Historical Perspective

[SuperScout]

[While making no claims of authorship, I think the following article does provide an interesting historical pespective on the birth, growth, and severe implications of radical Islamists.]

THE CLASH OF CIVILIZATIONS AND THE GREAT CALIPHATE

President Bush and his administration spokesmen are not telling the American people what they really need to know about this "war." If they don't do that between now and November it may cost them the election.

The war against terror did not begin on September 11, 2001, nor will it end with the peaceful transition to civilian authority in Iraq, whenever that may be. In fact, Iraq is but a footnote in the bigger context of this encounter, but an important one none the less. This war is what the Jihadists themselves are calling the "Third Great Jihad." They are operating within the framework of a time line, which reaches back to the very creation of Islam in the seventh century and are presently attempting to recreate the dynamics which gave rise to the religion in the first two hundred years of its existence.

No religion in history grew as fast, in its infancy, and the reasons for the initial growth of Islam are not hard to explain when you understand what the world was like at the time of Muhammad's death in 632 AD. Remember that the Western Roman Empire was in ruins and the Eastern Empire, based in Constantinople, was trying desperately to keep the power of its early grandeur while transitioning to Christianity as a de facto state religion. The costs to the average person were large as he was being required to meet the constantly rising taxes levied by the state along with the tithes coerced by the Church.

What Islam offered was the "carrot or the sword". If you became a convert, your taxes were immediately eliminated, as was your tithe. If you didn't, you faced death. The choice was not hard for most to make, unless you were a very devoted martyr in the making. At the beginning, even the theology was not too hard for most to swallow, considering that both Jewry and Christianity were given their due by the Prophet. There is but one God-Allah, and Muhammad is His Prophet, as was Jesus, and the pre-Christian Jewish prophets of the Torah (Old Testament). Both were called "children of the book"--the book being the Koran, which replaced both the Old and New Testaments for former Christians and Jews.

With this practical approach to spreading the "word" Islam grew like wild-fire, reaching out from the Saudi Arabian Peninsula in all directions. This early growth is what the Muslims call the "First" great Jihad and it met with little resistance until Charles Martel of France, the father of Charlemagne, stopped them in the battle of Tours in France, after they had firmly established Islam on the Iberian Peninsula. This first onslaught against the West continued in various forms and at various times until Islam was finally driven out of Spain in 1492 at the battle of Granada.

The "Second Great Jihad" came with the Ottoman Turks. This empire succeeded in bringing about the downfall of Constantinople as a Christian stronghold and an end to Roman hegemony in all of its forms. The Ottoman Empire was Islam's most successful expansion of territory even though the religion itself had fractured into warring sects and bitter rivalries with each claiming the ultimate truths in "the ways of the Prophet". By 1683 the Ottomans had suffered a series of defeats on both land and sea and the final, unsuccessful attempt to capture Vienna set the stage for the collapse of any further territorial ambitions and Islam shrunk into various sheikhdoms, emir dominated principalities, and roving tribes of nomads. However, by this time a growing anti-western sentiment, blaming its internal failures on anyone but themselves, was taking hold and setting the stage for a new revival known as Wahhabiism, a sect which came into full bloom under the House of Saud on the Arabian Peninsula shortly before the onset of WWI.

It is this Wahhabi version of Islam, which has infected the religion itself, now finding adherents in almost all branches and sects, especially the Shi'ita. Wahhabiism calls for the complete and total rejection or destruction of anything and everything which is not based in the original teachings of The Prophet and finds its most glaring practice in the policies of the Afghani Taliban or the Shiite practices of the late Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran. Its Ali Pasha (Field Marshall) is now known as Osama bin Laden, the leader of the "Third Jihad", who is Wahhabi as were his 9/11 attack teams, 18 of which were also Saudi. The strategy for this "holy war" did not begin with the planning of the destruction of the World Trade Center. It began with the toppling of the Shah of Iran back in the late 1970's. With his plans and programs to "westernize" his country, along with his close ties to the U.S. and subdued acceptance of the State of Israel, the Shah was the soft target. Remember "America Held Hostage"? Thanks, in large part to the hypocritical and disastrous policies of the Jimmy Carter State Department, the revolution was set into motion, the Shah was deposed, his armed forces scattered or murdered and stage one was complete. The Third Jihad now had a base of operations and the oil wealth to support its grand design or what they call the "Great Caliphate".

