"Multiple attack fronts!" Topic

This looks interesting.

Unconventional warfare?

YouTube link

well … sounds like worst then ever … more like giving peoples with real knowledge of islam teaching a reason to join fanatics then helping fighting them .

to much ignorance , christian-minded centred interpretations and ways of wording things to keep it real.

fanatism and ignorance shall nat be fought by ignorance with a fanatic sounding otherwise it will onlmy increase disasters for all communities.

thus…. yep unconventional warfare is by far right title :)

hearing and seeing this presentation is almost the samle as hearing the so-called selfproclaimed calif rainwashing his own community remixed in an european way .

those might be our own "jihadist" preparing for tommorows' christian crusade of bombing … better watch them without falling in the trap.

The lecturer is suffering from an "Us vs. Them" kind of 'bipolar disorder' and seems to see the world in rather Manichean terms of black and white. This shades her analysis so that every public act of Muslims takes on a sinister flavour with ominous overtones no matter how innocent that act might be. This kind of absolutism will alienate the main-stream Muslim world and might one day bring about the kind of religious and cultural polarity which she claims exists already.
She does make one interesting observation/point however. Her reference to a timeline of events in the march of Jihad towards the creation of the Global Caliphate is intriguing and worth a closer look.
Rod Robertson

indeed this point do better job , but then this slip out of valuable analysis as woulod only sound right if she was telling of caliphates proliferation as might be seen germing in too many braindead heads .

All in all global unique one is deadborn scarecrow as two many a division are rooted on the foundations of their 'caliphate idea' . Among those are internal racism among muslim world (ethnic and color based prejudice along each other) which is aswell one of the main bases of recruitement targets into the fanatics circles overthere .
So if the timeline was to go somewhat along her point it would only be about spreading 'caliphat-like offsprings rather then an unified thing .Not to forget that somehow the actual caliphat broke off a more centralised and global power .
Last point that she definitivly failled to take in account is that caliphate's propaganda and acts do breack muslim religious rules as many history equivalents raises of religious intolerance may enlight ( one of the spanish calif for instance was to be taken out of reign after beguining persecuting other communities , this happened with the help of sunnit 'religious law doctors' ( oulemas) who studied his case and found he was breacking too many religious duties, along which the respect of "the people of the book'( namely jews, christians , other muslims groups and Zoroastrian) while taking faith as escuse for it ).

Quite many other exemples do appear here and there , aswell as others where bloodbath in large scale had to take place before seeing an end to the fanatical madness.

By the way any idea of what happezned to local suffis in there ?
Those have a way too long tradition of being pointed at by fanatics who denied them being true muslim while once again 'religious law doctors' ( be them sunits ulemas or chiits ayatholas ) always end up concluing suffis were true muslim whith nothing religious to argue against them even if they clearly act and think out of most other muslim box .

The Sufis build ribats and pray to be left alone while the rest of the world consumes itself. As a group they are the least likely to succumb to the excesses seen too often in Sunni and Shi'i sects. Sufi mysticism is one of the truly beautiful faces of Islam.
Rod Robertson

Yes they are indeed ,
my questioning was about attacks against them by extremist not a possible participation from them in fanatical outburst.

Many an ignorant in islamic world did and still do take them wrongly , so I guess it might be something to always watchout wherever and whenever extremists crisis do come on scene.

Thank God I do not paint religion with a wide brush (peoples yes -otherwise why would I have such love of the nastiness of the Assyrian empire :)
And yes Sufi mysticism is one of the beautiful highlight of true Islam.
I can't access the ytube but have understood the discourse between you all and make my comments accordingly to that and my (always limited sadly) of Islam in general.
Remember its not the religion its the people that make these problems.
Cheers and enjoy your day.

Zargon, the real issue is about the degree of interpretation you subject a religious text to, which is linked to the technological and social sophistication of the culture involved. The situation is made worse when the text explicitly condones violent behaviour, and has been interpreted to push a particular, potentially antagonistic approach.

Until Islam has it's own genuine reformation, the problem of fundamentalism will continue and any genuinely valuable insights into the human condition will be drowned out by an exegetical emphasis on scripturally sanctioned violence.

Meanwhile in Europe

YouTube link

Oddly, I was most disturbed by the insinuation of "claim" to territory each time a bunch of Muslims gather for public prayer, in front of some church or blocking access to a public place, etc. That's just messed up. The momentum in the West must be curtailed, but I'm not sure what would work and be justice at the same time. "We" can't just go about treating all Muslims as if they are embryonic Jidahis. That behavior would certainly achieve the effect of driving more Muslims into a mindset where they see Islam literally threatened with attack and suppression. Perhaps none of that is avoidable, we've already seen the tipping point back there somewhere, and jihad is the enemy of WW3. If we put off too long doing what must be done about stamping the danger out, then we will have full scale war later instead….

