Every week on Monday morning, the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher’s Forum with short takes on a major issue of the day, the culture or daily living. This week’s question: What Should Western Response Be To The Attacks In France, If Any?
Simply Jews: I shall use as a starting point a precise example of what the Western response should not be. It was helpfully provided by one of the more moronic representatives of the Guardianistas, one Simon Jenkins, concerned most of all about possible damage to Western democracy as a result of new laws, new controls, new additions to the agenda of illiberalism.
There is no need for new laws/controls/etc. The West has enough legal, law enforcement, intelligence and military tools in its disposal, the only problem the West has is with the will and the readiness to use them. First of all, the West should pound into the ground the many heads of the militant Islamism – Al Qaeda, Taliban, ISIL (IS), Hezbollah, Bokko Haram, Hamas and all its other guises.
As long as all or even part of the above continue to exist, providing rich and fertile grounds for the so-called “lone wolf” growth, there wouldn’t be a chance to destroy the domestic terrorism.
And then will come the second stage: integration. The choice that must be offered to the adherents of the militant Islam in Europe and US should be simple: accept the laws of the land or move to a place where the law of the land suits you. Which is elsewhere.
The Noisy Room: My answer to ‘What should the Western response be to the attack in France, if any?’ is a mixture of responses from Allen West and from Ralph Peters.
1. Accept that we are in a war with Islamist terrorists.
2. Name the enemy – Islamist terrorists/Jihadists.
3. Know that we cannot continue to make our culture and values subservient to others.
4. We have to reconsider who we allow into the US and who can stay here. We also need to profile.
5. Get the lawyers out of the way and off the battlefield.
6. Accept that there will be collateral damage and don’t apologize for it.
7. No nation building or rebuilding.
8. Do not just ‘try’ to hold ground.
9. Go wherever the terrorists are and kill them. Try to exterminate them with prejudice.
10. When you leave a war theater, actually leave.
11. Leave behind smoking ruins and grieving widows. War means killing and breaking things. Accept it.
12. If in 5 or 10 years, the enemy even thinks of raising his head, go back and do it all over again. Finish it.
13. Never send American troops into a war that you do not intend to win.
14. We win, they lose and no soldier is left behind.
15. We don’t make deals with the enemy, no matter the immediate cost. The long term cost will be far worse.
If we do these things, France and the rest of Europe, will benefit and will finally have an example they can follow.
I think that about covers it. Any questions?
The Independent Sentinel: Curtail any Muslim immigration from terrorist countries. Stop using GITMO as the terrorist farm team.
Tighten surveillance on radical Muslims and Mosques. Move to arrest any Muslims returning from fighting with ISIS or al-Qaeda or from any known terrorist hotbed. Put the words “jihad” and “radical Islam” back into the FBI and Army manuals and use the words in speeches.
Change the rules of engagement and start capturing some of these terrorists for the purposes of interrogation. I’d immediately announce that I was leaving a residual force of 10,000 in Afghanistan. Stop aid to Yemen and other terrorist countries like Gaza until they come up with a plan to fight terrorism. Meet with al-Sisi of Egypt and re-establish that relationship after I met with Netanyahu and re-established that relationship.
Send weapons to the Peshmerga and tell the Iraqi government to pound salt. Iran’s Revolutionary Guards wouldn’t be my boots on the ground and I’d end those talks immediately. Instead, I’d meet with Congress about adding new sanctions. Talk about the need to stop the genocide in the Middle East and try to actually form a real coalition with allies, not with other terrorists.
I’d declare war on radical Islam, sit down with my generals and develop a comprehensive plan to defund them to start and all options would be on the table.
The Razor: It’s difficult to consider what the western response to the attacks in France that killed 18 innocents, considering we’re still waiting for the response to the downing of Malaysian Airlines flight 17 over Ukraine that killed 298. It does pose a bit of a dilemma since it’s impossible to convert to Islam AND Russian Orthodox at the same time, though if anybody could do it the Europeans can.
I have been asked what I think the West should do in response to the incidents. In preface I should mention that I object to the framing. I do not believe there is a “West” in any meaningful sense. Whom does it include? Western Europe, the British Commonwealth, Canada, the U.S., Japan, and Israel? More? Less? I think that the term was originally coined to distinguish between Greece on the one hand and the Persian Empire on the other and was resurrected at the turn of the last century to unite the United States with the older, presumably more sophisticated United Kingdom and Continental Western Europe. After World War I, it received new currency to tie the United States to Western Europe against Russia and its satellites. I think that distinction has largely lost its meaning and is no longer helpful to the United States.
However, I’ll divide my response into two questions. What should we (the United States) do? What should the countries of Europe do?
I don’t think we should do anything. France has its own distinct issues, quite different from ours. France is quite capable of dealing with its own problems and its citizens need to decide what response if any is appropriate.
What should the countries of Europe do? They really have only three alternatives. They can push their Muslim populations farther away possibly alienating and radicalizing them in the process, they can do nothing and determine that occasional mass murders by radical members of that population are an acceptable risk, or they can take affirmative steps to integrate their Muslim populations more closely into their societies.
I think it is up to the citizens of those countries to decide what kind of countries they wish to be. My preference would be that they accept their Muslim populations whether citizen or resident, not relegating them to second class status as is too frequently the case but that’s not a decision for me, an American, to make. They should do as they think best in the full knowledge that whatever they decide will have implications.
