Hawk, re: "Uh.. let's see... did either of those ideologies result in the end of civilization?
No. Not all "THREATS" actually become realities but that doesn't mean they weren't "threats." You're the one trying to argue that radical Islam is some kind of huge, scary, life changing threat that's comparable to the threat posed by Soviet/Chinese communism or German/Italian nazism/fascism. You're the one who took issue with my attribution to you of the claim that radical Islam posed an "end of civilization" threat.
So which is it? Did 1930-40s nazism or cold war communism present "end of civilization THREATS" or didn't they? Do you view radical Islam as a similarly dangerous threat, or not? How many angels can dance on a pinhead?
"So why can you can't see the obvious parallels between the Islamo-Fascist ideology and those of Nazism and Communism, all of which were aggressive, anti-democratic visions of oppression, imperialism, and human domination (slavery?), is beyond me...
You know what I'm saying is correct.. But now it more about not wanting to have to admit that you're wrong and I'm right, than it is about supporting what is necessary to avoid having hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of Americans lose their lives 5-10 years from now.
Dangerous in terms of intent, yes, but on a scale that runs from small town thugs who want to rule things to the great military powers of pre-WW11 Germany and post-WW11 Soviet Union, the radical Islamists are way down the ladder. Even if they acquire some kind of state power over the next generation they'll still be far down the power ladder and therefor not even close to posing the same threat that the Germans/Soviets posed.
For the foreseeable future the many hundreds of millions of potential Muslim soldiers that you find so threatening will never be able to mount an offensive attack against America. Their power will be limited to sniping and ankle biting those who attempt to live in their house. Why? Because there is no scientific base upon which they could spring to build the deadly weapons that could compete with ours, much less defend themselves from our wmds.
Wars of conquest now require air power and massively destructive weapons with pinpoint accuracy and satellite tracking. Drones are nice too. We may be able to fight territorial wars in the future without risking huge numbers of soldiers. It's not, therefore, about "hordes of soldiers," in fact it's about anything but massing for attacks which leave your forces vulnerable to strikes and total loss.
And no, you can't and won't be able to buy the kinds of weapons I'm talking about in any type of quantity, no matter how much oil money you have.
So face facts. Any Muslim "evil empire" will be able to threaten us with ankle biting attacks, will be able to hold us hostage to oil and will be able to stop us from occupying unless we're willing to wholesale kill them. It will not, however, be able to threaten us with invasion, defeat and occupation the way the Germans and Japanese might have if they'd been left alone to grow their nation's might and swallow up more territory.
But yeah, they're really, really nasty people with big bad plans. A lot of people are.
Don't you think? Ed |
