Foreign Policy
June 6 2009
Obama’s Speech:
Right where he wants them
Fri, 06/05/2009 – 12:37pm
The only people denouncing President Obama’s Cairo speech seem to be
right-wing nuts at home and Islamic extremists abroad. This is a good
set of opponents to have.
Meanwhile, I like Obama’s summary this morning in Germany of what he
is thinking about the Middle East:
And as the Chancellor mentioned, we discussed my recent trip to the
Middle East and the need for all of us to redouble our efforts to
bring about two states, Israel and a Palestinian state, that are
living side by side in peace and security. I think the moment is now
for us to act on what we all know to be the truth, which is that each
side is going to have to make some difficult compromises; we have to
reject violence.
The Palestinians have to get serious about creating the security
environment that is required for Israel to feel confident. Israelis
are going to have to take some difficult steps. I discussed some of
those in the speech."
"Difficult steps and hard compromises" would be a good name for
Obama’s emerging Middle East policy.
In reference to the denial by Iranian president Ahmadinejad that
holocaust ever happened, President Obama said in Germany that ‘he does
NOT have patience with people who would deny history’. Here is some
history that President should know and NOT deny either.
The political arm of Islam has been waging terroristic holy war on the
rest of the world for centuries. It has waged this war against
civilizations that have nothing to do with the West, let alone
America. This is why the case of Muslim aggression against India
proves so much.
Medieval India, before the Muslim invasions, was a richly imaginative
culture, one of the half-dozen most advanced civilizations of all
time. Muslim invaders began entering India in the early 8th century,
on the orders of Hajjaj, the governor of what is now Iraq. In the
aftermath of the Muslim invasions of India from 8th to 11th centuries,
in the ancient cities of Varanasi, Mathura, Ujjain, Maheshwar,
Jwalamukhi, and Dwarka, not one temple survived whole and intact. This
is the equivalent of an army marching into Paris and Rome, Florence
and Oxford, and razing their architectural treasures to the ground.
In his book The Story of Civilization, famous historian Will Durant
lamented the results of what he termed "probably the bloodiest story
in history." He called it "a discouraging tale, for its evident moral
is that civilization is a precious good, whose delicate complex order
and freedom can at any moment be overthrown by barbarians invading
from without and multiplying from within. Muslim invaders "broke and
burned everything beautiful they came across in Hindustan," displaying
the resentment of the less developed warriors who felt intimidated in
the encounter with "a more refined culture." The Muslim Sultans built
mosques at the sites of torn down temples, and many Hindus were sold
into slavery. As far as they were concerned, Hindus were kafirs,
heathens, par excellence. They, and to a lesser extent the peaceful
Buddhists, were, unlike Christians and Jews, not "of the book" but at
the receiving end of Muhammad’s injunction against pagans: "Kill those
who join other gods wherever you may find them."
The massacres perpetrated by Muslims in India are unparalleled in
history. In sheer numbers, they are bigger than the Jewish Holocaust,
the Soviet Terror, the Japanese massacres of the Chinese during WWII,
Mao’s devastations of the Chinese peasantry, the massacres of the
Armenians by the Turks, or any of the other famous crimes against
humanity of the 20th Century. But sadly, they are almost unknown
outside India. The perpetrators of these massacres were not military
thugs disobeying the ethical teachings of their religion, as the
European crusaders in the Holy Land were, but were actually doing
precisely what their religion taught. As has been well-documented,
jihad has been preached from the official centers of Islam, not just
the lunatic fringe.
/06/05/right_where_he_wants_them