YEAT’S “ROUGH BEAST”* IS ISLAMOSTAN
Jay B. Gaskill
The jihad terror game is intended to shake up conditions in the middle East until a single Pan-Islamist state can emerge; this vision contemplates a nuclear armed, oil funded Islamist world power, one fully capable of intimidating the West.
To achieve this grand vision, all non-cooperative governments within and without the region must be overturned or neutralized.
I will be calling this super-power-to-be Islamostan@, and its driving purpose will be the establishment of The Islamist Imperium.
World weary Europeans seem all too complacent at the prospect. Even to some Americans the possibility of a large Islamist state might once have seemed less than apocalyptic. But the following factors changed everything:
A seventh factor might have ensured the eventual triumph of the Islamist Imperium.
But the jihadist’s
catastrophic miscalculation on
But for that shock, this country’s foreign policies might well have been dominated by isolationists in the tradition on WW II’s German sympathizers. Instead, the architects of the Islamist Imperium now face an awakened American administration, zero tolerance for terrorist-harboring regimes, and a proactive campaign to seed the region with moderate democratic regimes.
I grant to the critics of the current administration a certain measure of wisdom born of prudence and caution. But the very notion that we might retreat into isolationist complacency belies the very nature and gravity of the threat.
We find ourselves as if projected by a time machine to pre WW II Europe at the very birth of the Third Reich, yet armed with the knowledge of what might unfold if the train of events is not stopped.
The Islamist Imperium must not be allowed to succeed.
As it happens, history has given this nation, whether in coalition with like minded allies or not, all the resources and intelligence needed to defeat this mindless jihad and to guide events in a more benign direction. The question at hand is whether we can retain the will for the long term.
Our failure would allow the birth of a new multi-state tyranny with the power to nuke American cities at will. Its rulers would belong to a fringe sub-culture that calls suicide murders “martyrdom operations.”
Peaceful co-existence? It would make the cold war seem like a cake walk.
* The current unholy jihad was eerily presaged in a vision of William Butler Yeats, (1865-1939) who was a poet, a Celtic Mystic, and (as is now painfully apparent) also a prophet. As he wrote in his poem “The Second Coming”:
@ Should the
Islamist extremists ever adopt this name, beware: That event will have signaled
the achievement of a pan-tribal, pan-ethnic unity based on Islam. The suffix, “stan” is derived from the Persian term for nation; as the
** I am not one of those critics of the Islamists who is willing to discredit the entire corpus of Islamic religious thought and practice because some fanatics have taken up arms against the civilized world. But the embedded differences are serious. Recently, Monsignor Walter Brandmüller, president of the Pontifical Committee for Historical Sciences, gave a speech honoring the birth of Pope St. Pius V . As Brandmüller put it: [The] “biggest difference between Christianity and Islam” stems from its view of human nature. “[T]he concept of the equality of all human beings does not exist, nor does, in consequence, the concept of the dignity of every human life.” The Islamic view holds to “a threefold inequality: between man and woman, between Muslim and non-Muslim, and between freeman and slave.” In this schema, the man “is considered a full titleholder of rights and duties only through his belonging to the Islamic community” [and] “The most irrevocable of these inequalities is that between man and woman, because the others can be overcome — the slave can be freed, the non-Muslim can convert to Islam — while woman’s inferiority is irremediable.”