The Islamic Threat Is Greater Than German and Soviet Threats Were

via: JihadWatch

The understatement of the day: "There is much less you can do against people who value dying more than living."

One is the number of people who believe in it. This is a new phenomenon among organized evils. Far fewer people believed in Nazism or in communism than believe in Islam generally or in authoritarian Islam specifically. There are one billion Muslims in the world. If just 10 percent believe in the Islam of Hamas, the Taliban, the Sudanese regime, Saudi Arabia, Wahhabism, bin Ladin, Islamic Jihad, the Finley Park Mosque in London or Hizbollah -- and it is inconceivable that only one of 10 Muslims supports any of these groups' ideologies -- that means a true believing enemy of at least 100 million people. Outside of Germany, how many people believed in Nazism? Outside of Japan, who believed in Japanese imperialism and militarism? And outside of universities, the arts world or Hollywood, how many people believed in Soviet-style totalitarianism?

A far larger number of people believe in Islamic authoritarianism than ever believed in Marxism. Virtually no one living in Marxist countries believed in Marxism or communism. Likewise, far fewer people believed in Nazism, an ideology confined largely to one country for less than one generation. This is one enormous difference between the radical Islamic threat to our civilization and the two previous ones.

But there is yet a second difference that is at least as significant and at least as frightening: Nazis and Communists wanted to live and feared death; Islamic authoritarians love death and loathe life.

That is why MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) worked with the Soviet Union. Communist leaders love life -- they loved their money, their power, their dachas, their mistresses, their fine wines -- and were hardly prepared to give all that up for Marx. But Iran's current leaders celebrate dying, and MAD may not work, because from our perspective, they are indeed mad. MAD only works with the sane.

There is much less you can do against people who value dying more than living.

Prager's analysis falters here: "The evils committed by Nazism and Communism were, of course, greater than those committed by radical Islam." As do many, he does not understand that in reality there is no radical Islam, only the Islam that can not set aside any part of the Koran, that disdains all non-Muslims and take offense at even mild criticism of Islam, Muslims, and Mohammed, propelling so-called moderate Muslims into a frenzy of retribution in the name of "justice." (Retribution does not have to be violent.)
Spengler of Asia Times reminds us that "Islam does not know moderation or extremism: it only knows success or failure" and that "the Muslim either is a soldier of the ummah, or he is nothing." All or nothing.

Islam does not have to produce an Auschwitz or a Gulag system to as proof of its greater danger, for entire civilizations and uncounted cultures have been destroyed in the maw of Islam since Mohammed left his cave.