What to do about Islam?

Adherents to islam are killing people at an increasing rate across a constantly-increasing geography.  The great thinkers of the West have no Plan B other than to accept this killing as the “new normal.”

Sending men with guns and jets with bombs isn’t working to stop it – and is costing the civilized world thousands of educated men and women in ground combat and in terrorist strikes across the West.

This ideology, the practitioners of which are taught by their holy book to kill all non-members, is costing the entire planet trillions of dollars that could – and should – be put to better use in education, infrastructure and science.

Islam is costing our global future an unknowable number of artists, entrepreneurs, authors, playwrights, scientists in the never-to-be fathers & mothers killed in ground combat and terror attacks with a Stone Age enemy having nothing better to do.

If they were to agree to leave the field of combat, which is what we are politely asking them to do, what are they going to do with their lives? Work at McDonalds? Open a Macy’s? Invent new internet software?

Per the UN, Muslims are the most illiterate cohort on the planet. Literacy is not needed to fulfill the goals of their faith: killing all of us & reciting the Koran … only in Arabic. What would be their goal of literacy? What would be the point of it?

They see on TV what we have and know they can never have it. Their faith tells them to kill us, they hate us anyway for our possessions, our ability to travel, our freedom, so – seriously – what else are they going to do? Open a store to sell us more stuff they can’t have?

Islamist terror is not slowing. It is accelerating and spreading. No reason exists to think this spread will stop unless it is stopped by force. In over a thousand years islam never has been stopped in its spread other than by force . It is a proselytizing religion whose followers are told to go forth, kill the infidel, take over his lands, until the entire Earth is theirs.

Muslims are following their ideology. They are doing what their faith commands. From an objective standpoint, how can that be combated? Tell them it’s OK for us to follow our faith, but not for them to follow theirs? How does that work?

Why would they stop killing because those they are instructed by their faith to kill are complaining about being killed?

Yes, our reaction is as stupid as it sounds, but – so far – complaining is the essence of the response of the West.

Islam is a pre-modern tribal society of stoning their wives, whipping their girls, beheading whomever they seem to want, and “honor killing” of their own children.

Not only are muslims intent on killing all non-muslims, they‘ve been killing each other for a millennium over the interpretation of the succession of who is to interpret the philosophy of this death-dealing cohort. If they are willing to kill other muslims by the tens of thousands over the interpretation of succession, why would they – ever – stop killing outsiders whose societies and countries their holy book commands them to conquer?

To think this will stop if we are nice to them is to ignore the entirety of the history of islam.

To think that we can get along – a Western cultural ideal, not a global ideal – is to project Western cultural mores and behaviors onto non-Westerners. This is imperialistic and monocultural.

Demanding we get along with those killing us because of who we are, while not demanding they get along with us is childish – lethally so. Why would they stop killing infidels when doing so has advanced their cult globally since 637AD?

For them to think that a West so weak as to hide the rape of thousands of women in Europe, and hundreds of children, evidently, in Britain, is a West strong enough to slow their advance would be absurd. Muslims may be ignorant – but they aren’t stupid.

Why would they stop when they can see that their savagery is trumping our (Western) courtesy?

Because islam is spread so wide, and because it seems that no land where it exists is immune to the attacks of terrorists willing to blow up themselves, and to send out their own children to blow up themselves and others, it is likely that the only way to stop it is to kill the ideology itself, and then await the natural decline of an ideology without a center – or funding.

When an ideology is built on strength – and islam is nothing other than a divine permission for the strong to oppress, rape and murder the weak at their whim – the annihilation of their core would provide empirical proof that their ideology is the “weak horse.” At which point an ideology of conquest begins to evaporate.

Thus far it is the West proving the weak horse in our ridiculous reaction of washing the feet of our killers, appropriating a headscarf to express “solidarity” (with slaveholding wife-beating murderers?), or opening churches and hiding the symbols of our peaceful, turn-the-other-cheek faith in order to not offend those of the kill-all-outside-the-tribe faith.

Yes. It is as absurd as it sounds.

Think how absurd it will sound to future historians – assuming, that is, that we write the history. And nothing guarantees that future historians will be Western. Keeping on our current path will assure they will not.

Some will complain that one can’t kill an ideology. They are short on history. Indian Thugees were an ideology. Imperial Japan was an ideology. NAZI Germany was an ideology. The USSR was an ideology. Are there NAZIs in the world today? Sure. Have they any power or ability to effect local change? No.

Some will say we can’t destroy an entire religion. So we are to accept being murdered? Until they have a Plan B for stopping terror, these people should be ignored as the fantasists they are.

If the West were to get serious about human rights, individual liberty, free will and action, and kill the centers of funding and ideology of islam, would doing so spark localized terror across the planet? Yes.

Is this different from the localized terror we see today? No.

For those who think that there are “moderate” muslims who are not on the side of the terrorists – we would find this out rather quickly by their reactions to the event.

Would a West going on the offensive against those who would destroy liberty and freedom (something worth fighting for only to, it seems, half the population – the child-raising half, interestingly enough) more easily defend itself against a violent response to the destruction of islam? Yes. On offense, you plan… on defense, you react.

We would know and plan to dismantle or blockade each mosque, or confine the attendees of that mosque prior to acting on islam itself.

Why our warriors are off killing terrorists one bullet at a time, rather than here defending American families from a violent uprising of self-flagellating illiterate daughter-killing baby-raping gay-murdering wife-stoning savages as we annihilate their centers of ideology is unknown.

Which returns us to the beginning. They are killing us at an increasing rate. No Plan B exists that does not involve the continued acceptance of the death they deal upon us. They can only be stopped by destroying their centers of ideology: Mecca. Medina. Riyadh. Qom. Quetta. We have weapons capable of doing so in an instant.

It is time to use them.

Unless you’re OK with the continued killing of our sons, raping of our daughters, and destruction of our future.

About Alex Scipio

About Alex Scipio: Alex moved out of the People's Republic of California to the Free State of Arizona, finally tiring of the lack of the Bill of Rights, the overgrown idiocracy, and the catering to non-Americans & welfare recipients. He still wonders how America got from Truman, Eisenhower, and Daniel Patrick Moynihan to the Liberal and Conservative extremes so badly managing America today. And, yes, islam DOES need to be annihilated. And doing what he can to get folks away from the extremes of political life.
This entry was posted in Foreign Policy and International, War and Terrorism and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to What to do about Islam?

  1. Herbert Thornton says:

    If three of the worlds four most powerful civilisations (USA, Russia, and India) don’t – either individually or together – do what Scipio advocates, then USA, Russia and India and most lesser powers will eventually be undermined and taken over by Islam.

    China on the other hand, while being one of the four most powerful civilisations, is unlikely to join the other three because it has the attribute of caution combined with the character of very great patience. Consequently, China may be destined to become the world’s last bastion of civilisation against Islam.

    China already has the means and will if necessary then use it to completely eradicate Islam.

    China will then lead the rest of the world back to civilisation.

    • Alex Scipio says:

      Thank you for your comment, with which I completely agree. If you have not read my novel, China Rising, I’d like to suggest it to you as it is predicated on exactly the same point.

      • Herbert Thornton says:

        And Thank you for suggesting China Rising. I arrived two days ago and I couldn’t put it down.

        Despite your describing it as a novel, there are many people and events in it that are uncannily close to what has actually happened since you wrote it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *