Yes, another council of concerned dignitaries will solve all of our ills! So all we have to do is resolve the Arab-Israeli thing and change almost every single government in the Muslim world. Should take a week or two...
Well that was subtle. As for the premise:
'They say that the critical symbol of discord is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict which, along with Western military interventions in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan, contributes significantly to the growing sense of resentment and mistrust that mars relations among communities.
"Moreover, the perception of double standards in the application of international law and the protection of human rights is increasing resentment and the sense of vulnerability felt by many Muslims around the globe," the report says.'
I have a few issues with this view. First, the Israel thing is a result of the failure of the Arabs/Muslims to manage their own interests, since they had plenty of opportunity in the first 10 years of the existance of Israel to obliterate it, and they couldn't pull it off. It looks like the Iranians are gearing up to directly join the effort to wipe out the only true democracy in the ME, so stay tuned for the end result.
I won't touch Iraq, except to say that nobody forced the locals to start slaughtering each other as soon as the Baathists were overthrown, and the fact that they're doing so is NOT the Americans' fault.
Afghanistan. Well, we could have ignored a blatant terrorist training base and the government that supported it, but strangely that doesn't seem like a viable option. The same people who carp about "Western military intervention" don't seem to make note of the attempts to rebuild the country and give it a functional government. What exactly is the message we're supposed to come away with here?
In the past I've advocated just smashing things as a warning to cease and desist. This has been frowned upon by many as being counter-productive in the long run, and I have been able to see their perspective. Increasingly I'm not convinced I'm wrong.
If trying to change governments in what we perceive to be the best interest of the subject peoples is just going to generate charges of, well whatever you can imagine, then WHY SHOULD WE BOTHER?
Leaving them be is a bad idea, since we're obviously despised as the infidel pigs that we are, so a little power projection can convince them that the Crusader-Zionist conspiracy is best left unprovoked.
Islam as a religion isn't a particular threat to Western society. However, unlike Christianity, there is no "render unto Caesar what is Ceasar's" in the Koran, so there is no possibility of the separation of church and state. Turkey has been trying it for the last 80 years or so and secularism is only held in place by the mailed fist of the Army. I think we could take a lesson from that.
I think "bridges" to the muslim world are a fine idea. You can set up access control on bridges, and if necessay blow them up to keep the Caliphate at bay. SomehowI don't think that's exactly what our "dignitaries" at the UN have in mind though...
No comments:
Post a Comment