Today in Europe, in the aftermath of the Brussels terrorist attacks, a dark truth stands reveled about the nature of the Belgian state. Belgium is a failed state at the heart of Europe…and much of the rest of Europe is following.
Belgium quite literally lacks the military means to enforce the sovereignty of the Belgian state in the Muslim neighborhood of Molenbeek in Brussels, the Belgian Capitol.
The following is via John R. Schindler of The UK Observer:
We should expect more guerrilla-like attacks like Brussels yesterday: moderate in scale, relatively easy to plan and execute against soft targets, and utterly terrifying to the public. At some point, angry Europeans, fed up with their supine politi1cal class, will begin to strike back, and that’s when the really terrifying scenarios come into play. European security services worry deeply about the next Anders Breivik targeting not fellow Europeans, but Muslim migrants. “We’re just one Baruch Goldstein away from all-out war,” explained a senior EU terrorism official, citing the American-born Israeli terrorist, fed up with Palestinian violence, who walked into a Hebron mosque in 1994, guns blazing, and murdered 29 innocent Muslims.
When that violence comes, a practically disarmed Europe will be all but powerless to stop it. To take the case of Belgium, at the Cold War’s end a generation ago, its army had seven brigades with 18 infantry battalions, plus some 30 more battalions in the reserve. Today, Belgium’s army has only two brigades and six infantry battalions, some 3,000 bayonets in all. That tiny force would have trouble exerting control over even one bumptious Brussels neighborhood in the event of serious crisis.
Thanks to Belgium’s sovereignty collapse, Europe is now in the throws of an emerging decade plus Muslim insurgency spreading from Brussels…
…while E.U. Security Forces supporting the Belgians are more concerned with repressing local predominantly white citizens from striking back at terrorist inclined Muslim migrants than dealing with the Muslim problem to begin with.
And it gets worse, with hundreds if not thousands of trained terrorists arriving with the multi-million person Muslim Migrant wave that German Prime Minister Frau Merkel kicked off in 2015. The EU faces a situation where it will see a ‘major’ (Charles Hebdo, Paris, Brussels class) EU terrorist incident every 60 to 180 days for the foreseeable future. This leaves aside the worse than American urban ghetto crime and sexual assault rates these illegal Muslim migrants are now inflicting on EU citizens.
NB: The EU is now no longer tourist friendly, with all the economic fall out that means.
The political corruption — and ethnic tensions between the Dutch speaking Flems and French speaking Walloons — that dominates the Belgian state make it impossible to remedy the Muslim insurgency there.
Nothing short of Belgian territorial partition between France and Germany can bring effective enough military governance to end the Muslim Insurgency in Brussels.
Given that awful reality, Donald Trump’s idea of reducing America’s role in NATO (Or perhaps even getting out of NATO all together?) is the best thing the USA can do.
Both Vietnam’s and Shia Iraq’s lessons for America’s citizens are that it is a futile waste of American lives and treasure to try and protect people who don’t have either the will nor the means to protect themselves.
Besides beer and chocolate, Belgium is well known for other fine products:
http://www.fnherstal.com/primary-menu/about-us.html
They just need “change”. Geert was in country recently, and perhaps Viktor Orban needs to bring his message of freedom and courage to the once proud country. Ted Shoebat claims the trouble started in the late 18th century, but I’ll let him post that theory…
The Europeans did not attack Iraq, apart from that they have been onboard with most of the American regime changes in the middle east. They were a big part of the Libyan stupidity and have cooperated with the US and the Sunnis in most of rest.
Blowback. It’s coming to America as well.
9-10% of Belgium’s population is Muslim.
Fracking, all accomplished by private means and contrary to the Obama, and greenie, agenda, has given the US the freedom to leave the middle east to its own devices. The Sunni-Shia war can proceed at its own pace. Obama has given the Iranian mullahs billions and that needs to stop, perhaps by a president Trump. The Saudis and Pakistanis, both with large unemployed youth populations, will fight the Sunni side. The Iranians know they face population collapse in 20 years with their 1.6 birthrate so they will decide to fight now.
Hopefully, Israel will not compromise with the Palestinians and maybe those ignorant illeterates will go fight the Muslim wars. Thank god Israel built the wall, in spite of the bad advice from everyone.
Time to close the borders as the entire middle east, except Israel, will be refugees in 10 years, Maybe 5.
“It’s coming to America as well.”
If you think Canada will be exempt, you are even dumber than you sound.
Belgium’s 2014 population was 11.23 million.
Ten percent is 1.1 million Muslims.
Call it round number of 1 million.
If 1% of that million are hard core terrorist supporters, we are talking 10,000 Belgians.
Belgium only has 3,000 infantry in six battalions.
Game over for the Belgian state.
NATO should have been wound up when the USSR dissolved itself. Almost everything NATO has done since has been mutton-headed.
“Almost everything NATO has done since has been mutton-headed.”
The only reason to keep it on life support was the bureaucracy and the EU, ditto. Once the US is gone, there is no NATO.
“Game over for the Belgian state.”
It’s sad that they don’t have a clue. We did notice the Flemish-Walloon split in signs.
The Grand Place has been rebuilt multiple times., The next time is coming if anyone is left to rebuild it.
Trent said, “Game over for the Belgian state.” Mike Walsh said here:
https://pjmedia.com/homeland-security/2016/03/23/after-brussels-open-borders-or-a-police-state-europe-must-now-choose/?singlepage=true
“They literally will not raise a hand to defend themselves.”
Belgium has made itself a threat to the rest of Europe.
Tom h. said —
>>Belgium has made itself a threat to the rest of Europe.
This is why I mentioned a French-German partition of Belgium.
Given that his current ISIS cell had 12-hours of pre-attack video surveillance of Belgian nuclear plants, Belgian internal security dysfunction motivating such an outside intervention is very much on the table.
European security services worry deeply about the next Anders Breivik targeting not fellow Europeans, but Muslim migrants.
Some pre-WWII Romanian revolutionary (whose name escapes me) said something to the effect “If I had my choice I’d rather kill the traitor than my enemy.”
I’m not sure why a European freedom fighter would a.) target Muslim migrants and b.) why security services aren’t worried about the targeting of Leftist traitors.
Killing the migrants doesn’t solve anything, the people who are inviting them in and blocking their expulsion are the leftists. The Muslims are just the pawns.
Once you strip away the moral and emotional factors associated with Breivik’s act, his targeting philosophy was clearly more advanced than what we see from the Paris, San Bernardino, and Brussels terrorists. Of course 9/11 was in a league by itself but that was a massive effort pulled off by an organization. If I was in the security business I’d be worried about white Europeans who’ve committed themselves to fighting for their homeland and doing as above, not so much to inspire terror but to take out the traitors who would block any measures to resolve the Muslim problem within Europe. Look at the carnage that one smart guy did. In terms of effecting policy, he weakened the next generation of socialists by taking out the most involved and brightest of the kids who were rising up the socialist ladder and he actually moved the needle in terms of moving Norway away from enthusiastically embracing Muslims.
What’s the end goal? That’s the question that security services should be asking themselves. What does killing migrants achieve? Would a European risk his life in order to commit terror against the Muslims and if so what would be achieved by his act? This likely outcome would be to increase the tit-for-tat responses and inspire more Muslim terrorism, thereby weakening his own society.
This entire state of affairs is so pointless. It’s an unforced error. There was never any public mandate for multiculturalism so how did the elites think this would work out?
The good news here is that Poland put some steel in their spines and said NO to any Muslim resettlement. Who would have ever argued that the Eastern European subjugation by the Soviets would turn out to be a blessing in disguise? Repression of freedom and economic stagnation are merely temporary ills but by suffering those ills the nations preserved their culture and their people. Look at the raw deal that Western Europe got from their traitorous elites.
The EU is now no longer tourist friendly, with all the economic fall out that means.
This doesn’t apply to the Eastern part of the EU.
If you think Canada will be exempt, you are even dumber than you sound.
Canada has already, if memory serves, experienced 3 incidents targeting political leadership. Some terrorists in BC targeted their Legislature, some terrorists in Toronto were busted up before they could attack Parliament and of course there was last years attack on Parliament.
Canada is going to get hosed because their Muslim population is larger than Americas. Idiots.
