London’s Hour of Reckoning

Ajeya,

It is very difficult to persuade muslims to give up their religion voluntarily because they have to leave their way of life, family and friends. The only way to do it is to comprehensively and continuously defeat them all over the world, use overwhelming force to crush terrorism and use economic incentives to get them to convert to any non-muslim religion of their choice.

As a starter, here are some things that can be done:

a. Defeat muslims in Israel: Take everyone in Palestinian territories like Gaza and West Bank and shift them to Iraq. Iraq is relatively underpopulated and the Palestinians are Arabs who can fit in. This will lead to a clean solution in Israel, provide an all-arab homeland to Palestinians and eliminate the Palestinian issue forever.

b. Defeat muslims in Kashmir: The US along with India puts overwhelming pressure on Pakistan to unconditionally accept the status quo, make the LOC an international border and get rid of all Jihadi apparatus in Pakistan like LeT, JeM, Hizbul etc. If the US has to use threat of military force, so be it. India should then immediately open up J&K for internal migration and encourage people from other states to move there as China has done in Tibet, with the objective of changing the demographics.

c. Defeat muslims in Chechneya: The US should give free hand to the Russians to change the demographincs in Chechneya by scattering the muslims to other parts of Russia and move Russsians in to live there. If it needs to use extreme force for that, so be it.

d. Defeat muslims in Iraq: Here the US needs support from all nations including India. In fact India can help out US in Iraq in exchange for a favorable solution in Kashmir. The US needs to seal the borders of Iraq with Syria and Iran. That can be done with manpower from India and perhaps Turkey. Then it should carpet bomb the Sunni Triangle like it did in Dresden in WW2. Once the Sunni Triangle is finished, Iraq becomes stable.

e. Defeat muslims in the west: Here the US and other western nations need to seriously tighten immigration with strict border controls. Muslim immigrants in North America and Europe should be expelled to their home countries unless they convert to a non-muslim faith. Muslim citizens should be monitored closely, especially in mosques to make sure that they do not create trouble.

f. Defeat muslims in general: Here US should use religious organizations like the evangelists to join hands with other non-muslim faiths like hinduism and judaism to actively promote conversion among muslims. Special financial incentives can be offered to speed this up.

#59 by SR

{This perverse logic that employs the sins of the father argument is extremely dubious. Karma some might call it, but it is apologism in poor taste.}

Point well taken. However it is neither perverse, nor dubious ... it is simply strategy to win a war (You ``do`` think it is a war, don`t you? Or do you think it is merely a law and order situation !).

In any war you chose targets with the most payoff and minimum input, be it hard or soft targets. Unfortunately, civilians have been established since long as routine targets as you point out the historical occasions, though you can add Attlila the Hun, Alexander and so forth to the list!

What was barbarism and butchery in Attila`s times was legitimized in Hiroshima/Nagasaki, and fully accepted and condoned as a perfect war strategy. Only difference was barbarism and butchey progressing to the efficiencies of industrial scale.

Reality is that this war is not the same as any other. Soldiers don`t need to be in uniforms and boots riding on tanks, led by valiant officers with medals on their puffed up chests. This war is where one side is visible while the other invisible. Where you cannot eliminate high value targets within the enemy, as there aren`t any. Where soft targets get more payoff than hard targets (both being made legitimate, mind you). Moralizing on the issue is platitudinous.

My condolences to Londeners. It is unfortunate and loss of any innocent life is sad. But these guys didn`t start it and once it is on, they won`t stop till they bring their perceived enemies to their knees, just as exactly the same very tactic was determined to be the best way to make Japan surrender.

If you saw the faces of Bush, Blair & Co on the day, you know what I mean. The invisible side is actually winning after 4 years of ``War on Terror``.

See the gypsy queen, in a glaze of vaseline, she`ll perform on guillotine, what a scene what a scene !

Re: # 58

SR, nice to hear from you...

Yes, I am optimistic about turning the proverbial corner, because now the debate has become public and it involves the interests and the well being of the whole world and not just the United States. The United States can be a 800 pound gorilla or a whale or a grinning baboon and still will not make a difference, because now, for the first time in a long time, the issue has assumed an utilitarian scope, where the interests of the many will now outweigh the interests of the few or the one. Realism and common sense usually comes from a close proximity to danger and now, the world realizes that the time for rhetoric is over and the task at hand needs to be solved, because there is no other option.

