Trump takes a calculated risk

User avatar
cassowary
Posts: 4118
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 11:30 pm

Re: Trump takes a calculated risk

Post by cassowary » Sun Jan 19, 2020 7:33 am

dagbay wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 6:04 am
A good summary of the middle east power structure with a recommendation for a long term strategy for the west which is worthy of a debate. (See significant objections raised in the comments)https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/t ... d-to-know/
The problem with the article is that it failed to mention the need to keep Muslims out of our infidel countries.

That is the least that we must do. Poland is doing that and is condemned for it. Recently, India passed a law allowing only non Muslim refugees to enter India and is also condemned by leftist parties courting the Muslim vote.

It is difficult for democracies to stop Muslim immigration for fear of losing votes from their Muslim population.

It seems dictatorships are better at dealing with the Muslim problem than democracies. But they go too far for my tastes and sensibilities.
The Imp :D

User avatar
Milo
Posts: 2691
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2016 10:14 pm

Re: Trump takes a calculated risk

Post by Milo » Wed Jan 22, 2020 9:22 am

dagbay wrote:
Sun Jan 19, 2020 6:26 am
Milo wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 11:53 am
dagbay wrote:
Sat Jan 18, 2020 6:04 am
A good summary of the middle east power structure with a recommendation for a long term strategy for the west which is worthy of a debate. (See significant objections raised in the comments)https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/t ... d-to-know/
I would sum it up as, 'it isn't working so keep doing it'.

The problem is engaging with Islam at all, when engaged, Islam parasitically attaches itself and degrades the other culture. Islam has seldom conquered a territory that anyone else wanted, its empire mostly consisted of backwaters and desert.

IOW, Islam's greatest strength is as a parasite.

The more we engage Islam, even through 'surgical strikes', the more we empower it.

The big factual mistake is where it says, "their oil money buys military equipment that they are not shy about using on others". Depends who the "others" and "their" are but many would think of Muslim states making war on other Muslim states. When it comes to Muslims slaughtering their own population there is no shyness but when it comes to war between states, Muslims are blushing maidens. When wars have come about in the ME, they are initiated by statest regimes, such as Hussain's Iraq. Again, Islam creates a mindset that is venal and cowardly. Think of all the vicious rhetoric from the ME and compare it to any action. The Palestinians lob rockets, constantly spew xenophobic venom and then cower behind human shields when Israel does something about it. IS, folded every time they actually met an actual army. The more Islamic a region becomes, the less danger it is to others but the greater danger it is to itself.

When one looks at the Islamic 'golden age' one sees this too. An almost perfect correlation between the size of the Muslim population and how civilized and advanced the society is. The Muslim golden age began with societies where Muslims were the minority and as more of the population converted, it went downhill.

The article recognizes this I think but can't bring itself to say what many say or imply in the comments: Islam should be quarantined like the disease it is. No contact. Not because Islam is aggressive, in the sense of deeds, but because it is NOT.

The only long term solution to Islam is alternative energy and energy efficiency. Without the hydrocarbon revenues, Islam will collapse; individual Muslims will learn from the collapse or go down with it. That would be my recommendation.
So you suggest isolating Islamic people. How would you deal with migration then. Remember that the EU welcomes it as did Obama's US while under Trump it's curtailed but still going.
Furthermore what should one do when they boarder with Islam? You may get to test your theory when the Muslim enclave in Spain asserts itself further.
What I wrote was aspirational. Of course few politicians in the developed world would simply ban Muslim immigration. Unfortunately they probably should. Indeed Muslim immigration to non-Muslim lands was haram for most of Muslim history!
A Muslim who is born and raised in a Muslim country where he consciously and subconsciously absorbs the laws, values and teachings of Islam, grows up into a young person who is aware of the customs of his religion, following its path and is led by its guidance. On the other hand, a Muslim who is born, and brought up in a non-Muslim country demonstrates the influence of that environment very clearly in his thoughts, ideas, behaviour, values, and etiquette unless his Lord helps him. This un-Islamic influence is seen more in the second generation of those who have migrated to non-Muslim countries.

This was the reason for Islam's view on at-ta'arrub ba'd al-hijra as reflected in many ahadith. At-ta'arrub ba'd al-hijra literally means "becoming shorn of one's percepts of faith after migrating [to city]," and technically, it means leaving an environment where you could follow Islam and moving to a place where you maybe prone to not following Islam. Such a migration is counted as one of the major sins.
https://www.al-islam.org/a-code-of-prac ... -countries

I have mentioned Canada's immigration system before, where we look at it from the point of view of how immigration will benefit us, leaving a small quota for refugees etc. Because of this, our immigrants are mostly well educated or wealthy. This mitigates the threat considerably. Such a system is also politically doable, although not easily these days!

As to borders, we just need to get a lot pickier about traffic with Muslim societies. Again, few if any will just do that but again border traffic should be addressed from the viewpoint of how it will benefit the country people are traveling to.

My country ended a policy that did not require passports for travel between Canada and the US. As I live in a major tourist destination, I saw a drop in quantity after that but a big increase in quality, (people with passports tend to be better quality of people) which I think is the way to go.

Post Reply