"Us vs. Them"

It's not a long shot for someone to get that idea from recent events in the moslem world over the decades… As long as "Them" calls "Us" infidels and we must convert or die. And they want to rule the world under Sharia Law … and we don't want'm to do that … "Us vs. Them" … do the math …

The West has been threatened by many radical or ultra-violent groups over the last 150 years. Nazis/ Neo-Nazis/ White-supremacists, Communists/ Wobblies/ the Red Menace, the Nation of Islam/ Black Panthers, The Italian Mafia, Irish Fenians/ the IRA, Secular Terrorist Groups, etc. But we never, in my recollection, created such a wide gulf between them and us as we do with radical Islamists and Jihadist groups. There is something primal and frightening about the antipathy and enmity which we have adopted with such relish towards these people and their agendas. Certainly they are very hostile to mainstream Western culture but so were the groups listed above. It is our reaction to them which worries me. Are Jihadists any more of a threat than any of the above listed groups? All of these groups threatened the Western social order and all killed many in the course of their struggle with the powers that be in the West. So why are we so hysterical about the Islamic Jihad?
Having watched Tony58's linked video (for 2 hours and 47 minutes), it seems to me that dealing with these unruly immigrant communities is a matter of better manpower allocation (and abandoning programmes which depress wages by bringing in excess foreign labour), better border control and first and foremost better policing and enforcement of existing laws. If I threatened to kill homosexuals or Jews I would be arrested in a heartbeat, but these clerics and their young followers openly threaten millions and are not sanctioned for their hate-speech. Don't outlaw Islamic religious garb, enforce laws which stop the spread of the hateful rhetoric spewed by these clerics and their acolytes.
Jihadists abroad do not really pose such a threat to the West do they? They can threaten and occasionally carry out successful terrorist attacks but with good intelligence and proper communication Western Security and Military structures should be able to minimize their impact. Many groups might get their hands on weapons of mass destruction but do we view Aum Shinrikyo with the same special fear which we seem to have reserved for Islamic radicals? These Jihadists threaten their own often corrupt and duplicitous governments and perhaps that is a good thing in the long run for both the Middle East and the world.
I wonder whether IS fervor would continue for very long if they did establish an Islamic State in parts of Syria and Iraq? Would it be any worse than the Ba'athist union of the 1950's? Look at what happened to Shi'ite Iran after the Islamic Revolution there. A vast majority of the young population is fed up with the theocracy there and will likely remove them from power in the next generation. Perhaps it is best for the West to concentrate on other more pressing concerns and let the brush-fires of Jihad burn themselves out in the Middle East.
My point is that we seem to single out this one group for extra-hysterical reaction and I wonder why? Is it in someone's or some group's interest to have us all so worked up about these fearsome and super-human warriors of God or is there something about our culture in the West which makes us prone to this excessive reaction to this particular group?
This irrational fear seemed to come through loud and clear in the presentation of Clare Lopez and I am at a loss to explain why she and so many others have so completely bought into this extremely polarized vision of Islam and a kind of siege-mentality. I really do not know why this is happening.
Rod Robertson

The lecturer is suffering from an "Us vs. Them" kind of 'bipolar disorder' and seems to see the world in rather Manichean terms of black and white. This shades her analysis so that every public act of Muslims takes on a sinister flavour with ominous overtones no matter how innocent that act might be.

It certainly does not help one develop a more nuanced view of Islam when the Koran specifically approves and applauds lying to infidels as not being a sin.

Lion in the Stars:
John Lyly wrote "All's fair in love and war." Does that mean that we should never trust an Englishman? Other non-Muslim philosophers and strategists such as Sun Tzu, Machiavelli, Thomas Hobbes and Carl Von Clausewitz justified deceit in warfare and times of peace. Does that mean that we should lump Chinese, Italians, Germans and once again the English into the same group as radical Muslims because their cultures support lying.
Lying is forbidden in Islam except when it allows one to make peace between estranged friends, when it is necessary for domestic peace in the household and when it is necessary for a Muslim to save himself or herself. Lying is also sanctioned in war but is not limited to just infidels. Al Taqiyya (overt lying) can be done to Muslims as well as infidels in times of war, if such lies further the cause of Islam. Likewise treaties can be broken for the same reason even if those treaties are with other Muslim states or tribes. Thus, in this, the Muslims are no different than anyone else mentioned above and may I include wargamers who routinely lie and misdirect their opponents to further their own interests and agenda. Are we really so different?
Rod Robertson

Rod, and I say think holding you in high regard. You speak and think like a very intelligent, well read, etc. academic … I respect that very much … I, for better or worse … still think like a Grunt. When someone is trying to kill you and/or your comrades on a battlefield. At that point, why they are trying to kill you, if I may, is very much "academic" … They are trying to kill you and your troops. You and your men are trying to kill as many of "them" as you can to try to insure, "we", "us" etc., make it back home …

"After doing everything we can to help these guys get into power, we're shocked and dismayed that they're not nice people"

"Does that mean that we should never trust an Englishman?"
There's an English saying and it goes like this.
"Your gona get a boot up side your- a boot I said up side your head mate"
This chant is normally repeated while swigging a pint and pointing aggressively at their opponents across the bar.
We English don't need to lie.
Cheers mate!

