Why does a movement that seeks to murder or enslave all those that oppose it, that treats women like chattel, that permits no personal conscience choices of its own adherents and subjects, and that prides itself on destroying all cultural attributes other than its own limited and warped heritage continue to gain followers, even those from western nations?
ISIS’ ideological success is based less on its own merits and actions than on the intellectual pacifism of its opponents. Leaders of the world’s nations are quick to condemn this ultimate terrorist movement, but shrink from entering into the battle of ideals and morals that is necessary to provide persuadable youth with a more decent alternative.
The actions of the Obama Administration provide a clear example of the west’s unilateral disarmament in the world of cultural values. Even before ISIS’ meteoric rise, or perhaps as one factor causing it, the President’s bizarre apologies for nonexistent offenses to the Muslim world, as well as his failure to promote American intellectual values such as individual rights and the rejection of totalitarian rule, have stripped from the marketplace of ideas the most potent alternatives to the witches’ brew ISIS offers. It was the firm advocacy of western values, backed by a staunch and armed resolve that helped topple the Soviet Empire. No such confrontation of concepts has yet been launched against Islamic extremists. There has been no “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall” moment in the fight against ISIS.
There has been no significant rebuttal of radical Islam’s nonsensical mantra that it has been the victim of western oppression, particularly the period of the Crusades. Islamic aggression towards, and invasion of, the West predates the crusades, starting in 630 A.D. The first crusade didn’t even occur until 1096. Muslim acts of brutality and oppression against Christians and Jews took place practically from the very birth of the Islamic faith.
A look at relations between the Muslim world and the United States in particular is instructive. Before America had any involvement, other than trade, beyond its borders, the Islamic governments in Tripoli, Tunis, Algiers and Morocco assaulted unarmed Yankee ships, stealing cargo and the vessels themselves, and enslaving the crews. At this point in the young Republic’s history, there wasn’t even an American navy in existence. Despite that, in the centuries that followed, the U.S. has aided Muslims in Europe and in Asia. Yet the un-responded-to myth of U.S. oppression continues to be touted, even by uninformed apologists within the U.S. itself, including President Obama.
Age related buy pill viagra erectile dysfunction may require medication. There levitra generika are a few reasons for sphincter of Oddi dysfunction. Most unexpected changes to an organization’s infrastructure involve dysfunctional management pfizer viagra without prescription of personnel and resources. However, Kamagra is one of the best choices to go with as it comes order cheap viagra in three types of consumption like jelly, tablet, and soft tablet and jellies on the market.
In the ultimately successful ideological battle against the former Soviet Union, the great importance of countering an anti-freedom philosophy was recognized and made into official policy by President Reagan’s National Security Decision Directive 75, which noted:
“U.S. policy must have an ideological thrust which clearly affirms the superiority of U.S. and Western values of individual dignity and freedom, a free press, free trade unions, free enterprise, and political democracy over the repressive features of Soviet Communism. We need to review and significantly strengthen U.S. instruments of political action including: (a) The President’s London initiative to support democratic forces; (b) USG efforts to highlight Soviet human rights violations; and (c) U.S. radio broadcasting policy. The U.S. should: Expose at all available fora the double standards employed by the Soviet Union in dealing with difficulties within its own domain and the outside (“capitalist”) world (e.g., treatment of labor, policies toward ethnic minorities, use of chemical weapons, etc.). Prevent the Soviet propaganda machine from seizing the … high-ground in the battle of ideas…”
That winning strategy has not been sufficiently utilized in the war against ISIS. The President appears to believe it is inappropriate to enthusiastically assert that the concepts of personal freedom, equal rights for women, and religious tolerance are superior to Sharia law. He is not alone. Indeed, even the National Organization for Women (NOW) has been, disgracefully, missing in action in the effort to help the female victims of ISIS. The NOW web site fails to mention the problem at all. Indeed, those heroic women such as Somali-born Ayaan Hirsi Ali who do challenge Islam’s inexcusable offenses against females find themselves ostracized by the White House’s leftist supporters.
There has been much written about the sparse and hesitant western military response to ISIS, and its failure to adequately support indigenous allies such as the Kurds. But far less comment has been made on the curious lack of an intellectual and moral response to this truly evil movement.