What this design calls for is the replacement of all secular leadership in any country with Muslim majorities. This would include, Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia, all the Emirates, Sudan, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Malaysia, and Indonesia and finally what they call the "occupied territory" Israel. As a part of this strategy, forces of the jihad will infiltrate governments and the military as a prelude to taking control, once the secular leadership is ousted or assassinated. Such was the case in Lebanon leading to the Syrian occupation and in Egypt with the murder of Anwar Sadat, along with the multiple attempts on the lives of Hussein in Jordan, Mubarak of Egypt and Musharraf in Pakistan. Pakistan is a particular prize because of its nuclear weapons. (Please note al Qaeda call for the Islamic-militant overthrow of Musharraf in Pakistan on March 25, 2004.)

The long-range strategy of the Third Jihad counts on three strategic goals. First, the U.S. withdrawing from the region just as it did in Southeast Asia, following Vietnam. Second, taking control of the oil wealth in the Muslim countries, which would be upwards to 75% of known reserves; third, using nuclear weapons or other WMD?s to annihilate Israel. A further outcome of successfully achieving these objectives would be to place the United Nations as the sole arbiter in East/West negotiations and paralyze western resistance, leading to total withdrawal from all Islamic dominated countries. Evidence of the Bush Administration awareness of this plan is found in the events immediately following the 9/11 attacks. The administration's first move was to shore up Pakistan and Egypt, believing that these two would be the next targets for al Qaeda, while Americans focused on the disaster in New York. The administration also knew that the most important objective was to send a loud and clear message that the U.S. was in the region to stay, not only to shore up our allies but to send a message to the Jihadists.

The attack on Afghanistan was necessary to break-up a secure al Qaeda base of operations and put their leadership on the run or in prison. The war in Iraq also met a very strategic necessity in that no one knew how much collaboration existed between Saddam Hussein and the master planners of the Third Jihad or Hussein's willingness to hand off WMD?s to terrorist groups including the PLO in Israel. What was known were serious indications of on-going collaboration as Saddam funneled money to families of suicide bombers attacking the Israelis and others in Kuwait. What the U.S. needed to establish was a significant base of operations smack dab in the middle of the Islamic world, in a location that effectively cut it in half. Iraq was the ideal target for this and a host of other strategic reasons. Leadership of various anti-American groups both here and abroad understood the vital nature of the Bush initiative and thus launched their demonstrations, worldwide, to "Stop The War". Failing this, they also laid plans to build a political campaign inside the country, with the War in Iraq as a plebiscite, using a little known politician as the thrust point? Howard Dean. This helps to explain how quickly the Radical Left moved into the Dean campaign with both people and money, creating what the clueless media called the "Dean Phenomenon". It is doubtful if Dean is even remotely aware of how he was being used, falling into that group of people that some have termed, "useful idiots."

By building on the left-wing base in the Democrat party and the ?Hate Bush" crowd, the campaign has already resulted in a consensus among the aspirants, minus Joe Lieberman, to withdraw the U.S. from Iraq and turn the operation over to the U.N. And, if past is prologue, i.e., Vietnam, once the U.S. leaves it will not go back under any circumstances, possibly even the destruction of Israel.

Should George W. Bush be defeated in November we could expect to see the dominoes start to fall in the secular Islamic countries and The Clash of Civilizations, predicted several years ago by Samuel Huntington, would then become a life-changing event in all of our lives. What surprised the Jihadists following the 9/11 attacks was how American sentiment mobilized around the President and a profound sense of patriotism spread across the country. They were not expecting this reaction, based on what had happened in the past, nor were they expecting the determined resolve of the President himself. I also believe this is one of the reasons we have not had any further attacks within our borders. They are content to wait, just as one of their tactical mentors, V.I. Lenin admonished..."two steps forward, one step back".

A couple additional events serve as valuable footnotes to the current circumstances we face: the destruction of the human assets factor of the CIA during the Carter presidency, presided over by the late Senator Frank Church. This fact has plagued our intelligence agencies right up to this very day with consequences that are now obvious. And Jimmy Carter himself, the one man who must bear the bulk of the responsibility for setting the stage of the Third Jihad. Americans should find little comfort in how the Democrat contenders constantly seek the "advice and counsel" of this totally discredited foreign policfy "expert."

Lastly, we should not expect to see any meaningful cooperation from Western Europe, especially the French. Since failing to protect their own interests in Algeria (by turning the country over to the first of the Arab terrorists, Ammad Ben Bella), the country itself is now occupied by Islamic immigrants totaling twenty percent of the population.

