Can Islamism produce a second Holocaust?
Rabbi Daniel Gordis cites a recent sermon by an Atlanta rabbi, Shalom Lewis, on Rosh Hashanah:
The rabbi then noted that if there are one billion Muslims in the world, and if authorities agree that about 5 percent of them are committed Islamists who embrace terror, that means there are 50 million such people. But he addressed non-radicalized Muslims, too, people he explicitly stated were decent, committed to democracy, potential partners in building the societies in which we want to live.
Still, he said, for the most part, they’re not speaking out. “A silent partnership is no partnership. Sin is not just in the act of commission – it is also in the act of omission.... Stand up righteously or get out of the way.”
There was, of course, the critical recognition that despite the horrors of radical Islam, it is Israel that lives under the microscope. “Russia invades. Nigeria enslaves. China oppresses. Pakistan rapes. Iraq slaughters. North Korea starves. Iran nuclearizes. Syria massacres.
Venezuela plunders. Afghanistan tortures. Sudan annihilates. ISIS beheads, and Israel is the pariah state, put under the microscope by the morally noxious.”
Rabbi Lewis said we must "exterminate" radical Islam, as we annihilated Nazism. Rabbi Gordis notes that today we have neither a Winston Churchill nor FDR to lead us against an implacable adversary bent on non-Muslim civilizational obliteration.
Factor in the Palestinians: they seek an apartheid state--backed, unconscionably, by the Obama administration. Add to that the Fifth Column that Israeli Arabs increasingly resemble, hating the country they live in while supporting the forces seeking to destroy the Jewish state. Add in that Team Obama serially insults Israel, driving a wedge in a formerly secure alliance relationship, as WSJ pundit Bret Stephens writes:
The real problem for the administration is that the Israelis—along with all the other disappointed allies—are learning how little it pays to be on Barack Obama’s good side. Since coming to office in 2009, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has agreed, against his own inclination and over the objections of his political base, to (1) recognize a Palestinian state; (2) enforce an unprecedented 10-month settlement freeze; (3) release scores of Palestinian prisoners held on murder charges; (4) embark on an ill-starred effort to reach a final peace deal with the Palestinians; (5) refrain from taking overt military steps against Iran; and (6) agree to every possible cease-fire during the summer’s war with Hamas.
In exchange, Mr. Kerry publicly blamed Israel for the failure of the peace effort, the White House held up the delivery of munitions at the height of the Gaza war, and Mr. Obama is hellbent on striking whatever deal the Iranians can plausibly offer him.
Stephens notes that Israel's latest Jerusalem housing project is a calculated slap in the face of Team Obama, showing that Israel will not let itself be diplomatically bullied. He concludes:
The relationship between the Obama administration and the government of Israel is beginning to look like one of those longtime marriages you encounter all the time. Maybe you’re in one yourself. He feels, Rodney Dangerfield-like, that he gets no respect. She’d be happy to offer some—if only she could find something to respect.
BS suggests a "trial separation," with Israel foregoing the $3 billion annual subsidy it now receives from America. At one percent of GDP Israel can easily cover the $3 billion. Doing so will buy Israel needed independence from a no-longer reliable ally. Meanwhile, Egypt, Israel's new best friend, is building a barrier to curb terrorist attack in the Sinai.
Put simply, Israel, Egypt--and the US, if its leaders understood, face an enemy whose appeal easily trumps what the West can offer, as soldier-author Ralph Peters notes:
Take the profoundly un-Washingtonian step of suspending our cultural vanity to consider what jihad offers the young and adrift, the failed and embittered, or the simmering convict. Then weigh that “Allah wants you!” package against our pathetic counter-bid.
By embracing Islamist extremism and the terrorist mission, the misfit gains:
- Acceptance for the first time in his life
- A sense of belonging
- Structure (never underestimate the appeal of rigor to troubled souls)
- A comforting explanation for his failures
- Power and purpose
- Justification for hatred and his anti-social impulses
- Revenge and respect
- The thrill of torturing others and the ecstasy of killing human beings
- The prospect of fame
- Paradise, should he die on jihad, with a host of submissive virgins who cannot compare him to other, more potent, more appealing males
And what do we offer to those we hope to deter?
- A job stocking shelves at Walmart
And the bureaucrats and contractors entrusted with this mission of persuasion don’t know a single person who fits the profile of the potential recruit.
So grave dangers gather as the West dreamily dithers. The only way to persuade potential recruits to step aside is to defeat the groups & causes they seek to join. As Osama bin Laden in 2001 famously said:
“When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, by nature, they will like the strong horse”
Take advice from one who knew how to attract jihadi....
Bottom Line. We've been warned many times. History teaches that a resolute, cohesive minority often triumphs over an irresolute, diffuse majority. It will take a resolute Israel to prevent the Palestinians from delegitimizing the Jewish state. This entails keeping Uncle Sam at a diplomatic distance, at least until a new president takes office. And it will take greater Western resolve to destroy implacable enemies.
Letter from the Capitol, LFTC, Homeland Security, National Security, Foreign Policy, Conservative Politics