not, has acted in morally despicable ways by NOT using the power we have available, yet fighting, killing and dying anyway.
Estimates of North Korean dead in the Korean war: 1.6M. American dead: 38,000. Had we just nuked PyongYang, far fewer than 1.6M North Koreans would have died – and NO Americans. The morally correct choice was nuclear weapons.
Estimates of North Vietnamese and VC dead in the Vietnam War: 2M. American dead: 58,000. Had we used nuclear weapons on Hanoi in 1963, far fewer than 2M enemy, and zero American dead. The morally correct choice: Nuclear weapons.
And in both instances, as in Japan, their people would be much better off today had they been utterly defeated, conquered and modernized. The WORLD would be better off today.
But people lacking any historical understanding, any concept of the purpose and actions of war, continue to reject nuclear weapons. This is as absurd as is their co-fantasy that is it somehow “nicer” not to conquer them at the lowest possible cost in lives – theirs AND ours – and in dollars that must be earned by someone to be wasted in conventional “war,” lowering that “someone’s “ standard of living to do so.
Productivity counts, and the most productive weapons – and those least likely to generate continuous fighting – are nuclear weapons. Our refusal to recognize this, our refusal to use our most productive weapons, THAT is the real “morally despicable” act.
Conclusion: Contrary to my commenter, it is the Left and the refusal to grasp history that is there for all who want to see, who refuse to accept that America is under the Rule of Law – and treason is NOT defending that law – who refuse to understand what war is, and what war does and does not do, who are morally despicable creatures acting treasonously and propagating policies resulting in mass murder.
And if we had an Opposition Party worthy of the name, I’d not be the ONLY one pointing out all of this, more citizens would be exposed to factual history and educated by it, and our voting patterns would change.
And the world would be a safer, freer, place of more – not less – liberty and peace.