TangoMan, that does not compute. 1% Muslims of @ 322 million Americans = 3.2 million. 3% Muslims of @ 36 million Canadians = @ 1.1 million.
“The EU is now no longer tourist friendly, with all the economic fall out that means.”
I still like Paris and always get a car from DeGaulle Airport because the train runs through banlieues and stops at stations where the doors open.
Maybe the rates will be cheaper. I noticed in the 90s that the French got much more friendly and any attempt to speak the language was met with smiles and friendliness.
I think that was the result of US tourism declining after Gulf War I
I meant as proportion of population, not as absolute numbers. Sorry for the confusion.
Yes, as Pat Buchanan said long ago, when the Iron Curtain fell, NATO should have disbanded.
But I certainly don’t cotton to Telenko’s plaint that “Shia Iraq” and Vietnam turned out not to be worthy of America’s attempted ‘protection’ (expansion
of Globalist imperialism, by immoral and illegal invasions) of them. They should be motivated to fight for themselves by the unwanted intruder’s
barbarism–and of course, fighting in manners approved by our military officers and leaders, that is, to advance US strategic goals, not their own?)
Tell me another tale.
Ken, I can figure which is smaller, your first name, your knowledge of history, or your IQ.
People here are overlooking the obvious. Western Europe’s admission of so many _ARAB_ Muslim immigrants so fast has metastasized their terror problem into an urban insurgency. Those are not defeatable by mere police operations. Belgium’s ground forces are simply too small to deal any kind of insurgency.
This will get really ugly. Sure it will take 10-15 years to get there, but Ralph Peters was prescient in his _Front Page_ interview nine years ago.
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=27456
“… the notion that Europe, the continent that’s exported more death and destruction than any other, is going to just shuffle wimpily to its doom is crazy. The Europeans have been playing pacifist dress-up while we protected them, but, sufficiently threatened, they’ll revert to their historical pattern–which is to over-react. Europe’s Muslims may prove to be the real endangered species; after all, Europe’s history of dealing with rejected minorities veers between genocide and, for the lucky, ethnic cleansing. For me, the question isn’t whether Muslims will take over Europe, but whether Europe will simply expel them or kill any number of them first. Sound far-fetched? How would the Holocaust have sounded to an educated German (or Brit, or American) in 1932? Europe is a killer continent. When the chips are down, it will kill again.”
The US may have made a success of fracking but in most places there is little opportunity.
That means that the Middle East oil is still of vital importance for the US. Whoever controls it has the heart of the global industrial economy in their hands.
Backing away from the ME will have huge and unpleasant consequences for American citizens.
“in most places there is little opportunity.”
Fracking has been a private matter here and in most of Europe the government owns all mineral rights.I understand that Russia has potential but, like the rest of Europe, they will mess it up. When has Socialism, European variety, ever worked ?
The coming rise in oil prices will rescue a lot of the frackers now that the weakest have been shaken out.
I expect that the Libya adventure was driven by Europe’s worries about oil. Personally, I think Egypt should invade the eastern half and take the oil industry.
Kerry and Obama would have a fit but Trump will probably wink at el Sisi, and let him go at it. The west is all Berber tribes, I understand and the scorpions can have it.
Europe is a killer continent. When the chips are down, it will kill again.”
And we’re not?
That means that the Middle East oil is still of vital importance for the US. Whoever controls it has the heart of the global industrial economy in their hands.
Nobody in the M.E. is doing the West any favors. Apple isn’t doing its consumers any favors either. We want to buy what they’re selling. If they refuse to sell, they cut their own throat. No matter who controls that oil, it does them no good sitting in the ground. Sure, they can take their societies back to 8th Century Arabia, which will entail mass death as the imported food stops arriving, the imported medicine stops arriving, the imported talent which manages their hospitals and water systems start departing, etc. In such a scenario the West will suffer from higher oil prices but how long can such a Pol-Pot-Like regime stand until the population rises and kills the revolution?
” the imported talent which manages their hospitals and water systems start departing,”
Venezuela will tell us how that ends.
TangoMan,
The ancient truth – states have interests; they don’t have friends.
Some of the Middle East states are definitely on the modernization track – UAE predominantly. Let’s not lump them all in together, they are not a monolith.
The petro states around the gulf have struck a deal going back to FDR and the Brits before him. We provide security for the regimes and they sell their oil on the open market. While sometimes compromised on one side or the other, it has been a very useful deal for humanity, in spite of some downsides.
Obama has chosen to trash this cooperative arrangement for something else, something only he and his closest advisors can visualize.
Woe is we.
Europe is a killer continent. When the chips are down, it will kill again.
Every successful organism and every successful society has a killer instinct or else it could not survive. Europe has been drugged into its pacifism by 70 years of protection under the NATO and the Pax Americana. The left exploited that opening to build a socialist utopia in the crystal sphere of protection that was built to protect Europe. We have a generation of Europeans (and increasingly, Americans) now who believe nothing bad can intrude their Valhalla if only the believe hard enough. Reality is generally not kind to delusions. The question is, will they wake or be murdered in their sleep?
A couple of weeks ago I bought tickets for a trip to Amsterdam and Normandy in May. If I bail on the trip it will cost a lot of money. Anyway, I could be attacked in by terrorists in the US. Today, I ate lunch in a restaurant in Columbus Ohio where I live. The restaurant was attacked by a Muslim a few weeks ago. Fortunately, the only death was the muzzie, who was shot by the cops.
I also wanted to say something about Belgium as a country. It really isn’t. It is the leftovers of a lot of European history.
In the 15th century, what is now Belgium was part of the lands ruled by the Dukes of Burgundy, who were members of the French Royal House of Valois. But, they were rivals of the King of France, and in the Hundred Years war, they often allied with the Kings of England. The Dukes of Burgundy were important in European politics of that time because their lands, which included what is now Belgium, Netherlands, and Luxemburg (Benelux), and the mouths of the Rhine and Meuse were the center of European trade, and were heavily populated and highly developed in industry and agriculture.
The last Duke of Burgundy, Charles the Bold, died without a male heir. His daughter, Mary inherited his lands. She married Maximilian Habsburg, the Archduke of Austria (It was a step up for him, even though he was in line to be Holy Roman Emperor, Austria was a backwater, and being the HRE was prestigious, but neither rich, nor powerful). She had a son, Philip the Handsome, and died at the age of 25 by falling from her horse. Philip married Juana of Castile (Juana la Loca). Their son Charles, inherited Spain, Central and South America, and the HRE.
Charles (I of Spain, V of the HRE) inherited his kingdoms during turbulent times. His reign (1516-1556, varies slightly in different places) was when the Protestant Reformation took place. He abdicated due to old age and poor health in the mid 1550s and gave the HRE to his brother Ferdinand, and the Low Countries, Spain, and the Americas to his son Phillip II. (Guess which was more valuable)
The protestant residents of the northern provinces of the Low Countries bridled at Spanish, and aggressively Catholic, rule. In 1579, they entered into the Union of Utrecht, created the Dutch Republic, and declared themselves free of Spanish Rule. What followed was 80 years of war including episodes such as the Spanish Armada (intended to cut the Dutch off from England), and the Thirty Years War, ended with the peace of Westphalia. The Dutch Republic was independent, the HRE was re-organized, and Spain had spent all of the gold and silver it looted from the Americas trying to maintain the status quo ante bellum. Spain was exhausted, and was never again a factor in world affairs, but it did retain rule over the southern provinces that had not joined the Dutch Republic, and which were Catholic.
Fast Forward to the Napoleonic wars. Napoleon annexed everything north of France up to the North Sea to the French Empire. After the defeat of Napoleon, the Congress of Vienna, re-drew the boundaries of France, and its former conquests. What is now Benelux, was declared to be the Kingdom of the Netherlands. They also restored the bourbon Monarchy in France. That settlement was challenged in 1830 when Charles X, the Bourbon King abdicated in the face of popular revolt. In 1830, the southern provinces of the Netherlands split off from the Northern (former Dutch Republic provinces), and became Belgium.
