A few points about the Long War
Joseph Sixpack (cool handle Joe!) wrote:
"I found it interesting that the traveler used the term "Long War". That is actually a term also used by those who view this as a global insurgency. The reason that many refer to the Long War as a global insurgency is that an insurgency is a struggle for control of a population. It rests on the assumption (which I believe to be true) that militant radical Islam is not mainstream Islam; that it is a fringe element. The militant radical Islamic movement is a fringe element seeking to obtain control of the Islamic world."
I don't believe it matters if jihadism is "mainstream" Islam or not.
(Though I do believe that yes, the Koran tends to encourage it. Maybe that doesn't matter on balance either though, you can make religious scriptures mean pretty much whatever you want them to.)
Some guerilla theory I read years ago, I think by General Georges Grivas though I can't find the reference now.
As I recall the estimate was something like: If 2% of the population are hard-core committed, and 20-30% are sympathetic at the minimal level of not informing to the authorites and supplying aid-in-kind, then the rest can be terrorized into cooperation.
And as Eric Hoffer pointed out about forced conversion, that cooperation won't be any less fanatical. The cowed majority will work themselves into passionate committment so they don't have to face the fact of their own cowardice.
Note that point, it's important to the development of the argument about Europe later.
Brandon W asked:
"Are you saying that it is not within our (the people's) power to avoid a war, or are you saying that it is not within our (the United States government's) power to avoid a war?"
I do indeed mean we the people of the United States.
It is beginning to strike me as kind of weird, that folks on the libertarian Right who know all about envy as a motivation on the Left for socialism, class warfare and regular old warfare warfare, don't apply it to their understanding of foreign relations.
Why do people in third-world countries, failed civilizations, and increasingly in a decling Europe hate us?
When have the rich, successful, powerful, and generally happy ever been liked by those who were not?
Does anyone think that hatred and resentment won't motivate attacks on us?
Some on the Left seem to realize something like this and come up with the solution, "We'll abase ourselves in abject apology, make them rich too and then they'll love us."
So people who inherit fortunes or are supported by rich relatives are always and forever grateful to their benefactors? They never regard self-deprecation as a wee bit patronizing?
And what does liberal guilt-tripping really say?
"Oh I'm so terribly ashamed of what my people have done to yours!"
Could it be that the inferred message is, "Don't ever forget what we are capable of doing to you."