Thursday, July 26, 2007

Asymmetrical war? Let's Even It Out

The very popular former Bolivian Congressman Jose Brechner is having his articles translated into English.
Here is Jose's recent article on the war on terror:

Asymmetrical war? Let's even it out.
JOSE BRECHNER

Trying to appease terrorists or look for common ground – a prerequisite for opening a dialogue – is irrational. Nothing can be done to change their steadfast conviction. Indoctrinated by family, state, mosque, media, school, university, and millions of fundamentalist spokesmen that form the base structure of their societies, there is nothing that can make these people change their position that it is better to kill or die than to live.

Throughout the Islamic world, there is a blinding indoctrination that calls for conversion or submission to Islam or the destruction of the infidels. Diplomacy cannot manage this situation. The only option is war, but not a war of surgical strikes that pretend to remove the cancer without touching or damaging the other organs. The cancer is in all the organs, and they all need to be attacked. The terrorists' objectives are civilians, so the western response must also include their civilians. The Islamists will change their defiant attitude only when the West is willing to destroy the populations that sustain, protect, and applaud terrorism, and to defend itself using the same methods that were used to attack it.

Bertrand Russell said, "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubt." If the war is asymmetrical, then it is an issue of restoring its symmetry. The foremost reason for this imbalance is because the west is weak-willed. In addition to a feigned sensitivity for humankind (motivated more by political collusion than by tenderness towards its fellow man), the west fears a large-scale fire that might reduce the supply of oil. The Islamists declared war against everyone, including our elderly, women and children. The west must act the same way if it wants to put an end to the massacre. The Islamists take advantage of the humanitarian sensibilities of the "infidel" and use their civilians as human shields, but when they see that their ruse has no effect, they will tremble in fear and return to their caves.

With each passing day, the hatred of the west grows, especially towards the United States. This hatred – fruits of leftist propaganda and the sensationalist press – is opportunistic, anti-democratic and suicidal; it uses euphemisms to describe the Islamic fascists who try to justify their actions as if there were something justifiable in the murder of anyone who does not share their religion. Terrorism is never acceptable because by definition, its targets are civilians. If in more than thirty years, Arab governments have not demonstrated any interest in stopping the terrorists, it is because they are part of the plan. The jihadis who attempted to carry out the most recent thwarted attacks in London were doctors; their reason was because Salmon Rushdie had been knighted. The murderers occupy all social strata.

If the west wants to return to normalcy and establish peace on Earth, it needs to finish off Saudi Arabia, the ideological mentor and financial backer of radical Islam; Iran, the promotor of Nazism and nuclear destruction; Pakistan, if Musharraf is toppled; and that leaves others like Syria, Libya, and the insignificant Hugo Chavez, who loves to participate in conflict and looks for more relations with the Islamists to gain political and military support.

Approximately every 50 years, history teaches that psychiatrically disturbed individuals achieve high levels of power, form alliances, and look to make themselves masters of the world. Nuclear proliferation has made their motives a global cause for concern. As a result of technological advances, arms and armies are more powerful, and military conflicts result in more death and destruction. Around 50 million people died in World War Two. The current world war that we face will certainly bring much more victims. Only when the Islamists are attacked by a west committed to bombing its cities, destroying its refineries and demolishing their multi-million-dollar sources of income, and obligating them to spend the coming decades reconstructing their countries and economies, will the world live in peace for another half century

6 comments:

  1. ++

    wow.. way to say Jose'.. (thumbsup)

    ==

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jeez, lets get him citizenship and make him Fred's new Sect. of Defense.

    Papa Ray

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous3:20 AM

    Theoretically speaking, neutron bombs would leave the refineries standing.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The man is living proof that fools are fanatics, being both fanatic and fool.

    True, the West could win in a total war against Islam, but simply escalating to total war would not win it. Did Germany, Japan or North Vietnam roll over the first time their cities were bombed? Almost every population subjected to such tactics have rallied to their leaders and hardened their resolve -- what fool imagines the proud Arabs would be one of the exceptions?

    The result would be an immensely destructive war, with appalling casualties on both sides, albeit greatly more on the Islamic side. But why oh why oh why oh why? The US is already decisively defeating the terrorists, without the need to exponentially increase the expenditure of blood and treasure!

    Besides which, the USA has many more allies in the Islamic world than enemies. Some of them are corrupt, weak, inefficient allies, but even such allies are better than implacable foes. And many are not poor allies -- the Iraqis, for example, are brave, steadfast, loyal, noble allies.

    What is so wrong with winning a war the easy way?

    Stupid doesn't begin to describe it.

    --- ---
    littletinsoldier.net

    ReplyDelete
  5. Jose can you see?

    Obviously Jose Brechner knows what he's talking about... He nails it perfectly...

    Its interesting Jose is quoting from Bertrand Russell...

    (Would the seemingly excessive hubris of the Democrat party allow them to learn something from Jose?)

    Think Jose Brechner read Edward N. Luttwak's excellent, " Give War A Chance " monograph that came out in the Foreign Affairs magazine back in '99?

    ReplyDelete
  6. kipwatson wrote:

    Almost every population subjected to such tactics have rallied to their leaders and hardened their resolve -- what fool imagines the proud Arabs would be one of the exceptions?

    Ooo 00 I'm scared. Let 'em bring it!

    The result would be an immensely destructive war, with appalling casualties on both sides

    No it wouldn't. The immense casualties would be in Tehran, Riyadh and maybe Damascus. Just like in Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

    The US is already decisively defeating the terrorists

    What planet do you live on? The jihadis are growing in number hour by hour!

    without the need to exponentially increase the expenditure of blood and treasure!


    Explain just how less than a week of nuking a few capital cities in the Muslim World and at least carpet bombing Mecca, and then taking over the oil fields of Iran and Saudi Arabia (to start with) would "increase the expenditure of blood and treasure."

    the USA has many more allies in the Islamic world than enemies

    Such as?

    the Iraqis, for example, are brave, steadfast, loyal, noble allies.

    Yeah, they love us to bits! And Iraq is such a stable, powerful and democratic ally, too!

    What is so wrong with winning a war the easy way?

    Exactly! Just as Brechner proposes.

    ReplyDelete