Blair does not need to change the approach of the United States, but a more likely outcome will be that the United States will have to increasingly pay heed to the politics of multrilateralism and it will find it harder to play the ``cowboy`` on the world stage. SR, the point of the matter, and the fact is, that Islamic militancy and terrorism is no longer an American problem and that makes all the difference, because now we can hope to have a meaningful and a serious debate on the issue.

Also; please remember, that unlike the United States`, the real guardians of British interests are the British civil servants, who frame and craft policies, which all ministers follow. In Great Britain, the minsters may come and go, but the policies remain the same and I have complete faith in the British civil servants to ``get their views`` across the Atlantic and not today, but soon, you will notice a change in the American tune. :)

The possibility of the terrorists getting WMD is a very real possibility, but I can promise you that behind the curtains, strict controls would have been imposed and any nation, with such a capability, which might be considered as a risk, would have lost its sovereign control over such weapons. Just, because you do not see the smoke, does not mean there is no fire. ;)

I doubt it, if there will be a marked loss of civil liberities. Remember, we are talking about Britain and not the United States. The British ``way of life`` is very understated and calm under pressure and now, after a long time, you will see the discipline of the ``thin red line``. SR, I am hopeful, because in any crisis, if I had a choice, I would favor the British over the Americans any day of the century, because British have the stoic maturity to solve the problems and they never get emotionally unbalanced like the Americans.

Ciao

Ferozek #64: You still have not explained what the Muslims should do to end this circle of violence. Personally, I don`t think they can end it unilaterally. It requires some actions from the USA, also. You are only mentioning generics like, ``root out this evil from their societies,`` etc. Could you kindly provide some practical and workable set of steps.........

``It is for this very reason that your oft quoted ``circle of violence`` will never shrink but will continue to expand if you play a mathematical game, which justifies violence on the basis of violence itself. In fact and in deed, the circle of violence will end only if the people, who engage in the acts of violence are removed from the equation and for that to happen, force might be required when diplomatic and political entreaties fail.``

I have never justified violence on the basis of violence, or on the basis of anything else. I am only stating that age-old truth, that violence does beget more violence. I don`t approve of it. But just because I don`t approve of it, doesn`t mean it doesn`t happen

The circle will not shrink until all the players partaking in the circle are neutered. Which is exactly what I am suggesting, should be done. At the moment, there are two major players. Organizations like Al-Qaeda on one side. And the neo-con policymakers on the other side........Both seem to be using the logic you have provided, i.e. ``force might be required when diplomatic and political entreaties fail.`` Both are using force to push their agendas. However, from what I can see things are just getting worse..........Hence I don`t think excessive force is the answer........

The policy of, ``With us or against us,`` is the policy followed by both these groups. And this is a very dangerous policy. It leaves no room for people like myself, who are against both............If both these groups are not neutralized, the violence they will create will engulf all of us. Since violence begets more violence.........

This is why, I think, the wisest move UK can make, at the moment, is to get out of Iraq......This will significantly shrink its circle of violence.........It will also allow it more resources to concentrate on protecting its citizens........This is not only my view. It is the view of the British people, also..........

Some good news. If this is true, then it is an indication that sanity is returning:

``UK considering force reduction in Iraq``

A gist of the story is that British Secretary of Defence has confirmed that Britain is considering force reduction in Iraq. It is planning to reduce the number of soldiers from 8000 to 3000 by next April. No final decision has been made yet.

This report was published in The Mail of Sunday.

www.bbc.co.uk/urdu

Re: # 67 Feroz

Your perspective is interesting and I hope you turn out to be correct in your optimistic prediction about the end of this war. I am quite willing to entertain your scenario as a distinct possibility.

You conclude: {``...if I had a choice, I would favor the British over the Americans any day of the century, because British have the stoic maturity to solve the problems and they never get emotionally unbalanced like the Americans...``}

I couldn`t agree more. As you know, I have voted with my feet. After 24 years in the Land of the Free I`ve moved, with my family, to the UK based primarily on this outlook.

Now, for another quote from Churchill... He seems to be someone you admire. Let me bring to your attention what he said about Islam and Muslims at one point, and seek your comment.

Churchill, W The River War 1899

``How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

``Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen: all know how to die. But the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytising faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall [italics mine], as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.``

Best regards

...SR

zeemax Re: # 66 {``...loss of any innocent life is sad. But these guys didn`t start it and once it is on, they won`t stop till they bring their perceived enemies to their knees,...``}

Okay, I understand what you are saying, but I am not sure what your stand really is... Are you speaking as a neutral observer who is making a comment on the situation as it exists, or are you saying that what is happening is justified because they did it first so they deserve it now?

