29 Oct 2007
What we're doing in Iraq IS stopping Islamization! What do you think is going to happen when we pull out? There will, within a matter of months to at most a few years, be an Islamic regime in place - and probably a Shia regime allied to Iran, at that. How easy do you think it will be to "stop Islamization" once Islam has obviously defeated us in Iraq? They will have plenty of momentum, that's for sure.
But let's accept, for the sake of argument, that "nothing bad" would happen if we pulled out of Iraq and redeployed to Darfur. What do you think would happen in Darfur? We'd be in the exact same situation as we are in Iraq - we'd be perceived as an army of occupation, and we'd be fighting a rabble of irregulars, and subject to daily IED attacks. No change!
How can the policy of "stopping Islamization" work, in practice? Are we back to propping up secular dictatorships again?
29 Oct 2007
You might want to take a look at the Iraqi Constitution, which states that no law can contadict Islam. The Shi'a are the majority and the Shi'a took power. Islam is back with a vengeance.
You might also notice that where elections have been held in Muslim countries, extreme Islamic parties do very well. The outlook is that they will continue to do well and gain in strength world-wide.
In the Southern Sudan, the Christian/animist majority would undoubtedly vote for independence from the Muslim north. Creating and protecting this new nation would�halt islamization there.
We cannot stay in Iraq forever. We cannot heal the 1350 year old Sunni-Shi'a split, nor should we try - it is not in our interest for the enemy to be strong and united. We should rather�desire that the camp of Islam to be weak and divided.
We should view the Muslim world as a hostile bloc and treat it the way we treated communism, by containment.
30 Oct 2007
Islam is back with a vengeance.
That said, Iraq is not yet under "Islamic law", and cannot be so while we are still there. You might also notice that where elections have been held in Muslim countries, extreme Islamic parties do very well. The outlook is that they will continue to do well and gain in strength world-wide.
I am aware of this, but since I did not argue that "democratization" was a good thing, it is not a germane response. We cannot stay in Iraq forever. We cannot heal the 1350 year old Sunni-Shi'a split, nor should we try - it is not in our interest for the enemy to be strong and united. We should rather desire that the camp of Islam to be weak and divided.
It does not necessarily follow that withdrawal from Iraq will create weakness and division within Islam. It is easier to imagine that a clear and self-evident American defeat in Iraq will create strength and unity within Islam. The bad guys will be energized by their victory, others in the Arab world will flock to their cause, and there will be a new Islamic troublemaker (Iraq) in the world.
Frankly, I think the calls on this site for US withdrawal are every bit as facile and poorly thought-out as similar calls found on Leftist websites.
31 Oct 2007
What exactly constitutes "winning" in Iraq? Is it when every Al Qaeda member in the middle east is dead? What about" ordinary" Iraq muslims who reject the idea of a free democratic Iraq and the only freedom they want is to be more free to practice Islam unfettered? Do you realize the differences between liberal democracy and sharia law?
If the U.S." wins" in Iraq, in ANY way you wish to define victory, then the U.S. will leave. We cannot afford the costs of this war for an indefenite period. And when we leave the forces of Islamic jihad will only be stronger because Iraq and Iran will surely ally.
Your post refuses to explain how we will know when victory has been acheived, it ignores the fact that the U.S. will have to leave some day, and fails to even speculate about what will happen after we leave.
One cannot argue that we need to stay in Iraq until we "win " without stating what a win is going to look like and I don't think you can.