To separate or not, thats the question

Submitted by Frank Oddersborg (Denmark), Feb 11, 2006 at 19:24

I'll say if we separated us from each other with less interaction it would indeed cause far more instability and chances for a "clash of civilizations ", would in the end be a self propriety prophecy.

It's far easier to wage war against "animals and inhuman beings" than "other humans", because a war on such principles would be a fight for survival of "the human race".
Such a war wouldn't be over when one side got the upper hand; it would last till the very eradication of the enemy.

War is the last political mean you have in a conflict and should be avoided until all other means have been tried over and over again.
Of cause politicians uses the threat of war as a part of their rhetoric.

The threats of holy war against Denmark are so far only a spoken threat. Many of those who have threaten Denmark with holy war, lacks diplomatic connections to set forth complaints and political statements other than threats.

Also those who threats by using crafty rhetoric, have among them followers with very little if any education to comprehend anything but issues in black and white. You may call the narrow minded, and so they are by our higher standards.

Last, some local warlords, religious leaders and corrupt governments needs something to gather a lager group to gain more power or move peoples attention from other problems. This can be gained by pointing fingers at "enemies of the true faith" and seeking a comfortable low level which everybody can understand.

Just because Muslims leaders seek the lowest common denominator e.g. are threatening with holy war, doesn't mean that we (the west) must set forth some threats. As they already know about our superior military force, they are scared...it only took us 800 hours to conquer Iraq.

IF WE DID:
If we separated us from each other and removed all troops from the Middle East this is what would happen.
Soon most of the Arabic countries would attack Israel. In this conflict Israel would use its nukes on the lager countries with industry, but in the end be wiped out anyway.

After that the war would continue, now with the largest for the region stabilising countries crippled by the nukes, resulting in victory for the most fanatic fraction.

After that there would be one huge fanatic unstable country in the Middle East, with nuclear capability beyond the present capability of Israel – I guess you all know what will happen next.

What we can do now:
We can stick together in the west and step up our efforts to stabilising the Middle East as in balance lies a safe future:
1.Step up the cartoon conflict, till we reach a level where the Muslims countries themselves calm down the situation, as we cant being a western decadent and infidel society.
2.Give the Palestinians their own country.
3.Make sure the Iranians don't get nuclear capability (eventually let USA bomb the shit out of them).
4.After the next major terror attack on any western country conquer Syria or Jordan.

What you think of my proposal?

---

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".