Once again the issue of what the West is actually fighting and against and how to describe it rises to the forefront. The Tundra Tabloids has repeatedly pointed out that the Obama administration chooses not to link Islam -not from ignorance or ‘PC’ restrictions- to jihadist activity, because their highly failed policy supposedly strives to delegitimize these Muslims in that what they are doing does not represent mainstream Islam.
Gen. Petraeus: Sorry Mr.President but you’re
getting a bit hard to hear, and please don’t speak up
Such a policy flies in the face of common sense and reason, for the Koran, Sunna and the Hadiths not only validate what they are doing, all four schools of orthodox Islam having nothing negative to say about it either, and in many cases dovetail with the jihadists’ own views. The problem is Islam, pure and simple, and not addressing that connection only allows for more jihadis to pick up the sword of jihad and follow in their warped prophet’s footsteps.
General Petraeus is not an idiot, nor an ideologue like his commander in chief, and is addressing the enemy in the same way the commander in chief and commander of US armed forces would/did define the enemy they were fighting in WWII, the Nazis, or National Socialism. Islam is no different, other than having significantly more adherents.
Lets face facts, it’s the numbers that are the main worry here, if Islam was only a small insignificant cult of followers, the overwhelming majority of western leaders would be looking at it, and the problems it’s creating in another light altogether. No one said it would be easy, but Islam has to be treated as a defective ideology, and the commanders put in charge of waging war on these jihadists, have to use strategies that probe Islam’s many weaknesses and use effective policies to defeat it.
In much the same way, while the military is doing battle against the weapon carrying jihadists on the battlefield, civilian government has to wage war against the stealth jihadists, like those within the Muslim Brotherhood network, like CAIR and ISNA and others. Not allowing them any advances in promoting their Islamic agenda of Islamization of US/western society is a must and is even more important than the battle the military is carrying out in Afghanistan and in Iraq and elsewhere.
Perhaps Petraeus gets that, or at least, the TT hopes that he does, as well as the Republicans set to take power from the Democrats in November. Remember, it’s up to US citizens to remind and/or educate their elective representatives about the high stakes here, and what needs to be done. KGS
The Washington Times: The White House‘s official policy of banning the word “Islam” in describing America’s terrorist enemies is in direct conflict with the U.S. military‘s war-fighting doctrine now guiding commanders in Iraq andAfghanistan.
John O. Brennan, President Obama’s chief national security adviser for counterterrorism, delivered a major policy address on defining the enemy. He laid out the White House policy of detaching any reference to Islam when referring to terrorists, be it al Qaeda, the Taliban or any other group.
But Army Gen. David H. Petraeus, the man tapped by Mr. Obama as the new top commander in Afghanistan, led the production of an extensive counterinsurgency manual in December 2006 that does, in fact, tell commanders of a link between Islam and extremists.
The Petraeus doctrine refers to “Islamic insurgents,” “Islamic extremists” and “Islamic subversives.” It details ties between Muslim support groups and terrorists. His co-author was Gen. James F. Amos, whom Mr. Obama has picked as the next Marine Corps commandant and Joint Chiefs of Staff member.
Mr. Brennan on May 26 told an audience at the Center for Strategic and International Studies that “describing our enemy in religious terms would lend credence to the lie propagated by al Qaeda and its affiliates to justify terrorism, that the United States is somehow at war against Islam. The reality, of course, is that we have never been and will never be at war with Islam. After all, Islam, like so many faiths, is part of America.”
In a speech that also severed the Obama administration from PresidentGeorge W. Bush‘s “war on terror,” Mr. Brennan also said: “The president’s strategy is absolutely clear about the threat we face. Our enemy is not terrorism because terrorism is but a tactic. Our enemy is not terror because terror is a state of mind and, as Americans, we refuse to live in fear. Nor do we describe our enemy as jihadists or Islamists because jihad is holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam meaning to purify oneself of one’s community.”