We are in the battle of our lives, a battle that will go on for many years, possibly even generations. If we fail to understand what we are facing or falter in the challenge of "knowing our enemy" the results will be catastrophic. Imagine a world where al Qaeda regimes control 75% of the world's oil, have at their disposal nuclear weapons, legions of willing suicide soldiers, and our national survival is dependent on the good graces of Kofi Annan and the United Nations.

[colmurph]

Maybe we should have let Sadaam take out the Saudis. This is not going to stop until the last Muslim has gone to meet "Allah".

[phuloi]

I am certain that,what with the brilliant immediate staff surrounding the president,these historical facts and also what the future may hold for states embroiled in Radical Islam theology have been studied thoroughly and that a plan of battle has been born.Still,it begs the question;Why have the American populace been left out of the loop? I agree with the author on this.If the Bush Administration doesn`t launch a full scale 'educate the masses' campaign,we`ll all be spending Euro-dollars (sans"IN GOD WE TRUST) in 2005.

[Seascamp]

Just a bit of musing on my part here. I think the author has the right idea so I won?t quibble about some stated things except one point. I for one would not see the Shiites as being Wahabi but instead, subscribing to the Wahabi blood cult mind-set is more likely. Two strange, murderous, bedfellows sharing the same blanket and pillow is how I see it, but mortal enemies beyond the common cause of killing all those they choose. Of the two, I see the Shiites as being the far more dangerous and having direct access to nukes via Iran. Both have a burning desire to turn the globe into a ball of fire battleground but both, despite their medieval yappidy yap and threats, absolutely know that if and when push comes to shove, they and their homelands are instant radioactive glass and it?s back to waddle and dub hovels for the radioactive survivors. Within the Wahabi devout, it is forbidden to believe that the world is round. On the other hand and last I checked, long-range ballistic weaponry follows the curvature of the earth, not a flat plane. We?ll see who is right, but I?m not betting on the flat earth proposition or the concept that some supposed ?Allah? is going to deflect the inevitable and deadly counter strike heading right down their attitudes.

The point the author makes about the Bush vulnerability due to prevailing ignorance has a bit of merit to it. But on the other hand, again, 9/11 was a very public object lesson in exactly what our enemies have in mind and there should be no doubt or ignorance at all, none. But alas, here we are with our plates full of sloppy political agenda, leftist media distortions and dangerous lies and are, thusly, distracted from what we already know and have been shown. As I see it, Bush and Crew have been trying to keep this incipient WWIII from breaking out in a global ball of hungry flame and this has included trying to keep the home front from having a big time blowout with the Moslems. I guess I?ll admit to not signing up for the ?hug your local Moslem? program in the time just after 9/11. Frankly, I was way too busy watching the Saudi students dancing their dance of elation and joy right here in the USA and adsorbing the brutal lessons learned, plus preparing for the ones yet to come.
But then, that?s just me I suppose.

I would agree with the author that it?s cyclic and the Jihadists are on the gory blood trail again, one more time. But this time may be their last time???.forever, amen. What is up for grabs now are what will be left and where, that?s all.

Scamp

[SuperScout]

It's always enlightening to play "what if," and that scenario of Saddam playing "You Bet Your Burnoose" was played out in a highly classified computerized wargame in which I participated. Inputting what we knew, and some of what we suspected of SH's materiel, tactics, force structure, and a few other variables, we concluded with a high degree of certainty that he would not have been content to replace the House of Saud with the House of Uday, but would only gotten greedier. The Saudi National Guard makes Barney Fife look like Elliot Ness.

We tried, with some success, to allow a mutual blood-letting exercise for the region, ergo, the Irani-Iraqi war. Onliest problem is that the two playground bullies got tired of the game before we thought they should quit. Our war gaming also took into account the effects that SH could have made had we not aided and abetted his eight-year-long nosebleed.

There certainly are times when my evil twin whispers in my ear, "Why not just make a large, solid glass parking lot out of the place?"

Education, my dear Brother Griz, involves, as you so rightly know, a willing imparter of knowledge and wisdom, and an even more willing group receptors. Absent this duality, and nothing is accomplished. Sadly, the average American demands the 'fast-food', 'instant gratification' answers and solutions to any real or imagined problem; they are also very quick to blame someone else for their own errors.