If your stance is that of a neutral observer making an objective comment, I agree with you. If your stance is one of justification then I have nothing further to say except paraphrasing Ghandhi ji that an eye for an eye will eventually lead to a world full of blind people.

...SR

PS: Good to see you back from across the River Styx to the world of the living... :)

#71 by SR

You know me well enough to know I always speak as a neutral observer. ``What goes ... goes .... what goes of my father?

Performing on a stool, we`ve got the sight to make you drool, seven virgins and a mule, keep it cool keep it cool !

zeemax #72 Sure you say you are a ``neutral observer`` on the london bombing. What makes you so confident you are neutral and not on a defender of terrorists? Time for sitting on the fence, for spitting in the plate you just ate, from is running out on people like you.

SR #70 greetings. you say you moved from the US to UK primarily because the british have a more mature outlook. That is fine, although personally after spending three decades in the US I have nothing but good things to say about this country and its wonderful people (who come from all over the world). But then...I have never been to a country I did not fall in love with immediately. And I used to travel to many countries at one time. Hell, even the one day I spent in India flew by so fast and I was just beginning to enjoy myself listending to the weird dialects I heard at red fort...

The only country I had difficulty in was Saudi Arabia where from the start you are made to feel unwelcome - even before you land, they give you a disembarkation card that has in big red letters the warning that the punishment for bringing drugs into the country is death (OK, they do that in Singapore to). In my first visit, there was this big ape there to recieve me who introduced himself as my ``protocol officer``, then checked my passport as Pakistani and asked if I was there to seek a job (which was none of his business, since he was there to help me by-pass their long immigration lines). Then I found that while the city was full of shops for luxury goods (and entire market for gold, entire shops for perfume, travel), but I could not find a single bookshop. Go to London, and Heathrow airport alone has more bookshops than what they had in the entire city. That speaks volumes for the difference in outlooks between the brits and the arabs. No wonder all these terrorist sympathizers sitting in the west dont put their money where their mouth is, and move to saudi arabia.

Re: # 70 sr
//.... After 24 years in the Land of the Free I`ve moved, with my family, to the UK based primarily on this outlook....//

SO where do you go from here? Now that islamic terrorism has arrived in UK. And it will be much worse, much much worse - because UK has been a sanctuary for islamic freaks for a long time.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/10/international/europe/10qaeda.html?hp&ex=1121054400&en=63f4d035a1e68f74&ei=5094&partner=homepage

``........``The terrorists have come home,`` said a senior intelligence official based in Europe, who works often with British officials. ``It is payback time for a policy that was, in my opinion, an irresponsible policy of the British government to allow these networks to flourish inside Britain.``
``

tahmad Re: # 74

Greetings to you too...

To say that Saudi Arabia is the pits is a gross understatement. I simply refuse to go to SA for the kinds of reasons you`ve mentioned. One day, if I live long enough, the present system in SA will be abolished and if the new system, by some miracle, is a better one, or at least not as bad, then I might consider going there for a visit. I know much about SA from people who have been close to me and have a first hand knowledge. My very first girlfriend back in the early 1970s was a Saudi citizen. She was in Fatima Jinnah Medical College, Lahore, and was from a fairly privileged family. I learnt a lot about SA from her stories. Then another friend who lives in London and grew up in an ex-pat enclave in SA tells me stories of wild parties where drinking, dancing and drugs (free flowing cocaine, heroin etc) are on a scale that dwarfs anything in American suburbia. The Saudi security apparatus, evidently, has a monopoly over the drug trade. This explains why they literally eliminate all competition. It seems that if you know the right people in the right places in SA, you are even more above the law than any Pakistani big-wig is in his country. And we know how bad that is... so you can just imagine.

As far as the US is concerned, let me once again make clear that I make a distinction between the nation and country on the one hand and the ruling elite on the other. The nation and the country I absolutely love and am loyal and sympathetic towards. I am one of them. Most of my friends and loved one are among them. All my children were born there as was my wife and her parents and their parents and grand parents. I have never felt as an outsider. My American close friends are just as close and near nd dear to me as my close desi friends. (It is utter nonesense that we cannot get as close to goras as we can with our people. Rubbish... we can and I testify.)

The nation and country includes the people at large, their norms, the daily life, the land, the culture etc. The ruling elite consists of the power structure, the big business lobby and their thugs the governmental bureaucracy. The politicians are a unique category. They are the go-betweens amongst these two groups. Their role is to pretend to be on the side of the nation and the country while in fact being the paid pimps of the ruling class. The American people in the simplicity and generocity are every bit the victims as any outsider.

