Wahabism Delenda Est!

You learn quickly, Grasshopper. The point about Samuel II was that by "sparing" Agag, Saul lost his monarchy. Agag was, by name, the ancestor of the ur-antisemite, Haman, from the Biblical book of Esther. Haman paid for the right to enact a decree allowing him to murder all the Jews on earth. Sadly, I don't quite think you've come to grips that if you scratch a "moderate" Muslim, then you'll have to reveal the Koranic dogma that requires everyone to be either Muslim or dhimmi. There is no pluralistic tolerance in Islam, John. And the necessary conclusion is that the only outcome is that we are destined to fight Islam until one side unconditionally surrenders. The end of wars are ALWAYS determined by the losers, not the winners. Once one side quits, then terms can be decided. As long as there is one Wahabi, Sunni or Shiite Muslim who dreams of turning the Capital Building in Washington DC into a mosque, the fight hasn't ended. Ideally, there might be some folk who happened to be born Muslim who will fight their own rather than allow more genocide to be committed in the name of Allah. Christianity says one should judge a tree by the fruit it bears, no? Make a compelling case for the contributions of Islam for the last thousand years. If it's difficult, the case is solidly made. It remains sad. But it doesn't just affect us. We only seem to notice when it hits us in the gas pump or at the occasional foreign military or diplomatic outpost. Look at the Muslim treatment of blacks in Africa. Whatever vestiges of white slavery there is in the world. The greatest cultural subjugation of women on the planet. In fact, look around the world and 95% of most of the world's current violent conflict has one thing in common... radical Islam on the wrong side. There were isolationists in the US in the 1930s. Good American Germans and Italians enlisted to fight their cousins because the threat of the spread of fascism was too great to ignore. Find me one radical Islamic protest for peace with more than 1000 protestors in the last century... anywhere on the planet. The evidence is overwhelming... and damning. Wahabism isn't a mutation. It is as much Islamic as Jesuits or Franciscans are Catholic. And you'll find that after wiping out root, branch, twig and leaf of Wahabism... there will be more. There will always be more until Muslims are willing to kill their brethren to prevent the desecration of what was long ago a proud religion though it has contributed little other than pain, poverty and backwardness in the meantime.

All good points, Aaron. My point is, we just can't, nor should we, kill them all and convert them. The Christian church has morphed through the centuries. Islam will too, especially if goaded in the right ways. No, the two are not synonymous, and Islam does not have a central edifice for a Muslim Martin Luther to attack. In a sense, Islam resembles the splinters of Protestantism, where any Imam can be a powerful voice, and there is no central unifying body to police the hordes, as it were. And certainly, the modern era poses challenges and opportunities not present when Luther nailed the 95 Theses to the door of the Wittenburg cathedral. Whether the left likes it or not (as they tend to be a touch short-sighted in these things) this *is* a clash of cultures, and one that will go on for hundreds of years, if we, culturally, have the stomach for it. My sense of the left is, they have no stomach for it, and almost yearn for dhimmitude in their self-loathing of western culture. So, we'll fight the fight - but we can only fight it a bit at a time, like it or no.