The unity of Belgium was based on religion (Catholic). The politics of the late 19th and 20th centuries were based on language. Belgium is split in half by Language, and has established a boundary between Dutch speaking Flanders and French speaking Wallonia, which is line across the middle of the country that runs east west just south of Brussels. Brussels region is a 15 Km box that is a no man’s land. Belgium politics is largely organized around the linguistic split. About 60% of the population is speaks Dutch.
I do not know how all of this will affect the impending (or just started) civil war between Muslims and everyone else. But, it will probably get very messy. Think about Lebanon.
Some of the Middle East states are definitely on the modernization track – UAE predominantly. Let’s not lump them all in together, they are not a monolith.
Can Donald Trump’s wealth buy him class? How about Hulk Hogan’s new wealth (or existing wealth) can it buy him class? What I’m really saying is that I’m skeptical that the UAE can buy themselves a sophisticated economy. Maybe they can, I’ll wait and see, but right now I’m looking at this as more like a Cargo Cult operation. When that sophisticated economy is principally staffed up by guest workers and when the oil runs out, I’m not sure that the economy will still function, especially if the region descends into conflict and disorder. There are a lot of high value and very high profile targets in the UAE, so what happens if terror finds its way back home? I can foresee events which could lead to the chance of Chinese-like ghost cities developing.
I haven’t updated my analysis from about 10 years ago but back then I looked at the entire MENA region and split oil and non-oil exports and found that Spain exported more non-oil goods/services than the entire MENA region of a billion people. If there was no oil there that entire region could fall off the face of the planet and hardly anyone would notice. I also looked at the history of economic development over time. Back in the 50s Iran, Iraq, Jordan and other ME nations had a GDP/capita greater than South Korea, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand and while the latter group grew the former group stagnated.
Nevertheless, I’m open to seeing what some of the big spenders are going to accomplish. Off the top of my head I can’t find a historical equivalent of a nation buying their way up the developmental ladder especially with an expatriate army of experts which is 5 times larger than the native population.
Robert, Interesting history of Belgium, Spain and the Netherlands. Thank you.
TangoMan, I agree. Cargo cult sounds just about right.
“How about Hulk Hogan’s new wealth”
That is the thing about winning lawsuits, not only do you need a favorable verdict, you also need a solvent defendant, preferably one with assets that cannot be spirited away or hidden. 50 years ago if you sued a newspaper they had a big downtown office building and several mammoth presses worth a lot of money. What does Gawker have? Rented office space, desks, chairs, and computers. Those of you who have liquidated a business know how much that is worth. The term for it in Bankruptcy Latin is bupkis. Any cash that was lying around disappeared before the foreman was done reading the verdict. Hulk’s new found wealth is also bupkis.
I think there is something we should brace ourselves for, if we haven’t already. The resistance to muslim occupation is going to start with some very unsavory people. Neo-nazis and other assorted ultra-nationals who go about picking on soft targets, killing teenagers, business owners and so on because they are exposed to danger, crimes that we’d normally bring the hammer down on. But if there is ever going to be a popular uprising, someone has to start and it will most likely be people of that sort. When it happens, we have to make a moral decision, do we accept it as the necessary spark that lights the fire or do we try to extinguish it and crush the native resistance? If we choose the later, we’ve condemned Europe to occupation.
Is this really a war, are we really identifying islam as the enemy and all muslims are legitimate targets, or is this a civil issue, where we permit demographics and civil law to be used against us until we’re conquered by numbers? Personally, I no longer regard any muslim as innocent. They may have committed no crime, but they are the sea in which killers swim and they protect those killers with silence. They are innocent in law, not innocent in spirit. In every sense I regard them now as the enemy. And this is a hard thing to think, as I have a few muslims friends who are of the genuinely peaceful kind. But I’d see them sacrificed if it meant ALL muslims were exiled as well.
Personally, I no longer regard any muslim as innocent. They may have committed no crime, but they are the sea in which killers swim and they protect those killers with silence.
– The Occupying Powers instituted a DeNazification Program on all of Germany.
– There was mass ethnic cleansing of Germans from Poland, Czechoslovakia after the war:
No doubt this was traumatic as it was happening, but the nations healed after a time.
I have a few muslims friends who are of the genuinely peaceful kind. But I’d see them sacrificed if it meant ALL muslims were exiled as well.
I dated a Muslim girl for about a year. I’m on the same boat with you. My personal feelings towards one person shouldn’t guide my opinion on what I think is needed or what is the correct position for a society.
The issue, as I see it, is that those with early warning radar are already attuned to the danger and see the path forward but most of society isn’t seeing the severity of the problem. People are going to be thinking about their rental properties and who will rent them if the Muslims are expelled. They’ll be thinking about how to staff their restaurant or other business. The disruptions in their personal life will make them resist paths which will make their societies safer and more cohesive. This means that the severity of the problem has to increase significantly. The immediate post-war years which brought about the ethnic cleansing of Germans relied on recent memories of German atrocities and those were severe enough to unite the people in the effort to expel their Germans.
I don’t know how high the pain threshold will get on this issue but I suspect that we’re still a long way off. There are also a great many propagandized people who are now true believers in multiculturalism and feel quite OK with presuming to open their countries to outsiders in order to showcase their own personal enlightenment. With nationalist sentiments on life support, it becomes very difficult to create an effort which is designed to protect nationalist interests.
But if there is ever going to be a popular uprising, someone has to start and it will most likely be people of that sort. When it happens, we have to make a moral decision, do we accept it as the necessary spark that lights the fire or do we try to extinguish it and crush the native resistance?
This is one of the reasons that I’m backing Trump. I have my doubts that he’ll follow through on his statements but there is really no other alternative. He does need to do what he pledges to do. The problem here is that if he takes a powder the problems will grow over time and then we’ll be facing a future which is much worse and a real strong man will take over, likely through non-legal means.
As for crushing the native resistance, that doesn’t work as we see with the PC effort. You can get people to submit but the fire of resistance still burns in their soul. When a Trump comes along and opens the pressure relief valve, all of that built-up pressure comes out in unexpected ways. It was never really gone.
My fear is that most of the people who cry out that something must be done, will also cry out that something must be done as soon as the killings start. There is an awful lot of posturing going on but I suspect the amount of real support an ethnic cleaning would get is still very small. People are not ready to think of themselves like that, they need to see a lot more bodies and blood before they really MEAN that something must be done.
People are not ready to think of themselves like that, they need to see a lot more bodies and blood before they really MEAN that something must be done.
Of course people don’t see themselves that way. Everyone wants to be nice and to think of themselves as nice. Some parents want to be nice to their kids and other parents worry less about being nice and work on being responsible and raising their kids properly, even if their children cry out “you’re being mean to me.”
If a society does go down that route there will be an unintended consequence, which is the collapse of the welfare state. A pay-go model depends on the young paying for the old and when your society’s demographic growth is dependent on immigration, the income streams which pay for the benefits are going to dry up quickly.
So in addition to being a mean people regarding the removal of Muslims there will also be accusations of broken promises. Of course there will be the financial gain of no longer paying welfare to vast hordes of Muslims and that should soften the blow of reduced welfare spending which is directed at the native population.
And the elites wonder why people hate them so much. Thanks for this grand scheme you guys sold us, thanks for destroying society. This is probably going to entail a century of misery and recovery.
“Some of the Middle East states are definitely on the modernization track – UAE predominantly. Let’s not lump them all in together, they are not a monolith.”
Iran was modernizing under the Shah. The mullahs drove him out with the help of Carter and we have seen how that works. UAE may d better but Islam is the problem and they are funding some of ISIS as insurance,
I think Spengler is right and this is a Muslim civil war that will go on for a while. Bin Laden’s original beef with us was our defense of the Saudis.
I think we need a cordon sanitaire around the middle east. Too bad Israel is in the middle of it but they are tough and maybe they can keep the muzzies at bay. The wall was a good start. If it gets too hot they may have to drive all the Muslims out of the West Bank and do what the Czechs did with the Sudeten Germans.
“I no longer regard any muslim as innocent. They may have committed no crime, but they are the sea in which killers swim and they protect those killers with silence. They are innocent in law, not innocent in spirit. In every sense I regard them now as the enemy. And this is a hard thing to think, as I have a few muslims friends who are of the genuinely peaceful kind. But I’d see them sacrificed if it meant ALL muslims were exiled as well.”