Legion 4:
When I was young, about the time of the rise of Islam it seems ;), I traveled through much of the Middle East and saw a great deal of good and bad there. While I do not pretend to have your experience on the battlefield, I have had a great interest in the Muslim world for many years.
The vast majority of the Muslim world is not trying to kill you nor have they ever tried to kill you. The extremists and tribal fighters which you may have encountered in Iraq and/or Afghanistan are a very small minority in the totality of the Muslim world, a well armed and highly dangerous minority, but a minority none-the-less. These people and their fanaticism are the exception rather than the rule. If the resistance you encountered was more wide-spread than that, the likely reason was that you were (rightly or wrongly) viewed as invaders at whom an armed resistance must be directed – tribal or nationalist rooted hostility rather than religious motivation.
I understand you still see the world from an "Poor Bloody Infantry" POV, but if we are to find allies within the Muslim world in order to try to bridge the gulf which divides us, we must not paint the whole population in the same light as the armed radicals. Only through cooperation and 'verifiable trust' can we both work to eliminate radical Islam's hold over the Middle East and South Asia. Ultimately it will fall on the locals to do this, but we can help, so long as we are mindful of the realities on the ground and do not alienate the vast majority of the Muslim world with hostile polarity which should only be directed at the radicals (a la Ms. Lopez's diatribe).
I greatly respect your service and the risks you took to do the job which your nation asked you to do. Now it is time to take off your battle-dress and put on a new mantle – that of an informed and engaged citizen with a wealth of experience and knowledge which most do not possess. It is people like you who can take the next step in Western-Islamic relations and forge the connections and contacts which could transform our relationship to a more peaceful and prosperous future for all.
You, and those like you, who step forward are the key to peace or war. It is a heavy burden on your shoulders, to be sure, but who ever said life is fair?
Rod Robertson

Well said, Rod.

I agree with pretty much all you said Rod … And yes, well said. I realize many moslem people and nations are not our enemy. I saw a recent interview with the current King of Jordan. I wish more moslem leaders were as wise, forward thinking, etc. as he is … I've always respected the Jordanians. Just like when my Father fought the Germans in WWII, he didn't hate all Germans. As I don't hate all moslems … The rub being again, regardless if some one is shooting at you and your comrades. In that instant, the "enemie's" politics, religion, etc. means little … And yes, I agree, no one said life would be fair …

Trouble is Rod, impressions can be quite deceptive, some of my German relatives are lovely people, but they are ardent Nazis. I've worked with many charming racists and one of the nicest 'blokes' I worked with in Israel, openly told stories about torturing guerrillas in the SA bush wars. Any evidence from travels are also anecdotal, by nature, and as such not really the foundations with which to make any extrapolated claims, especially about any culture.

Again, anecdotally, my experiences match yours, that is until you start talking about subjects which they feel are really important. Two examples stick in the mind, the first a work colleague who was a gentle lady who no one had a bad word to say about. As this was the time of the Satanic Verses, a colleague asked this lady what her reaction to the Fatwa was. We expected that she would deplore it, but with a calm smile told us she would kill him if she saw him. Sound of eight jaws hitting the floor! Eventually we asked her why, her answer, because my religion has commanded me to,

Second anecdote, which comes with all the usual caveats. I'd very stupidly misread a train time table and had to take a 40 mile taxi journey home. The driver was a Muslim, self-professed, very polite and soon we were swapping stories about how badly our respective football teams were doing. Then, for some reason the subject of the Jews came up, bang! it was like hitting a switch, the amiable man began a vicious diatribe about the international Jewish conspiracy and ended by a rant about taking back Jerusalem, even if it took 200 years. The last half of that journey home was not pleasant.

I could give you dozens more, especially as my best friend is no married into a Muslim family and I have worked with many Muslims. So begging your pardon, I'm more sceptical about their intentions, sceptical though, not paranoid.

@ Rod Robertson,

I hear what you are saying, but have you noticed how ISIS have behaved towards non muslims, in particular the Yazidis?

Please compare & contrast the 1st. video and it's analysis and what was happening on the 2nd. video!

The jihadi warriors on the battle field are seeking martyrdom and it's reward of unlimited sex with 72 perpetual virgins!

islam is a totalitarian political ideology with a supposed divine sanction!

Think of it as the divine wind/kamikaze X ????????????????
Which is attacking on multiple fronts and is very unconventional warfare.

