Tuesday, January 16, 2007

A War On Our Shores


America has become the frontline. We did not invade a country. We did not provoke such an attack. On 9/11/2001 an enemy, offended by our lifestyle, commited an act of war. We are currently at war with not only those responsible but against all who would commit murder as a legitamate military tactic.

Let us be frank. There is really only one group of people that have embraced this tactic as a weapon. Muslims. Sanctioned by their Koran and the example of their prophet they commit the most horrible crimes on the face of the earth. Perhaps one may suggest that not all Muslims support such horrific crimes against humanity. Then let them speak!! Five years have passed and only a handfuls of Muslims have stood up to denounce purposely crashing civilian passenger planes into civilian offices, homes, and daycare facilities.

Islam is refusing to police itself. If a Nazi nutcase wraps himself in the Christian religion and then blows up a civilian building it is immediatly denounced and condemned by every Christian church in the world. Why is the Muslim world silent to attrocities? Silence is solemn support. Arabs danced in the streets on 9/11/2001. They found joy in pain and suffering.

Nothing has changed. If some Muslims want peace they must fight alongside of us. Civilization and humanity have been attacked.

We fight with a conscience and try to limit civilian casualties. They target women and children purposefully. There must be no negotiating with murderers. They do not understand peace. They only know how to rearm.

We must effect four steps to secure our civilization.
1. We must wake up as a people to face the peril of our situation.
2. We must topple all regimes that refuse to hunt the jihadists.
3. We must kill, capture, or silence the jihadists everywhere.
4. We must eradicate Islam that demands the blood of our people.

What will you do?

Will you by your silence... give them the tools to destroy the innocent?
910group.com Begin to fight back.

Sunday, January 14, 2007

Reexamining The Partitioning of Iraq

There have been many who have discussed what won't work in Iraq. Frankly there does not seem to be much that will work for sure. It is at this time that I think that it would be wise to reexamine partitioning Iraq. First, we must be realistic with the dangers of partitioning.

1. Kurdistan. The most obvious partition will be separating the kurds from the Sunni/Shiite mess. Unfortunatly this will get us into very hot water with Turkey. The southern section of Turkey has a high concentration of Kurds who have long petitioned for a Kurdistan. Turkey has violently opposed this movement. If we provide a Kurdistan on the border of Turkey it really won't take long for the Turkish Kurds to immigrate to the new country. This will seriously tick off Turkey. Once the Kurdistan/Turkey issue is resolved with a probable effect of serious long term issues with Turkey we can rather easily partition the Shiites from the Sunnis.

2. Baghdad. Who gets Baghdad? This is a serious question that will not go away. Both groups want this old seat of power which is a large part of the current problem. Should we put up a wall? Berlin II? Either way there are problems. Perhaps we can set up an international city like Jerusalem. Both peoples live in peace. But with such Muslim sects that may be impossible. It would either be better to put up a wall or better yet give the city to one of the groups in exchange for more territory outside the capital.

3. Border issues. The border must be a wide border that is mostly uninhabited. Unfortunatly there are many mortars and RPG's that are in militia hands. The border will have to cut through some inhabited areas. Rather many inhabited areas. These residential areas will have to be flattened and people forceably evicted. Both sides of the border would have to be patrolled by Shiite and Sunni army personnel. This will solve the issue of a Civil War and the issue will become one of national conflict. Which will hopefully be soldiers shooting at soldiers rather than terrorists cutting shopkeepers heads off.

4. Terrorist states. Would this plan not allow both sides to build up armies with the support of countries from their religious sects? Yes, Sunnistan would get much military support from Egypt, Saudia Arabia, etc and Shiitestan would be getting a lot of support from Iran. On the plus side both of these countries would have incentives to get rid of terrorists. Countries want soldiers while factions tolerate terrorists. Terrorists attack civilians while soldiers attack soldiers. Soldiers answer to the government. Governments answer to the people. We will provide continued military advising on anti-terrorism missions. If either country violates the other's border we withdraw support from that country.

5. Relocation. This will cause a global outcry as we seek racial cleansing of areas. I will say this once. We have done it before and we ought to do it again. (think Germans and Poles)

Lets look at the upside. We gain a valuable ally. Kurdistan. We hopefully will win the Shiites over and keep them away from full support of Iran. We will give the Shiites a vested interest in defending their country from an exterior enemy (Sunnistan). We will give the Sunnis a proper way of defending themselves and controlling their destiny. This plan will allow the Shiites and Sunnis to stop bickering over customs and laws. Best of all it puts the security issue in Iraqi hands and allows us to get out to rearm for dealing with Iran.

Issues that need to be resolved. Baghdad. Oil Revenues. Army Recruitment/Training. Border Creation.