Fear has brought you to this. Fear is the mind killer and courage is the only antidote.
America is largely to blame for the current surge of ISIS and the carnage they have inflicted on both the middle east and to some small extent in Europe and elsewhere. By attacking Iraq and all the stupidity that entailed. By sacking the Iraqi army after winning that war and by support of the Saudis who finance and to some extent control ISIS. The Europeans mainly went along for their part, as did Canada.
To advocate a holy war is the height of madness, and will bring nothing but pain and misery.
Any chance any of the warring parties will recognize that it’s religion drives all this. I am starting to hate religion, for all the pain it has brought mankind.
You are simply a subroutine in an amazing universe that began some 14 billion years ago. To make up all this god crap, then kill each other over it, is the epitome of ignorance.
I still like Paris and always get a car from DeGaulle Airport because the train runs through banlieues and stops at stations where the doors open.
There’s an RER express from the airport that goes through all the dodgy stations without stopping. I was there the week after the November attacks and made a point of waiting an extra ten minutes or so for the express train to arrive. The regular train definitely should be avoided by all tourists as many locals (not indigenous French of course) get on it just to rob people going to or from Charles de Gaulle airport. Air France also has busses that go directly to various parts of central Paris but they are very expensive.
I recommend reading up on urban insurgencies, starting with two books about the Algerian war of independence. The first is Alistair Horne’s _A Savage War of Peace_, and the second is _Insurgency and Counter-Insurgency in Algeria_ by Alf Andrew Heggy. You probably find Horne’s book in your public library, though it is available from Amazon, and Heggy’s book is can be found used at Amazon here:
http://www.amazon.com/Insurgency-Counter-insurgency-Algeria-University-international/dp/0253330262/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1458927882&sr=8-1&keywords=insurgency+and+counterinsurgency+in+algeria
I cannot emphasize enough how grim this will get. Significant use of torture is inevitable, and the French use of it in Algeria is a perfect illustration of the slippery slope to hell.
Plus we can expect governments to resort to full high-tech means of population control, notably with “chipping” of most, if not almost all, Muslims in Europe.
I no longer regard any muslim as innocent
My personal feelings towards one person shouldn’t guide my opinion on what I think is needed or what is the correct position for a society.
If we as a country follow these sentiments, American citizen and legal-resident Muslims should cooperate with our government why?
We will get better results by incentivizing cooperation. This means treating individuals as individuals, encouraging assimilation as we once did and protecting Muslims who work with us. We don’t do these things now.
We could also limit Muslim immigration or at least immigration from places like Somalia and Pakistan.
We could also do serious surveillance of radical mosques and Muslim groups, as our current administration refuses to do.
Such measures might be enough, if we were serious about them.
However, we are not serious. So why does anyone think that we are going to be able to treat all Muslims as suspect? It’s not 1942. Even if we could identify, isolate and/or deport every US Muslim (not that I think we should do these things), does anyone seriously think the US govt could pull it off? I doubt that we would be able to identify and locate a substantial fraction of our Muslim population. And even if we could, a substantial fraction of our non-Muslim population would object, perhaps even if there were mass-casualty terrorism perpetrated by American Muslims.
War by database is unlikely to work. The signal/error ratio is going to be too high. We should focus on the pursuit of the jihadis and their sympathizers and leave other Muslims alone.
“To advocate a holy war is the height of madness, and will bring nothing but pain and misery.”
PenGun, I actually agree with a couple of your points in your post. This, however, is something that began with the death of Ali ibn Ali Talib in 661.
The fall of the Ottoman Empire in 1920 was the next step. The history of Islam is a histpry of war and destruction. There was a very brief “Golden Age” under Harun al Rashid and his son but that was over by 827.
The next big wave of destruction was begun in 1255 and Baghdad was destroyed.
The history of Islam is violent and that violence was not begun by us. It is intrinsic in the primitives that adopt that warlike religion.
The Sunni-Shia war will go on and, as I wrote, our independence from middle eastern oil for the first time since Texas could no longer supply our needs in the 1970s, will allow us to be spectators. We just need to keep the defeated losers out as they are not compatible with modern life and civilization.
Christian Arabs have assimilated pretty well and I know some of them. I have Iraqi and Syrian friends but I don’t know that any is a practicing Muslim.
Christianity is compatible with modern civilization because it has been evolving since the end of the Thirty Years War which ended the period of absolute rule by kings. Louis XIV made a catastrophic mistake when he repealed the Edict of Nantes and expelled the Huguenots from France. The Industrial Revolution went with them.
The only reason we got involved with the Muslim world was oil and we now have enough and if the idiots that oppose nuclear power had not come along, we would be further along in independence. Fracking is what will save us and not the Europeans.
“We should focus on the pursuit of the jihadis and their sympathizers and leave other Muslims alone.”
I agree but we must stop the Saudis from sending radical preachers here and radicalizing our mosques. I have read some stories of moderate, real moderate imams have been driven out of these mosques by Saudi imports bringing significant financial resources from the Saudis.
Also, the Saudis distribute radical literature in Arabic.
• Sufi and Shiite Muslims are viciously condemned;
• For a Muslim who fails to uphold the Saudi Wahhabi sect’s sexual mores (i.e. through homosexual activity or heterosexual activity outside of marriage), the edicts published by the Saudi government’s Ministry of Islamic Affairs, and found in American mosques advise, “it would be lawful for Muslims to spill his blood and to take his money;”
• Regarding those who convert out of Islam, the Saudi Ministry of Islamic Affairs explicitly asserts, they “should be killed;”
• Saudi textbooks and other publications in the collection, propagate a Nazi-like hatred for Jews, treat the forged Protocols of the Elders of Zion as historical fact, and avow that the Muslim’s duty is to eliminate the state of Israel;
• Regarding women, the Saudi publications instruct that they should be veiled, segregated from men and barred from certain employment and roles;
The report states: “While the government of Saudi Arabia claims to be ‘updating’ or reforming its textbooks and study materials within the Kingdom, its publications propagating an ideology of hatred remain plentiful in some prominent American mosques and Islamic centers, and continue to be a principal resource available to students of Islam within the United States.”
The Saudis are a big part of the problem and they have hired many retired State Department retirees and have a strong role in our government. They have been tolerated and more because we needed their oil. Now, we don’t.
“We should focus on the pursuit of the jihadis and their sympathizers and leave other Muslims alone.”
-We should pursue the activist Nazi and leave alone the moderate Nazi.
-We should excise the aggressive cancerous growth but leave alone the dormant cancerous cells.
-We should root out revolutionaries acting to overthrow the US Gov’t but leave alone the members of the revolutionary group who take no action to overthrow the US Gov’t.
To be a Muslim means that one believes X, Y, and Z where X is murder for apostates, Y calls for the overthrow of the gov’t and Z calls for subjugating one’s neighbors.
These beliefs are in conflict with civil society. The presence of this ideological cancer is more of a problem in Europe than in America. We might tolerate a subversive population which represents 1% of our population if we’re willing to put up with continuing tragedies from our own 5th column and continuing mass surveillance of all us in order to keep an eye on the 5th column but Europe is facing a different scenario, an insurgency as Fenanndez wrote in one of the pieces quoted in the OP.
Look at the aggressiveness of CAIR and other Muslim groups right now, working to force their ways onto others and force others to accommodate them. This is going on when they’re 1% of the population. Already they’re a massive irritant in civil life, never mind the threat to safety. In order to respect your wishes we all need to be subject to mass surveillance and other security theater FOREVER. Let’s understand the trade-offs here. Some people will look at the trade-offs and decide better to expel the Muslims and restore freedom to everyone than keep the Muslims and live under intrusive Big Brother. This is the trade-off, it’s not a false dilemma because you want the jihadis expelled but never specify how we can identify them beforehand.
Secondly, you don’t address the dynamic we saw in Brussels. The community hiding the terrorists, you know, the very group you’re saying we should leave alone. You assert a distinction between sympathizer and other Muslims but I don’t see how you can ascertain when a Muslim is a sympathizer and when one isn’t.
PenGun, you and your hippy ways are a sad sight. Singing kumbaya doesn’t really help matters.
