Sunday, November 15, 2009

Pablo on terrorism

Pablo at Kiwipolitico has another interesting post on terrorism. Following is the comment I posted over there. I think the war against the jihadists is far from won even though it appears we are winning the battle in Iraq and are pressing forward in Afghanistan and Waziristan.

In that measure I would say that the jihadists are losing, which is what prompted me to open the post with the quote from a veteran SOLIC professional. However, when it comes to the likes of Pakistan, the Sudan or Afghanistan, then the issue remains very much open.

A fascinating post and discussion as usual. I wish I had more time to consider and post more appropriate and well thought responses.

I disagree with the last gasp of a dying man quote but understand why you included it. Gavrip Principio, Eire, Israel, the Boer and any number of other examples during the retreat of the British empire are sufficient to demonstrate the effectiveness of terrorism as a weapon. The point is well made by the Tamils & Al Qaeda in Iraq that when the terrorists turn on their own population rather than the ruling class they are losing.

Andrew W makes a good point that politically weak governments are prone to manipulate the spectre of terrorism for their own ends.

And weak politicians simply choose appeasement over hard decisions. That is what we are seeing with Obama.

I am interested in peoples views on the Clash of Civilisations. This post is an interesting contextual first chapter but it must be leading somewhere. Personally I see jihadist terrorism as being a multi generational conflict. Until those Islamic nations have developed and educated and prosperous middle class living reasonably democratically there will be no sustained peace. Iraq represented a country much further along that path than Afghanistan which is why it was chosen. Oil and Bush unfinished business with Saddam were not sufficient reasons in and of themselves to justify war. The possibility of WMD being provided to and used by terrorists and the opportunity to provide an example democracy to the rest of the Arab world were the reasons for going into Iraq.

Leaving Afghanistan as the sole front in the war against Jihadist terrorism would mean inevitable defeat due to the nature and backwardness of the country.

imho the jihadists are trying to overthrow our Western democracy and it is legitimate for us to take the fight into countries that are not ruled democratically or at least with popular support.

So I look forward to the next chapter where Pablo develops the clash of civilisations theme, either agreeing or disagreeing or in a different direction.


Kiwireader said...

The West has a far more serious threat than jihadis to worry about. It is islamic immigration (colonisation actually), and the fact that by 2050, Europe will be majority muslim. Once great nations are now circling the drain. Such a terrible shame.

Redbaiter said...

So what exactly is the point of transferring garbage from the Kiwipolitico blog to the No Minister blog.

You think it needs duplication at the expense of No Minister original content or what??

Adolf, you really need a clean out of your contributors mate. Too many of them just don't seem to have a damn clue.

Psycho Milt said...

You seem to define "garbage" as anything other than your own unsupported assertions of authoritarian conservative values. It's not a definition that's widely shared, if it's shared at all.

What we're looking at here is a No Minister author deciding to bring his readers' attention to an interesting discussion at another blog, in case they hadn't noticed it for themselves (for instance, I hadn't). It's entirely legitimate practice, but if you disagree, feel free not to practice it on your own blog.

Anonymous said...

One of the few good things left about NZ - is that, somehow, Wales has had more terrorism in the last 100 years than NZ. Not to mention Quebec.

Pablo said...

Thanks SageNZ, for the link. i have continued the discussion over on the comments thread in KP.

What I did not do is centrally address your "Clash of Civilisations" query. I will have to reflect on it some more simply because I am undecided whether or not a genuine civilisational clash is what is at play these days. I do know that the "End of History" thesis was premature and now proven wrong, but whether that has to do with the larger socio-cultural divisions emerging in the post-industrial and post-Cold War context remains, to my mind, a matter of conjecture.

WAKE UP said...

While you guys are muttering in your beards about a putative "clash of civilisations", it's actually happening at warp speed, and coming soon to your town.