Islamic State: "We will conquer your Rome, break your crosses, and enslave your women, by the permission of Allah"

link

O Americans, and O Europeans, the Islamic State did not initiate a war against you, as your governments and media try to make you believe. It is you who started the transgression against us, and thus you deserve blame and you will pay a great price. You will pay the price when your economies collapse. You will pay the price when your sons are sent to wage war against us and they return to you as disabled amputees, or inside coffins, or mentally ill. You will pay the price as you are afraid of travelling to any land. Rather you will pay the price as you walk on your streets, turning right and left, fearing the Muslims. You will not feel secure even in your bedrooms. You will pay the price when this crusade of yours collapses, and thereafter we will strike you in your homeland, and you will never be able to harm anyone afterwards. You will pay the price, and we have prepared for you what will pain you.

Milites:
Your anecdotal accounts are persuasive evidence of the darkness of the human condition but neither of the two people you cited has likely done any physical act to back-up their angry opinions or convictions. I have encountered similar opinions and beliefs in both Muslims and non-Muslims. When I encounter such I am alarmed and repulsed by such hate speech but I do not think that they are agents of a coming apocalypse. They are people. Approach such people with caution and prudence and as you say be skeptical but not paranoid of what they say.
Tony58:
Perhaps I have not been clear in my above points and if so I apologize. You will get no argument from me that IS is bad, very very bad. IS deserves to be declaimed in public debate and destroyed by military or police action wherever it is found. In fact, I would widen the net to include all radical and violent Islamic organizations which are directing their violence outward towards innocents.
However IS is between 15,000 and 25,000 light infantry with some but very limited heavy weapons which they can reasonably be expected to use. To be sure they are vicious and violent and they target Muslims and Non-Muslims alike. They slaughter and revel in that butchery.
But there are organizations all over the globe that do the same and the West is not in an hysterical state about them. In India tens of thousands of Christians are being killed by Hindi mobs in the north east of the sub-continent and in South Asia Rohingya Muslims are enduring a slow genocide by the Burmese. At no time has the West suggested war with India or Burma/Myanmar have they? All I am saying is that the Western political elites and media seem to single out Islamic Jihadists for a special kind of treatment and a sort of siege mentality is growing in the West making organizations such as IS seem far more dangerous than they really are from a global perspective.
I quote from your quote above the following:

You will pay the price as you are afraid of travelling to any land. Rather you will pay the price as you walk on your streets, turning right and left, fearing the Muslims. You will not feel secure even in your bedrooms.

Such talk as the lecturer Clare Lopez uses in your above-posted video only serves to heighten the fear of the West and inflates the Jihadis' image and reputation. It plays into their hands and abets their cause. I do not understand why we do this.
Radical Islam is a totalitarian organization and at least on the surface so is all Islam – "Islam" means submission. But so is the Catholic Church and every corporation I've encountered to date. The military is a totalitarian structure too. Why do we not single out these organizations for criticism and reformation? Because at least in the case of corporations and the military such totalitarian structures serve our interests. Do we quake in fear at Japanese corporations which are dominated by the philosophy of Bushido (which spawned the notion of the 'Divine Wind' almost a thousand years ago?
Islamic totalitarianism is limited by effective countervailing forces in most of the Islamic World. Radical Islam seeks to destroy or ignore those forces and so is dangerously out of balance and threatening.
The greater harm is when we apply such out of proportion reaction to the wider Muslim population and wrongly treat them as the radicals we hate and fear. This prepares the soil for the germination of many more radical seeds and will only worsen our problems down the road.
In conclusion, IS must be fought and defeated. The West needs the Muslim world to do the heavy lifting in such a conflict. It is unwise to alienate the people we are going to ask to risk their lives to defeat IS. It is counterproductive to raise the reputation of IS through our own hysteria and demoralize those who will have to fight them before the battle begins. What is needed is a calm and calculated approach to defeating first IS and then all of violent, radical Islam by a wide spectrum of means, only one tool being military conflict.
Rod Robertson

anecdotal accounts are persuasive evidence of the darkness of the human condition

It probably has been that way since Day 1 all thru the evolution of the creature known a "Human" on the planet Earth …

I like the tone of this discussion. Hopefully this kind of reasoning together is going on everywhere, increasingly, and the fruit of it will be level-headed action toward cooperation with all engaged in bringing an end to the conflicts and dangers of militant fanatics of all stripes. Their differences are immaterial. Their violence is what must be addressed. Beliefs, even expressed, without violence accompanying those expressions of hatred, are not to be punished beforehand. So any and all demonstrations of solidarity without actions following suit are to be handled as public disturbances according to statue and law, nothing more. To leap to "shut the barn door" will only fan the flames higher….

Legion 4:
Well said.
YouTube link
Rod Robertson

Thanks Rod, though I'm a simple former Grunt … sometimes even I see the light …