August 21, 2006

The War of Two Religions

Through the violent attacks of a Radical Islam, two religions have been brought into conflict. The first is that of Islam, a faith that at its core requires absolute submission from its adherents, and looks towards the subjugation of the world as its ultimate apotheosis. As the youngest of the monotheistic religions, Islam is at a point in its development that Christianity passed through centuries ago. And it is not with Christianity that Islam is currently at war. Islam is saving that for the mopping up phase of its current campaign. The religion that Islam has engaged is a much younger one, the religion of Freedom.

As a religion Freedom has been gaining converts since the success of the American Revolution enabled it to go forth and be preached to the world. Freedom is easily the most popular of the new religions and historically converts nearly 100% of all populations in which it is allowed to take firm root. This is the religion which we have lately brought to Iraq.

The genius of the religion of Freedom is that it allows all other religions, from the venerable to the trivial, to exist without fear of censure or destruction. Indeed, the only thing that the religion of Freedom firmly forbids is the destruction of Freedom itself. "Thou shalt not destroy Freedom" seems to be the only commandment. And Freedom has been shown to resist efforts to destroy it in the most ferocious way. It’s enemies would do well to ponder the fate of previous attempts to do so.

On September 11, the agents of Radical Islam began their attempt to destroy Freedom by attacking it at its core. The reaction of Freedom to this assault has been, once you consider the destructive power of the weapons systems it possesses, measured, deliberate and cautious. This is because Freedom, although sorely wounded, does not yet feel that its very existence is threatened. A more serious attack at any time in the future will put paid to that specious notion.

Following a second attack at a level equal to or exceeding September 11, any political opposition to pursuing our enemies with all means at our disposal will be swept off the table. The First Terrorist War will begin in earnest and it will not be a series of small wars with long lead times and a careful consultation of allies. The war will become, virtually overnight, a global war of violent preemption and merciless attack towards the spiritual and geographic centers of our enemy. Arguments revolving around the true meaning of ‘imminent’ will be seen as they are -- so much factional prattle. Due to the nature of the enemy, the First Terrorist War will be fought here and there and everywhere. It does not matter when or where the second serious strike on the American homeland takes place, it only matters that on the day after this country will be at war far beyond the current level of conflict.


During the Second World War, our system, with few alterations, brought us through to a peace in which there were greater freedoms than before the war. Victory validated our way of life. Not only were our freedoms intact in 1945 but they were poised, with the economy, for a great expansion throughout the rest of the century and into this. If you had proposed, in the summer of 1946, that within 50 years all minorities would be fully enfranchised, that women would be fully liberated, and that homosexuals would be a dominant force with their enfranchisement only a moment away, you would have been dismissed as a socialist dreamer. And yet, here we are.

The same situation can also be envisioned as the result of our victory in the First Terrorist War at the end of a less-clear but no less threatening passage of arms. But this will only happen if we remain clear about the real nature of the First Terrorist War, and committed to unequivocal victory regardless of the costs in lives and treasure. Only by matching the determination of our enemy to destroy us will we prevail. The only thing that can defeat us are a dull reliance on management, a fascination with process rather than victory and the reluctance to believe the extent to which our enemy desires our annihilation.

Beyond victory in the First Terrorist War is a greater goal. What we must seek is not merely the "control" and "containment" of terror, for terror in this guise cannot be controlled or contained. We must come to the deeper understanding that only a complete victory over the global Radical Islamic forces can prevent the onset of a confrontation more terrible than the current war.

What we must press for in the Terrorist War is a victory so decisive that we can, in the end, avoid the larger war lurking on the not-so-distant horizon - - a true war between civilizations. That war, should it come, will not take the name of The Terrorist War, but of The Islamic War.

The Terrorist War is still a struggle that can be fought and won with conventional means. An Islamic War, should it come, would engulf the world and be anything but conventional.

From: The First Terrorist War

Email this entry to:

Your email address:

Message (optional):

Posted by Vanderleun at August 21, 2006 1:42 PM | TrackBack
Save to


"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.

Superb, as usual. I do not wish for war but war has sought us out. Well then, let us 'Cry Havoc!' and go after those who would destroy us and our way of life. If we are hit again let us call to arms the tradition that old hoary Andrew Jackson has bequeathed us and end this war the only way it can be ended. With a resounding victory of course. Our enemies must go the way of Carthage, of Persepolis, of Nineveh. They leave us no other option.

So be it.

Posted by: Mike Austin at August 21, 2006 12:15 PM

Today, Iran has mollified the left and bought themselves more time. That's all they're doing, is playing for time. I fear they are just going to wait President Bush out for his 2 remaining years, hoping the likes of a Kerry is elected in '08.

Should that be the case, an attack 10 times worse than 9/11 will not elicit the response you've described.

I love W, I don't agree with him on a number of issues but when it comes to Iraq and the war on Islamofascists, he is the man. But I fear he is worn down. WTF happened to "you're either with us or you're with the terrorists?" Another fresh fighter, ala Rudy could end, very quickly, The First Terrorist War.

When Iran gets nuclear weapons, and surely our deep thinkers must know that this is what they want, all bets are off. And if there is a dem in the White House, a lot of people are going to die.

Great post too. Freedom as a faith is a wonderful idea I haven't seen before. Hard to believe when the President of Iran publicly calls liberal democracies abominations and for their end, that the liberals in this country still don't get it. A 10X 9/11 attack, 2 years into a democrat presidency will still be blamed on Bush.

Posted by: MM at August 22, 2006 1:37 PM

When a more ruthless approach to fighting Islamofascism is proposed, the usual retort is that "we only descend to the level of, and become like our enemies."

That is pure crap. As you pointed out, we became a BETTER country after WWII, and that was after deliberately killing several hundred thousand enemy civilians, including dropping to A-bombs.

Posted by: Roderick Reilly at August 23, 2006 11:14 AM

MM STATES "A 10X 9/11 attack, 2 years into a democrat presidency will still be blamed on Bush".

Bush is going to be blamed for every problem for the next fifty years. That's the way the Left works. There is absolutely no acknowledgment of Clinton's missteps that allowed Al-Qaeda to operate or that Clinton had the ability to liquidate Bin Laden after Bin Laden declared war on the US.

Posted by: JD at August 23, 2006 1:31 PM

That radical Islam is basically at war with all things non-Islam is a good observation.

It means a country like India should be a solid ally if courted a bit.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at September 7, 2006 3:58 PM
Post a comment:

"It is impossible to speak in such a way that you cannot be misunderstood." -- Karl Popper N.B.: Comments are moderated to combat spam and may not appear immediately. Comments that exceed the obscenity or stupidity limits will be either edited or expunged.

Remember personal info?