Seeing how you’re a hippy and so probably love trees and the environment, I’m guessing you adhere to the precautionary principle with respect to environmental politics. If my guess is correct, then explain to us why you don’t apply the same principle to the subject of culture.
We could also limit Muslim immigration or at least immigration from places like Somalia and Pakistan.
Most of us are on different sections of the same path. Some people saw the danger decades ago, some a few years ago, others are seeing it now, others are getting worried, others are blind (Hi PenGun).
Would you have advocated for banning Muslim immigration 10 years ago? If not, do you recognize that you’re on a path which leads to more aggressive solutions? If you do see yourself on a path, what is the problem with advocating for clearer solutions than you believe are presently warranted? If you’re wrong about your present solutions then society pays a price for not fixing the problem when it had the chance.
If you have progressed in your viewpoints over the years and now can advocate for not permitting future Muslim immigration, what makes you so sure that those who are advocating more intensive solutions are wrong to advocate their positions?
Jonathan, Mike K.
History is a process that goes from the past to shape today, then the current events of today close out options for the future.
Islamic Terrorists go for soft targets.
America had become a harder target for al-Qaeda, so it struck where the forces of order were weaker.
When America collapsed al-Qaeda and spawned ISIS. ISIS went local, and then international to fill the virgin field America’s run down of Al-Qaeda created in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.
Europe, thanks to Merkel, is now not only weaker. It is -invested- with a title wave of thousands of trained ISIS terrorists hidden inside millions of illiterate Muslim refugees.
A title wave of terrorists who have places like Belgium, where the forces of order are as strong as wet paper-mâché, to launch a European based insurgency against the West.
The weakness in West Europe is multi-culturalism and self-hate of European nationality. It is a intellectual paradigm that blinds leaders there to the real threat and makes them more likely to attack their own nationalistic citizens for resisting Muslims than saving their states.
This means years of horrid Muslim terrorist atrocity until those multi-cult (and yes they are now a cult) leaders are replaced by hard core European nationalists.
And Madame Le Penn of France will be the least of it.
Tom H’s reading list is a good place to start to understand the near future the current events in Brussels have created.
Here is a example of past events shaping today’s realities.
Pay close attention to the Muslim populations percentages of Germany, France and Britain —
https://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/articles/20150806.aspx
Counter-Terrorism: Tracking Islamic Terrorists In The West
August 6, 2015: British counter-terrorism analysts believe about 700 British Moslems have gone to join ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant) in Syria so far and about ten percent have died there. Many are coming back with a bad attitude and Britain is having a hard time keeping track of their Islamic terrorist activities (if any) in Britain. The problem is worse in France, where over 2,000 French Moslems have gone to Syria so far. Again about ten percent have died and many who return want to terrorize the people of France. Germany has sent fewer, largely because so many of their Moslem citizens are Turks who have been in Germany longer. Note that 4.6 percent of 81 million Germans, five percent of 64 million Britons and 7.5 percent of the 66 million French are Moslems. While the ISIL recruiting is a problem a larger issue is the degree to which the Moslems of Europe are supportive of Islamic terrorism against the countries they are living in.
European police and intelligence agencies continue to have a difficult time agreeing on how many of their Moslem citizens have been radicalized by Islamic terrorist groups, particularly ISIL. Police in the EU (European Union) believe at least 6,000 of their citizens have been radicalized. That’s about 1.2 Islamic terrorists per 100,000 people in the EU. If you take just Moslems, that’s 30 per 100,000 EU Moslems. The problem is that intel agencies that monitor Syria and Iraq believe that are over 3,000 European Moslems in the area with ISIL or other Islamic terrorist groups. The problem is that while the EU police are counting people they know exist and who have demonstrated clear evidence of interest or participation in Islamic terrorism, the intel estimates of the number of European Moslems actually operating in Syria and Iraq are estimates based on fragmentary information.
I think it’s quite foolish to assume that muslims will cooperate with us on terrorism if only we are nicer to them. They have already chosen sides, and they did not choose ours. Their culture requires them work for our destruction and to support the killers who attack us. How on earth do you expect an outreach program to make any headway against hundreds of years of cultural pressure built up behind them? It’s like asking the Jews to engage with Nazis in the hope of appealing to their humanity. They are not here to integrate with us, they are here to replace us. We either stop them by force or we don’t.
“then international to fill the virgin field America’s run down of Al-Qaeda created in Syria, Iraq and elsewhere.”
I think as they are defeated in Syria, mostly by Kurds who are a real threat to Turkey, they will go more for terrorism.
Some of us like Europe but it is getting dangerous to go there. I’m glad we went to Belgium when we did. I won’t go again. Our British friends are in India now and I wonder if he will doing anymore military tours to battlefields, many of which are in Belgium?
Paris is probably OK and I appreciated learning about the express trains from DeGaulle to Paris. At my age, we are probably not going to go too far anymore.
I’m going to Quebec this June and to Chicago but will stay in the country. No more Greece for us. Too bad.
I would like to go to China but it is just too long a trip.
I still think we will see a big terror incident in this country this year. I expect riots in Cleveland at the GOP convention but more will probably happen
“Seeing how you’re a hippy and so probably love trees and the environment, I’m guessing you adhere to the precautionary principle with respect to environmental politics.”
No idea. I just wander in the wilderness, as I’m by myself, politics does not enter into it, unless you count dealing with wildlife both large and small.
Keep in mind that the Saddam regime’s terrorism overlapped the al Qaeda network:
Kyle Orton: The Islamic State Was Coming Without the Invasion of Iraq (or “How Saddam Hussein Gave Us ISIS”);
Iraqi Perspectives Project: Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents.
Ken Hoop:
“immoral and illegal invasions”
Answers to “Why did Bush leave the ‘containment’ (status quo)?” and “Why not free a noncompliant Saddam?”;
Answer to “Was Operation Iraqi Freedom legal?”.
You have already posted these months ago.
When you redefine terms and when you grant the right of an imperialist entity working in a unipolar world to define legality and morality
you get your required “answers.”
Now, if you can post Chinese government statements, Russian government statements agreeing that the Iraqi invasion was moral and legal, together with
polls of Iraqs which acquiesce on the matters, you might have a convincing case. Contrarily, all post-war polls show
Iraqi majorities–even among Saddam’s Shia opponents, argue to the contrary.
Clinton’s attack on Serbia/Yugoslavia also violated international law.
PenGun:
“America is largely to blame for the current surge of ISIS and the carnage they have inflicted on both the middle east and to some small extent in Europe and elsewhere. By attacking Iraq and all the stupidity that entailed.”
Actually, ISIS is primarily blowback from the Assad regime’s harboring and support of AQI combined with its bad reaction to the Arab Spring protests, which was exploited by al Qaeda derivatives (per their M.O.) that were freed by Obama’s course change from Bush.
Of course, Assad isn’t alone as a tyrant with catastrophically poor judgement. Saddam is guilty of poor judgement, too.
First, see the Kyle Orton analysis and Iraqi Perspectives Projects findings linked in the comment upthread at March 25th, 2016 at 6:38 pm. The source of AQI is the Saddam regime’s Islamic radicalism and terrorist alliance with al Qaeda.
Second, OIF was Saddam’s choice. To switch off the Gulf War ceasefire enforcement, Saddam only needed to comply with the “governing standard of Iraqi compliance” (UNSCR 1441), especially the disarmament (WMD) and terrorism mandates of UNSCR 687 and humanitarian mandates of UNSCR 688. Iraq could and should have disposed of the Gulf War ceasefire enforcement by complying in 1991-1992, let alone 2002-2003. Instead, in his “final opportunity to comply” (UNSCR 1441), Saddam chose to remain in material breach of his ceasefire obligations and thus triggered OIF.
Answers to “Did Bush allow enough time for the inspections?” and “Did Iraq failing its compliance test justify the regime change?”.
Third, the “carnage” of the insurgency that overwhelmed our peace operations with Iraq until we adjusted with the COIN “Surge” was the legacy of Saddam’s “systematic, widespread and extremely grave violations of human rights and of international humanitarian law by the Government of Iraq, resulting in an all-pervasive repression and oppression sustained by broad-based discrimination and widespread terror” (UN Commission on Human Rights, 19APR02).
