Slightly off-topic, but still related: Over the weekend, I had a conversation with someone who had travelled a lot in China and who spoke for a few minutes about a book he had read documenting the horrors for which Mao was responsible. A few minutes later, though, he remarked that China "can only work as a single-party state" because nothing would get done, otherwise--the country was too big and the interests of the different factions and regions were too diverse for democracy to work very well. When I remarked that perhaps the Chinese and the world would be better off if China were not one country under one party, but a collection of smaller democracies, he responded: "Well, then there would be lots of conflict between them and nothing would ever get done." I take this comment as symptomatic of the way that most modern so-called liberals like to rationalize and excuse the poor behavior of the enemies of the west because they believe it shows how open-minded they are. In fact, it shows what dupes they are. On the one hand, this guy recognizes that Mao was terrible, but on the other, he chooses to defend the repressive, one-party state that Mao instigated as the only way to get things done.
Kurt | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 12:03 pm | #

So what is the solution ? We go around with a gun and anyone that greets a hello with "salam aleikum" gets shot on the spot ?

Because, I'm afraid, that's becoming the only option in at least a few European cities.

The problem is, we need to unleash physical violence in our midst, and we will get hurt in the process. Yes this is a sacrifice.

But why make the sacrifice ? Nobody wants to.
Tom | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 12:07 pm | #

I agree fully with VDH's observation that the British (so-called) intelligentsia is "unhinged."

The tile Archbishop of Canterbury has become synonymous with "Idiot of Immense Proportion." I do not understand what this blowhard expects to accomplish by denigrating the USA and its mission in the ME, but I do know that I am beyond caring to understand. Williams is as much an enemy of civilization as Zawahiri.
Peter Boston | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 12:40 pm | #

Theres nothing compassionate about encouraging an enemies barbarism with appeasement.

Thats akin to luring a criminal with unlocked doors, knowing full well that you'll have no choice but to kill him once he comes in.
SteveH | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 12:40 pm | #

Your friend isn't unusual, Kurt. How many people who scream bloody murder about alleged (or actual) election irregularities in the US don't have any problem fawning over Castro, who has never subjected himself to a real election?

I know the Orwell quote is attributed, but he did say somewhere that pacifism is an idea that can be held only in countries with strong navies. Mutatus mutandis, the same holds true today.

Israelis are all over the lot on politics but there are few actually Israeli pacifists. If there were a lot, soon there wouldn't be any Israelis.
Alex Bensky | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 12:41 pm | #

What makes a man of religion like His Arses, Rowan Williams, the expert on foreign policy, diplomacy, and himself omniscience besides? Where does the humility and humbleness go with a man of the cloth? And why should we pay attention to him?

Remove the might of the West which stands behind the man, he so disdained, set him free among his new friends the barbarians.
always right | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 1:20 pm | #

There is no law under the law of the jungle except eat or be eaten. However, to be successful with that, one must be immensely clear and highly accurate about what is, what can be, and what must be (which, by the way, is the foundation of any morality worthy of its name). When you have a raving beast coming at you, you don't negotiate with it or submit to it, you kill it and get on with living. There could be no more moral act than that.

The Islamics are insisting on our submission to the law of the jungle. We must recognize that fact and deal with it accordingly. They must either give up the law of the jungle and join the civilized world or expect the law of the jungle to be applied to them with great clarity. There is no middle ground.
A. Rational Human | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 1:55 pm | #

So let me see if I understand this problem: In the late 60's western women ranted at their men about being treated unfairly, burning their bras, demanding all kinds of equality, etc. while name calling those men with whom they disagreed. Fast forward 40 years and we hear these rumblings of western women who now want the men to slay this dragon come from Islam land! I must have a very twisted perspective, in some ways.

I don't see the Islamic women marching in protest over how their men treat them... Yet we are there to "liberate" these women, bring their culture into the 21st century, out of the 13th century? Sure, I know, those girls under the burka would be beaten and killed if they protested...got another argument you want to propose so that our young men do battle with those savages in turbans who have too close a relationship with goats, etc.?

Enlightened women, who wudda thunk it?

Why don't you girls just have one giant cat fight?
RJ | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 2:15 pm | #

So the Archbishop of imbecility cannot understand how a small Christian minority can be such a threat to local Islamic power structure? I guess he can neither understand how one man could have been such a threat to the local political/religion power structure in Judea 2,000 yrs ago. I think the Arch-imbecile needs to read that book on his coffee table.

Really, does he need any more proof of why his denomination the world over is declining into nothingness?

I think he is simply desperate for attention.
Wr_guy | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 2:38 pm | #

Wasn't it Marx who said when the last capitalist is hung, it will be with the rope he made?