Now about the misguided policy of the ruling class. Let me bring the following story that appeared in the NYT to your attention:

Al Qaeda`s Smart Bombs
By ROBERT A. PAPE

WHILE we don`t yet know who organized the terrorist attacks in London on Thursday, it seems likely that they were the latest in a series of bombings, most of them suicide attacks, over the past several years by Al Qaeda and its supporters. Although many Americans had hoped that Al Qaeda has been badly weakened by American counterterrorism efforts since Sept. 11, 2001, the facts indicate otherwise. Since 2002, Al Qaeda has been involved in at least 17 bombings that killed more than 700 people - more attacks and victims than in all the years before 9/11 combined.

...continued...

The full story is available at -- http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/09/opinion/09pape.html

Beejay and Ana:

You sagaciously pinpoint that

``true`` justice is not what is happening in iraq, afghanistan, darfur or anywhere else where there has been senseless loss of lives.

“True” justice is not simply served on a silver platter of “democracy” as many would have us believe. Each indigenous culture needs to work out its own recipe for development in the cookbook of international relations. Trying to stir up a dish of terror is NOT what I prescribe on the menu.

If that is your interpretation of my article then you have wrongly “spun” the message Im trying to weave. I realise finger-pointing at “Goras” alone is not the answer. BUT acknowledging our whole-hearted dependence to them and their magic-wand political prescriptions is part of a deeper deadlier symptom which we have to wrangle ourselves out of.

It is high-time we take off those rose-tinted ``mops`` and spectacles and peering into the double-standards of Western diktats we will ALL find dissymmetry.

Samina Shah

I do not diametrically oppose George Galloway. In fact I have a deep-seated respect for him. He expressed a heartfelt sympathy to all those who were dead/injured by the bombs in London. Like Galloway Samina I DO NOT CONDONE acts of violence aimed at innocent civilians going about their daily lives. They have not been a party to, nor are they responsible for, the decisions of their government. I do however project dismay towards the carpet-bombing of Baghdad and an indiscriminate killing of its pregnant mothers and children.

The loss of innocent lives, whether in the UK or Iraq, is precisely the result of a world imbalanced due to income inequity spread by Western hegemony. Samina you can deny it all you want but the reality pill is never a facile one to swallow.

Until there is a legally binding concerted multi-lateral effort to involve developing nation stakeholders in the negotiation and development process the status quo will linger like a deadly virus.

After the Madrid bombings, I urge the UK government to sanctimoniously shield the people in this country from harms way, as the Spanish government acted to remove its people from harm, by ending the occupation of Iraq and by turning its full attention to the development of a real solution to the wider conflicts in the Middle East.

Only then will the innocents here and abroad be able to breathe, eat, live and enjoy every ticking moment of life`s most cherished asset- that of unequivocal justice.

Re: # 68

Romair, as to the practical steps, which the Muslims can take; the foremost is to admit that Islam and its ideology has become dysfunctional and is in need of a reform.

Secondly; they need to seperate religion from politics and everything else in their lives.

Third; they need to stop appeasing wrongs committed in the name of Islam and speak out against the wrongs done in the name of Islam.

Fourth; they need to intergrate into the societies, where they live and they need to stop forcing their views upon the majority in non-Muslim nations.

Fifth; Muslims have to adapt to the 21st century and stop trying to relive the 7th century.

Sixth; they need to renounce violence.

Seventh; Muslims have to learn that world has many different interpretations and develop tolerance in deeds and not just in words.

Eight; accept the prevailing paradigm of international relations and power equations and stop trying to resist the prevailing status quo and if it is unjust, then they must resort to dialogue instead of confrontation to solve the problems.

Nine; create an awareness, within their own societies about political plurality.

Ten; stop patronizing violence as a means of political tool and glorifying it under religious pretexts.

Ciao

HP

You accurately depict how Saudi extortionists fund terrorism. They do so to try and clear their repugnant conscience thinking it will bring them salvation in the hereafter.

One day the largesse of Saudi oil and petro-dollars will dry up and this ``rentier`` monarchy will implode from quiessence. So too will many of the other Gulf states.

The House of Saud does not stand on legitimate underpinnings. For decades the Saudis have meddled in murky waters. America turns a deaf ear to such claims because Saudis bankroll a lot of Wall Street portfolios.

A marriage of ill-fated convenience HP. That is what it is.