Ken Hoop,
Well yeah. The answer is going to be the same. The legal character of the enforcement of Iraq’s compliance with the UNSCR 660-series resolutions is historical record.
Trent Telenko:
“Both Vietnam’s and Shia Iraq’s lessons for America’s citizens are that it is a futile waste of American lives and treasure to try and protect people who don’t have either the will nor the means to protect themselves.”
In other words, turn back the clock to Neville Chamberlain re Munich Agreement:
“My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minister has returned from Germany bringing peace with honor. I believe it is “peace for our time.” Go home and get a nice quiet sleep”
In other words, turn back the clock to Neville Chamberlain re Munich Agreement:
I’m not seeing the parallel. Hitler was a threat to Europe, including the UK. The UK had much in common with the continent, the peoples were similar, the religions were similar, the cultures sprang from the same rootstock, there was long history between them, and they were separated by a mere few miles of the English Channel.
Why should the American people be concerned if the entire Middle East turns into one huge blood-feud battle and by concerned I don’t mean people should refrain from tut-tutting but they should mount up and go over there and expend blood and treasure to bring peace to the warring factions.
The best thing for the world might be to allow the entire region to get it on and we concentrate on containing the mess so that it doesn’t blowback onto us. Once they’ve tired of killing each other and destroying their infrastructure, they might reform their beliefs, culture, religion, customs, and find a way towards peace.
“Once they’ve tired of killing each other and destroying their infrastructure, they might reform their beliefs, culture, religion, customs, and find a way towards peace.”
That is Spengler’s 30% solution. I agree. Israel is in a bad neighborhood but may be able to keep them at bay.
I think Turkey may go down due to Erdogan’s bad judgement.
It would be a good start to bomb the electricity and communication infrastructure into ruin. No more phones, trucks, cars, tv, radio or any other modern means of transportation and communication. Let them adjust to life in the dirt and perhaps they’ll not have time for all this nonsense.
Pengun said, “To advocate a holy war is the height of madness, and will bring nothing but pain and misery.”
Tell that to the followers of the pedophile Muhammed who not only advocate but wage “holy war” against us.
You are the idiot here if you believe that western civilization should adhere to suicidal rule-following while the jihadists live among us, consume our generosity and ceaselessly plot lawless violence to press their multi-millenial dreams of global caliphate. You reveal your stunted and statist intellectual milieu by using the favorite cliche of present day communists, “America is largely to blame…”
FiretrUCK you and your smug blame America first leftist claptrap. Earlier in this thread it was rightfully pointed out that popular wrath might be more effective targeting domestic traitors than muslims. Your kind of thinking makes that an easy choice.
Pengun said, “To advocate a holy war is the height of madness, and will bring nothing but pain and misery.”
Tell that to the followers of the pedophile Muhammed who not only advocate but wage “holy war” against us.
Tell that to the Nazis, the slaveholders, George III, and the Stuarts. See Kevin Philips’ The Cousins’ Wars: Religion, Politics, Civil Warfare, And The Triumph Of Anglo-America for details. Bottom line, the muslims should understand that we can find a Cromwell, Washington, Grant, or Marshall when we need one. Do they really want to bring their holy war here when we will respond with holy wholly war on a scale they cannot imagine and have never endured?
“we will respond with holy wholly war on a scale they cannot imagine and have never endured?”
I think this may still be possible in red states and blue states with large Hispanic populations but I doubt very much if Europe has it in their dna any longer.
In South Dakota, pheasants tend to run and in Germany young men tend to do the same because the others got shot years ago.
Eric,
While I agree with you here:
>>Actually, ISIS is primarily blowback from the Assad regime’s harboring and
>>support of AQI combined with its bad reaction to the Arab Spring protests,
>>which was exploited by al Qaeda derivatives (per their M.O.) that were freed
>>by Obama’s course change from Bush.
>>
>>Of course, Assad isn’t alone as a tyrant with catastrophically poor judgement.
>>Saddam is guilty of poor judgement, too.
This makes no sense:
>>In other words, turn back the clock to Neville Chamberlain
Europe and Belgium in particular are at the start of a protracted Muslim urban insurgency a’la Algeria.
America took no sides in Algeria between France and the Algerian Muslims.
Nor should we with Europe in this conflict.
Belgium is terminally ill WRT its Muslim insurgency.
At a minimum it has 1% of it’s Muslim population as hard core terrorist supporters. The demographics works out to 10,000 home grown urban Belgian Muslim insurgents.
The minimum force level for security forces in a successful insurgency — AKA British Army in Malaya — is that Security forces (Police, paramilitary, military) must out number insurgents by 10-to-01.
The Belgian Army only has six infantry battalions with 3,000 infantry. They are outnumbered 3.3-to-1 by the hard core terrorist supporters.
The Belgians need their end of Cold War force structure of 48 infantry battalions for this insurgency — minimum — plus a much enlarged police force even to begin dealing with the problem.
Until the Belgians even start trying to get a force that large. We should stay the hell out and re-implement visa screening for all Belgians traveling to America.
The Belgians and West Europe with their Muslim Urban Insurgency are in the same place Britain was between the Fall of France and Churchill’s attack on the French fleet.
The Europeans have to demonstrate they have both the will and the means to deal with the Muslim Urban insurgency threat before we provide any support.
The West Europeans won’t be there for 7-to-10 years at the very earliest.
I agree we should stay out of this and keep fracking. Muslim immigration should be sharply limited and that requires Trump or Cruz.
Hillary will accelerate Muslim immigration for the same reasons Blair did.
I am concerned that this Cruz mistress thing is a stink bomb thrown at both Cruz and Trump by someone in the Rubio organization who has ties to the GOPe, maybe through Bush where Rubio got many of his people originally.
This could give the insiders the excuse to say neither was a viable candidate and substitute someone like Ryan who would take orders from donors.
I am very discouraged today.
Mike K,
Odds are we will have one to two more Paris/Brussels type terrorist attacks between now and the GOP convention.
The GOP Elites have no answer and Trump/Cruz have the only reasonable solutions.
Everything else is media posturing.
I would not be surprised and I do expect riots at the convention.
Equal to limiting immigration by Muslims from trouble spots like Syria is a way to limit Saudi influence in US mosques.
The Saudis have become far too expensive allies for us. We don’t need them for their oil and they have wormed their way into the government for years buying influence.
The royal family has bought peace with the Wahhabis for years but we have no positive interest in their issues.
The French had a real interest in Algeria and their connection with Muslims had more rational reasons than ours, which is totally about oil and that is over.
Maybe Fortress America is our best course for a while. Fred Smith has an op-ed in the WSJ today about how great trade had been for us. It has great for him, no question.
We have to fix our welfare state before we can figure out the balance.
pheasants tend to run and in Germany young men tend to do the same because the others got shot years ago.
They said the same thing from 1806-1871. Who said the Germans are either at your feet or your throat? I would not give up on the Euros yet. The EUros, yes, but the Euros, no.
“Actually, ISIS is primarily blowback from the Assad regime’s harboring and support of AQI combined with its bad reaction to the Arab Spring protests, which was exploited by al Qaeda derivatives (per their M.O.) that were freed by Obama’s course change from Bush.”
This is gospel now. It’s in no way true, but is one of the weasel twisting of reality threads, to avoid the blame for a massive US failure.
No.
ISIS is a creation of the US, financed and nurtured by the Saudis. It has been incredibly useful as a way to satisfy their Saudi and more impotently, Qatari clients, with out actually doing much of anything. Slick.
“ISIS is a creation of the US, financed and nurtured by the Saudis”
Delusional, as usual. You’re right about one thing. The Saudis are too expensive as allies.
FDR made a deal with ibn Saud in 1945 on the way home from Yalta to protect them in return for oil.
They have held up their end pretty well until the past 30 years. Iran broke the deal when Carter “Threw out the Shah like a dead mouse,” as one Iranian general said.
The royal family has been feeding the Wahhabis for 90 years but they are making trouble as we get more Muslim refugees and immigrants.
The Saudis and ISIS is one side in a Muslim civil war. The only reason we got involved was because we were not independent in oil. We are now.