Seems relevant with all of this wesern hand-wringing.
Your Jewish Master | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 4:15 pm | #

For years white American males have been derided, scorned, accused, abused, and in some quarters, thought to be obsolete. Media portrays them as stupid, lazy, loud mouth assholes that must be made fun of. All of this is a concerted effort to create doubt about the Western Culture they created and nurtured.

Sadly, self serving American women help to perpetuate this myth. They are, in fact, the best example of useful idiots.

Not to worry, Doc. True American white males are still the most feared fighters on the planet. And with good reason. Even the US govt shakes with fear when confronted with the "Gun Culture." As well they should.

It is certainly ironic that a bunch of rednecks with guns stands between American women and the forced wearing of burkas.

Ironic, maybe, but the redneck culture is our culture, and is responsable for the elevation of women to their current status in America.

Go ahead girls, sharpen your knives, a let the laughing begin. However, when American white males are the last ones standing, you will be standing behind them.
Oracle of Delaware | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 4:49 pm | #

If you have time, take a look at my Blog. I address illegal immigration and Islam.
Bill Mc | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 5:03 pm | #

dupes like this idiotic canterbury fella were long ago brainwashed by the postmodernists into believing that if they became more counter-culturish they'd attract new domestic adherents and even win over some non-western/non-christians.

instead, they diminished their own integrity, lost respect of domestic true adherents, and gained no new believers from either the ranks of the counter-culturish/atheistic disbelievers or the third worlders --

all of whom have much more respect for true believers like Pope JPII.

rowan williams reminds me of many of my fellow ny'ers - the upper west side atheistic Jews.

williams and these laspsed Jews would rather have the respect of the editors of the nytimes than follow the basic tenets of their scripture.

they'd rather follow the fashionable nonsense of the last century than the eternal wisdom of the preceding 30.
reliapundit | Email | Homepage | 11.26.07 - 9:15 pm | #

It's p.c. now to view America in the same light as one would a wife beater, with his lust for "power and control." (stats on female violence actually negate the myth that the male has cornered the market on violence, should the feminists want to look into it.) The disintegration and feminization of the culture obviously go hand in hand and it's refreshing to see a few angry white males here. (diversion programs for alleged wife abusers are very often facilitated by feminists who greatly enjoy their power and control over their "students.") Aggression has its' place in the scheme of things. Self defense isn't tyranny. Men aren't wife beaters as a group nor are women w/o aggression- and the archbishops' pacifism is deadly.
Katina | Email | Homepage | 11.27.07 - 12:07 am | #

the Archbishop should read the book of Joshua...one of the most violent books of the bible, and a total refutation of Christian pacifism. Unlike Allah, God is slow to anger, but when He gets down to business, He kicks butt.
tsebring | Email | Homepage | 11.27.07 - 12:23 am | #

"When we are finally cornered and must allow our own barbarism to surface to combat theirs head to head..."

The idea that we were always somehow virtuous souls in the past is laughable. Western Civ has always STRIVED to be democratic, open and all that good stuff we were taught in Civics class. After the fact we revise the war to read that we had some noble cause but the real truth is that our existence or someone whose cause was close to ours was threatened by an external or even internal enemy. To face that enemy we went positively MIDIEVAL on their asses. We bomb the crap out of them until they are the ones who SUBMIT to our victory. We kill them and theirs until they FEEL and KNOW they are defeated. That is how we won the wars in the last century. Dresden, Berlin, Hiroshima, Nagasaki were the answers to the questions they asked of us - The Blitz, Pearl Harbor, Bataan, The Philipines, Nanking and so many others. The answer was we could be as barbarous as they or more so.

As in the movie Independence Day, in my fav scene, the weird doc who has studied the aliens for years and is now in the grip of the surviving one. The POTUS asks it, "What do you want of us?" It's answer, "Die, Die!" Which is my answer to those who wish our submission or death.
Robohobo | Email | Homepage | 11.27.07 - 12:41 am | #

The Archbishop of Canterbury is welcome to die for his principles. In fact, I encourage him to get on with it. Me - I'd rather abandon my principles and stay alive. Easier to reform than to resurrect.
Bugs | Email | Homepage | 11.27.07 - 3:25 pm | #

You're right. We need to confront the juggernaut of Islamism.

When do we attack Saudi Arabia? Heck, forget attacking them, how about cutting all economic ties with them? I'd even settle for prohibiting the President from walking around holding hands with members of their royal family.

How about it, brave boys? Gonna attack the problem at its roots?
DocAmazing | Email | Homepage | 11.28.07 - 2:29 am | #

I see that you strongly agree that sacrifice is key to victory.
So, two simple questions: aside from forfeiting civilization for requisite savagery, what exactly are you, personally, willing to sacrifice? What have you sacrificed thus far?
voltaire | Email | Homepage | 11.28.07 - 9:44 am | #

"I must have a very twisted perspective, in some ways."
Ya think?
Gus | Email | Homepage | 11.28.07 - 2:08 pm | #