Ask Marion: The Western nations, minus the US, made a big stride forward in standing up to Islamic terrorism on Sunday in Paris as their leaders walked arm in arm in unity. And the French Prime Minister declared war on radical Islam.
And I’m with Judge Jeanine Pirro… The US (And the Rest of the Western World) Must Arm Muslims Fighting Extremists ‘To the Teeth.’
Americans should be more than concerned; they should be frightened at the weak kneed reaction of our president to this latest terror attack as the rest of the world is finally waking up. Americans need do their homework. Why isn’t our president in Paris today? He certainly had plenty of time to fly to and vacation in Hawaii for the holidays. Are we still paying money to the Muslim Brotherhood? Hillary Clinton said back in 2011 that we were reaching out to the Brotherhood and just recently she said we needed t0 be more tolerant of our enemies; reason alone that she should be out of the 2016 presidential race. And let’s not forget Hillary’s aide with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and al Qaeda.
America is now suffering from electing a president they didn’t vet and instead chose to ignore all the warning signs. Hopefully we will not be that foolish again, for the battle against radical Islam is a battle that the West must win and our leadership doesn’t even see interested in participating!
The Right Planet: I don’t honestly know what sort of coherent and decisive response can be delivered by the Western World if they steadfastly refuse to acknowledge they have a problem with Islamic terrorism. The stance many Western leaders assume is to bury their collective heads in the sand when it comes to the subject of Muhammadanism, i.e., Islam. The refusal by many Western leaders, especially President Barack Obama, to admit Jihad is codified into Islamic law, and that the works of Muhammad contained in the Hadith, Siri and Koran greatly influence the actions and plans of Islamic terrorists, is an exercise in either lethal incompetence or villainous treason. I’m just not going to mince words here.
I have seen video after video of Islamic terrorist groups of both Shia and Sunni extraction shouting, “Allah U’ Ahkbar!,” as they commit their murderous rampages. Yet I hear my own leaders telling me it has nothing to do with Islam. Please, do not insult my intelligence. To me, the point is not to condemn everyone who may call themselves a “Muslim.” The point is to understand how Islamic ideology inspires so many who do call themselves “Muslim” to commit barbarous acts against anyone who does not submit to the severity and ruthlessness of Muhammadanism.
Laura Rambeau Lee, Right Reason: Following this past week’s attacks, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls declared that France is at war with radical Islam. Heads of state from many nations across Europe and the Middle East came together in unity against the attacks, joined by millions of people carrying signs says Je Suis Charlie – We are Charlie. The Obama Administration was pathetically absent from Sunday’s show of solidarity against these attacks. Attorney General Eric Holder went to Paris but did not participate in the march of unity with the other nations. Instead he appeared on the many Sunday talk shows. When asked if we are at war with radical Islam, he could not bring himself to state what has become obvious to the rest of the civilized world. Utilizing the Obama administration’s tired narrative, he declared we are at war with terrorists who commit heinous acts and who use a corrupted version of Islam to justify their actions.
In the aftermath of the massacres, we are discovering the Kouachi brothers were known to United States, British, Yemeni, and French intelligence. The younger brother served 18 months in prison in France after being convicted on charges of terrorism in 2008. Both brothers were on the no fly list. We knew one and possibly both brothers received training in Yemen in 2011 with Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). There they met Anwar al-Awlaki, the American Muslim preacher killed in a drone strike ordered by President Obama in 2011. Let’s not forget, Al-Awlaki was also behind the Ft. Hood shootings committed by U. S. Army Major and “Soldier of Allah” Nidal Hasan. It makes me wonder why there was no international outpouring of concern or unity then. It appears the French lost interest in their surveillance of the Kouachi brothers in spite of their history of terrorist connections.
The Obama Administration is attempting to frame this incident as an attack on free speech. This was not an attack on free speech, it was an attack on those who chose to blaspheme the prophet Mohammed, and as President Obama has told us, “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.” We must not let them redirect our focus from the threat of radical Islamic terrorism. We must not try to understand why they are committing these acts of terror, or empathize with them, as former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has said. We need to understand that sometimes evil just is, and it must be annihilated.
It appears we had the intelligence. It appears we shared the intelligence. And yet, we continue to see these attacks being committed at an alarmingly increasing number with better planning and organization. The Western response should be focused on increased surveillance, more intelligence gathering by capturing and questioning those found to be involved with al Qaeda, ISIS, ISIL or any other variant of these radical Islamic groups, and being proactive instead of reactive in the fight against radical Islam. We must declare CAIR a terrorist organization and prohibit them from having access to and directing how we train our national security agency personnel in their investigations of terrorist threats.
Here in the South we have these nasty insects called fire ants. They live in colonies built upon mounds of sand. If you happen to step in one unaware they will climb up your body by the hundreds without you feeling a thing. Then some silent signal is given and all of them will bite in unison, causing incredible pain. My biggest fear is these radical Islamists are planning some nationwide or even worldwide terror event, and like the fire ants, are coordinating to synchronize these events to happen simultaneously.
Well, there you have it!
Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the week’s nominees for Weasel of the Week!
And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.
It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.