The US was a net exporter of oil through the 1950’s and later. The deal with the Sauds was made because we wanted lines of communications to Iran and a source of oil for Europe. And we didn’t want the Ruskies to have access to same.
Don’t feed the PenGuns. It only creates droppings.
Here is another “flaming datum” for the now visible Muslim Urban Insurgency in Belgium.
Hicham Chaib is the Belgian chief executioner for ISIS in Syria.
He was active in terrorism and fled to Syria before Frau Merkel turned loose the flood gates of uncontrolled Syrian Muslim immigration to the EU.
See:
Brussels slaughter ‘just a taste’ of what is coming, warns ISIS chief executioner in chilling new video threatening further attacks on the West
Hicham Chaib responsible for many beheadings and crucifixions in Syria
Belgian warns West that ISIS will ‘kill your people’ during new video rant
Executioner shoots a kneeling ISIS prisoner at the end of the 9-minute film
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3511274/Brussels-slaughter-just-taste-coming-warns-ISIS-chief-executioner-chilling-new-video-threatening-attacks-West.html#ixzz447c5QRBu
Text from the link —
Before joining ISIS, Chaib worked as a senior figure within Sharia4Belgium – a radical Islamist group that was branded a terror organisation by a judge who found 45 members guilty of terror-related offences last February.
Heavily-built Chaib is understood to have served as a personal bodyguard for the group’s lead Fouad Belkacem – who was jailed for 12 years following last February’s trial.
Chahib even served as co-leader of Sharia4Belgium when Belkacem was jailed for two years for incitement of hatred towards non-Muslims in Antwerp in June 2012.
The other two men who helped Chaib lead the group, Feisal Yamoun and Noureddine Abouallal, are both understood to have been killed fighting in Syria in recent years.
A year later Chaib and his wife Kaoutar Bioui fled to Syria to join ISIS, which had yet to declare itself a caliphate and was just one of a number of terror groups battling for power and territory.
Having become one of the first Westerners to join ISIS, Chaib positioned himself as a senior propagandist – using his Facebook page to encourage new recruits and starring in a large number of propaganda videos and photographs released by the then rapidly expanding terror group.
With Chaib being arguably the most prominent Belgian figure in ISIS during its rapid expansion last year, there have been suggestions he is largely responsible for the fact Belgium has seen more nationals join ISIS’ ranks than any other Western country.
“The US was a net exporter of oil through the 1950’s and later. The deal with the Sauds was made because we wanted lines of communications to Iran and a source of oil for Europe.”
Oil exports were not significant after about 1950, with the exception of the oil embargo during the Six Day War, which we broke by exporting oil to Europe. In 1975, exports were banned but we had been running out of Texas crude for some years before that. Production peaked in 1967 during the six day war, but declined after that until fracking came online.
FDR’s deal with ibn Saud concerned oil, although he may have been thinking more of Europe at the time.
They eventually came to an agreement that centered around U.S. support and military training for Saudi Arabia, then a fledgling country surrounded by stronger nations, in return for oil and political support in the region. “I would take no action, in my capacity as Chief of the Executive Branch of this Government, which might prove hostile to the Arab people,” Roosevelt later wrote to the Saudi king in a follow up letter.
Unfortunately, the great friendship between Roosevelt and Abdul Aziz didn’t last – the U.S. president died less than two months later. His successor, Harry Truman, didn’t always see eye-to-eye with Abdul Aziz (in particular, his views on Israel were far less conciliatory), who himself died in 1953. However, the core themes of the Saudi-U.S. relationship established at that meeting – security and oil – have endured through five Saudi kings and 12 U.S. presidents.
This says it all in where Belgium is going —
VIDEO=> Belgian Imams Refuse to Pray for Souls of Non-Muslim Victims of Brussels Islamist Attack
Jim Hoft Mar 29th, 2016 8:30 am
http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/03/video-belgian-imams-refuse-pray-souls-non-muslim-victims-brussels-islamist-attack/
Belgium does not want to fight terrorism. This is perhaps not the best of sources, but it links through to the more reputable Jerusalem Post. For months, Belgian soldiers on guard duty protecting against terrorist attacks did not carry ammunition.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/point/262303/belgian-soldiers-deployed-fight-terrorists-had-no-daniel-greenfield
And remember, the French police guarding the Charlie Hebdo offices in Paris were unarmed.
When you deliberately set up your soldiers and police to be killed by terrorists, you don’t really oppose terrorists.
I think they want to fight terrorism. It’s just that they don’t (yet) want to pay the cost of doing it. This includes, from the point of view of the current Belgian political class, the political cost of offending Muslim voters. We have the TSA and had, for a while, unarmed National Guardsmen in airline terminals, yet Americans are becoming increasingly concerned about the risk of terror attacks and increasingly unhappy with govt half-measures. The Belgians have unarmed soldiers outside of Jewish institutions. If/when there are more attacks the Belgians will eventually either arm up and do what is necessary or they will capitulate in some way, perhaps by trying to cut deals with the terrorists. They and the French have a lot of Muslim voters, but the Muslims are still a small minority. At some point, if the attacks continue, it’s a fair bet that the non-Muslim majority will replace their current leaders with ones who prioritize Belgian national security.
Jonathan,
What that Imam means for Belgium and Europe is that the only real solutions on the table are either the expulsion of Muslims from Europe or submission of Europeans to Muslim Sharia law.
There are no other options left.
Only bloody-minded types — predominantly “America 1st” Nationalists — understand that right now.
The Europeans won’t until they have exhausted all other alternatives, which is normal.
This Muslim Urban Insurgency will exceed the Holocaust in scale. We can only hope it doesn’t exceed the Holocaust in horror.
We’re looking at a 15-20 year process.
The problem right now is that Europe’s military big three — England, France and Germany — are being lead by what amounts to suicidal leadership that doesn’t want to fight and won’t let it’s nativists fight the Muslims either.
Effectively, this means at some point both the Right wing nativists and the Muslims will go after the suicidal Lefties running those three nation’s government -simultaneously-.
We as Americans cannot effect any of this, and with the West European NATO “Big Three” being unwilling to defend themselves, there is no NATO anymore.
This, BTW, makes Trump the only real national security candidate in the American Presidential race.
Trump is the only one ready to deal with Europe’s on-the-ground reality as it is and not as the transnational progressive political elites want to see through their PC colored glasses.
It’s inexpressibly sad to me that the Ruling Elite in all three of those countries seem to value the tender feelinz of the local Muslims more than the safety of their native English, French and German citizens, even to the point of either actively censoring the media, or bringing charges against bloggers, tweeters and facebookers who have posted uncomfortable insights and reports.
This will not end well – and hey, anyone got a Captain Obvious graphic handy?
I’m glad that I got to see Europe, back then. Either way it goes, Europe will not now be anything like what I remembered it.
At some point, if the attacks continue, it’s a fair bet that the non-Muslim majority will replace their current leaders with ones who prioritize Belgian national security.
Take a look at Belgium’s population pyramid. It’s a weird looking pyramid. The widest part of the pyramid is the 50-54 age group, every 5 year grouping below that group is smaller than the one above it until the 15-19 age group and below that it’s kind of a straight line.
The Turk and Moroccan youth in Belgium comprise 35% of their population compared to Belgian youth comprising 18% of the the Belgian population. The population of Brussels is 25% Muslim.
Policing is a young man’s profession and the police are infused with Muslims.
WHO will comprise the shock troops which will restore order to that society? The old farts of Belgium? They’re going to impose their will on young Muslim tuffs? We all know this, right, Government is Violence. Without that monopoly on force, how effective is government?
As much as we like to think that civilizations don’t die, I mean the ones we know, not the abstract ones we’ve learned about in history, the truth is that we’re probably looking at Belgium facing a slow death. The government is completely dysfunctional due to the schism between the Walloons and the Flemish. They people aren’t reproducing themselves. They’re submissive and want to protect their pensions. They’re importing Muslims galore. Who is going to fight for Belgium? Some will. The recent ceremony was crashed by Nationalist tough guys, they’ve shown that they’ll fight, but they were rejected by the normal Belgians as being too divisive. Those normal Belgians simply want to appease and show understanding of Muslims, etc. They’re essentially useless at this point. The Muslims though are far more united in attitude and culture and so when faced against the Nationalist Defenders the Muslims have numerical superiority and almost certainly don’t face rear-theater traitors (they know how to deal with Muslims who don’t side with fellow Muslims, see Scotland for a recent example.)
