Pipes favours a military solution to our Islamist problem
By Ted Belman
Daniel Pipes wrote Europe’s Stark Options in which he defined the options as integration, expulsion or Islamification. He failed to take a position. I wondered what it might be so I googled him for it and came up with this,
How the West Could Lose (FrontPageMagazine.com | December 27, 2006)
He asks “After defeating fascists and communists, can the West now defeat the Islamists?” He thinks victory is not so simple because
Islamists (defined as persons who demand to live by the sacred law of Islam, the Sharia) might in fact do better than the earlier totalitarians. They could even win. That’s because, however strong the Western hardware, its software contains some potentially fatal bugs. Three of them – pacifism, self-hatred, complacency – deserve attention.
I found his definition of Islamist interesting because they are anyone who follows Sharia Law. So moderates are those who don’t. My reading is that he considers moderates to be apostates. He goes on to define “pacifism, self-hatred, complacency” and ends with,
Pacifism, self-hatred and complacency are lengthening the war against radical Islam and causing undue casualties. Only after absorbing catastrophic human and property losses will left-leaning Westerners likely overcome this triple affliction and confront the true scope of the threat. The civilized world will likely then prevail, but belatedly and at a higher cost than need have been.
Should Islamists get smart and avoid mass destruction, but instead stick to the lawful, political, non-violent route, and should their movement remain vital, it is difficult to see what will stop them.
So it appears that he favours a military solution.