Islam and Separation of Mosque and State

Submitted by jennifer solis (United States), Oct 29, 2007 at 18:56

There is a problem of division in the U.S. The "Right" is of the view that we are at war. The "Left" increasingly assumes we are at fault; to the point of delusions like 9-11 was self-ochestrated.

However, imagine for a moment that Islamism wins. That Shari'a law takes over the U.S. This will not ultimately happen without great protest from both the "Left" and the "Right".

Where would the U.S.'s "Moderate Muslims" fit into the picture?

I suggest that moderate Muslims are waiting to see who wins, and that they won't be terribly dissapointed to be under Theocratic Rule. While they enjoy freedoms of the West, their religious background is what they would cling to if they found themselves once again subject to their Imams and Mullahs.

With all due respect towards Dr. Pipes, hoping for moderate Muslims to "take the helm" in fighting Islamism is comparable to, should Hitler have won the war, Germans then enlisting in the U.S. military.

The Cold War ended, basically, when the Soviet Union went broke. No chance of Saudi Arabia, ergo much of Islamism, going broke. Islamism is a major means of controlling the masses in most of the Middle East, and parts of the far east.

WWII ended because of Hiroshema, Nagasaki, and the obliteration of Berlin. U.S.'s General Douglas MacCarthur wrote Japan's Constitution, which is still in effect today.

Moderat Muslims enjoy freedom and security when it is handed to them. They do not fight for it. Look at Iraq. Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have fled this burgeoning "democracy", including doctors, lawyers, engineers, the best that Iraq had to offer. It's my opinion that democracy will never be in Iraq, simply because it requires seperation of Church and State, and this will never fly wherever vast Muslim populations exist.

I think Daniel Pipes' explaination of solution to the Israel - Palestinian problem can also be applied towards Islamism. Dr. Pipes has said the Palestinians will stop terror tactics only when it no longer serves them, when it is more to their advantage to not employ terrorism. When the Palestinian's will to eliminate Israel is "crushed".

The same way, when Islamism's will to impose their dictatorial ideology through terror or "lawful" Islamism no longer serves them, when it is no longer to their advantage to do so, it will cease.

We CANNOT be responsible for "re-habilitating Iraq" - to quote Daniel Pipes. We also cannot be responsible for "re-habilitating" the religion of Islam. Neither can moderate Muslims.

We CAN employ our right to defend our nation against "Islamism". When it is no longer advantagious for Islamism to try to impose it's ideology through terrorism or any other means, when it is actually a dis-advantage for them, only then will it diminish.

Already this has been effected and effective - the U.S. took out the Taliban, and it's a mess in Afganistan, but it's certainly to their dis-advantage that they were (and still are) supporters of Islamism.

While Saddam Hussien himself was more of a student of Stalin than Islam, totalitarian Islamic rule is what controlled Iraq; Saddam posed a threat to the U.S. and Israel, not to mention surrounding countries, and he and his sons were destroyed.

Al-Quaeda is now fragmented and has been a target of the U.S., along with other various Islamic radical groups.

Hopefully, Ahmadinejad (and Hamas) is next.

Moderate Muslims just won't cut it regarding any effort on their part to come up with an alternative to Islamism. They are not capable nor is their even much of a desire on their part, with or without incentives; I believe this is because they themselves think it would be futile. They know the sad history. Muslims themselves have long been the most numerous victims of war in the name of Islam. Oddly, despite this, theocratical rule is not the anathema to them that it is to non-Muslims. Can anyone imagine the religion of Islam shouting, "Separation of Mosque and State!" ? Moderate Muslims already have an alternative to Islamism; the U.S.A.

But it was and is handed to them; if they could stand up to Islamism, come up with an "alternative Islam", they would have done so already. They haven't in England or France. Moderate Muslims go the way of "the strong horse", whether it be the enforcement of the laws of the nation they live in, or Islamism. -JS

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".