To save Belgium will require a unified European response, an occupation, and then a rolling mass emigration scheme across Europe. First restore Belgium back to the Belgians, then move onto another country. One at a time and this maintains numerical supremacy. What are the odds of that happening? Pretty much zero at this point. It’s going to take a country like Belgium crashing in order to open the eyes of the normal, appeasing, milquetoasts in every country.
What that Imam means for Belgium and Europe is that the only real solutions on the table are either the expulsion of Muslims from Europe or submission of Europeans to Muslim Sharia law.
There are no other options left.
Only bloody-minded types — predominantly “America 1st” Nationalists — understand that right now.
The Europeans won’t until they have exhausted all other alternatives, which is normal.
I believe that you are assessing the situation correctly.
It’s inexpressibly sad to me that the Ruling Elite in all three of those countries seem to value . . . .
I don’t know your comment history so I’m going to treat your statement as a new revelation. Our elites hate us. The sooner people realize this the better. The views they hold of Trump voters are the same as they hold for the supporters of the other candidates, but exasperation is what is driving them to speak plainly about Trump voters. Elite interests are aligned so that they come at the expense of the interests of most of America.
“For months, Belgian soldiers on guard duty protecting against terrorist attacks did not carry ammunition.”
The American Marines at the Beirut barracks were armed with unloaded M16s and they watched the grinning suicide truck driver come though the barrier.
There was a photo on Facebook a few weeks ago showing two US soldiers standing their ground and shooting at a truck bomb in Afghanistan. They stopped it but it killed them when it exploded. The others inside the barrier were not injured. Times change and American are learning.
I’ve tried to find that photo since.
Tangoman,
There will be enough German volunteers to deal with Belgium’s Muslims when the time comes. And the Germans won’t be fussy about definitions.
There was a photo on Facebook a few weeks ago showing two US soldiers standing their ground and shooting at a truck bomb in Afghanistan.
That’s an old clip. I saw it years ago. Good that it is still around and being posted as fresh.
There will be enough German volunteers to deal with Belgium’s Muslims when the time comes. And the Germans won’t be fussy about definitions.
If that comes to pass then we’re dealing with an intransigent German gov’t, possibly many European gov’ts. If they’re arresting people for criticizing Muslims on facebook what do you think they’re going to do to people who volunteer to go to Belgium to get it on with the Muslims there?
This has to be a gov’t led response. As Subotai noted, gov’ts don’t want to fight. They want this nightmare to stop and everything to return back to order. They’ve constructed a policy vision based on wishful thinking, which explains why they’ve let in millions of Muslims over the years and why they give them welfare and other benefits. There is no political upside to changing the status quo, of veering from the path of least resistance – it was simply easier to give welfare to people than to deport them, it was easier to allow family reunification than to deport the single men. No one wanted to be called a racist, so the acquiesced. No one wants to fight. So until a leadership class emerges which is willing to fight, the Muslims will grow in numbers and strength.
There is a clip of the Brussels demonstration which shows a Belgian tough guy clocking some Muslim-defending cuck in the face and knocking him down. Some people get it. That guy understands what is going on. They’re a minority. They’re powerless. The people and the government are siding with the Muslim population in Belgium. They don’t want to face what this all means. They want a return to tranquility and normality. Matters need to get a lot, lot worse before there is any movement to make things better.
Tangoman,
The definitions I said the Germans would not be fussy about include the definitions of “volunteers”, “Belgium’s” and “Muslims”. By that time most European governments won’t be fussy either, though I expect some atavistic qualms concerning the Germans’ fuzziness about the definition of “border”.
TangoMan,
By the time Germans are moving in large numbers to be the “Belgian Foreign Legion” in dealing with the Muslim Urban Insurgency, the German Bovernment will be as glad to see them leave as the Assad government was to see Syrian Sunni fighters go to Iraq and die fighting Americans.
I expect roughly the same long term results for the German elites as the Assad regime obtained after the Americans left Iraq.
Apparently not all is lost, Sean Bean is providing masticatory massages to Red/Green:
Alt Right on Twitter_ _We need more #Hooligans! #Belgian cuck gets knocked out 4 supporting #Muslims who bombed #Brussels #DeportAllMuslims https___t.co_BAusuKaezf_
Trent, they won’t really be volunteers. I agree that Belgium will be formally partitioned by its neighbors, most likely excluding the Netherlands, after it is de facto partitioned into Flemish, Walloon and Muslim areas.
Some national background here. Belgium is dominated by two historic ethnic groups – Flems and Walloons – who do not get along. The Flems speak a mild variant of Dutch (Wikipedia says the difference is comparable between American and British versions of English) and populate the northern half of Belgium, known as Flanders. The Walloons speak basically French and have the southern half. Plus the Flems were mostly Protestant and the Walloons mostly Catholic.
They sort of jointly controlled a small central area of Belgium centered on Brussels which was pretty much ceded to Europeanism of some sort – initially NATO and then the EU. This central part has become more and more populated by Muslim immigrants, who agree with the Flems and Walloons in that they don’t want to be Belgian either.
The Flem vs. Walloon animosity has been rising since World War Two, and particularly since the end of the Cold War. There were some separatist tendencies which hit a peak around 2005-2007, though that since seems to have subsided somewhat.
What counts is that there was some formal, and a lot more informal, devolution of national government power to separate Flem and Walloon entities, and this included a de facto devolution of internal security responsibilities just as the Islamicist threat really took off. I.e., there was no one in charge. And still isn’t.
This Flem vs. Walloon animosity is THE major reason why Belgium has become a failed state. It never was much of one by European standards and has become much less so in the past 25 years.
And the Brussels area is very, very clearly becoming a Muslim-dominated failed state.
This is why I contend that Belgium has become a security threat to the rest of Europe.
It is also why I feel Belgium will be facto partitioned, by its own people, between Flemish, Walloon and Muslim majority regions. It is almost there right now.
And this is why I feel Belgium’s fate will be to be formally partitioned between its more powerful neighbors. Germany and France will do that to protect themselves, and to eliminate the Muslim majority terrorist sanctuary area centered on Brussels.
I wonder how dispersed the Muslims are throughout the country. A possible solution might be for the French to annex the Walloons and the Dutch to annex the Flemish and then build a wall around Brussels, like Escape From New York, and let the Mohammed Pliskins enjoy Gaza on the English Channel.
Tangoman,
The Muslim-Flemish-Walloon self-partition of Belgium is inevitable.
See:
Europe’s Muslims hate the West
Young men like the perpetrators of the Brussels attacks refuse to embrace the social codes of Belgian life.
By
Leon de Winter
3/29/16, 2:36 PM CET
http://www.politico.eu/article/brussels-attacks-terrorism-europe-muslims-brussels-attacks-airport-metro/
“Almost 60 percent of Europe’s Muslims reject homosexuals as friends and 45 percent think that Jews cannot be trusted. More than half believe that the West is out to destroy Islam.”
Here is a somewhat related article on the migration affects Muslim Problems in Paris —
France: Exodus of 10,000 millionaires amid rising Muslim tensions
By Ananya Roy
March 31, 2016
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/france-sees-millionaire-exodus-religious-tensions-rise-1552423
“Rising tensions in France, especially in Paris following a series of Islamist terrorist attacks in 2015, have spurred an exodus of its super-wealthy citizens, a new report on migration trends of millionaires and high-net worth individuals across the world reveals. The report warns that other European countries, including the UK, Belgium, Germany and Sweden “where religious tensions are starting to emerge”, will also see similar trends.
Regarding a Brexit, the report suggests millionaires would want to stay in Britain even if it leaves the single currency bloc.”
Tom Holsinger said —
>>Trent, they won’t really be volunteers.
Neither were the Russians in Donbas.
Oh bloody hell, see this —
At least FIFTY ISIS supporters are working as baggage handlers, cleaners and catering staff at Brussels airport, claim police
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3517493/At-FIFTY-ISIS-supporters-working-baggage-handlers-cleaners-catering-staff-Brussels-airport-claim-police.html