A Binary State

In talking with many of my friends on the Left, I get the feeling that their outrage over the war in Iraq and their absolute desire to “bring the troops home” at the earliest possible time is predicated on a subliminal belief that once the war in Iraq “ends” (for us, at least), we'll be well on our way toward "peace." Intellectually, they know this won't happen, but emotionally, I think they want to believe that once one war ends, peace will be at hand.

That’s also why they’re outraged at Israel for defending itself again Hamas, Fatah, and Hezballah, and threatening action against Iran. In fact, only recently, John Edwards, Democratic candidate for President, implied that because Israel may choose to act against Iran (a country that has threatened to nuke it), Israel is a threat to world peace! (He has since scurried to recant any misunderstanding about that implication, now denying that he made it). After all, the West must do everything in its power to make peace with murderous, barbaric thugs—must in essence, give peace a chance—and the war against Islamofascism will end.

And with the end of the war, the frightening specter of a dhimmi world dominated by Islamists—a world of misogyny, religious intolerance, homophobia, religious censorship, no freedom of speech, etc., etc.—will evaporate before their eyes and all the world’s children will live in a multicultural utopia. It'd be nice, but history indicates that it simply will not happen.

Wretchard of the Belmont Club comments on war and peace, 21st century style:

Perhaps the idea of War and Peace as a binary state has passed. It would be interesting to see whether an equivalent concept exists among rival tribes in parts of the Middle East or whether they are accustomed to living in a twilight state of neither war nor peace, the condition depending on the time of day.

If, as now seems, the Tribes have imposed their way of war upon the West, then we will long for a definite peace the way Redcoats in North America hankered after the clash of orderly ranks in the open field. Long will we seek it, but seek it in vain.

Then Israel will have proved not the exception, but rather the new rule. And the landscape though apparently open, may little by little come to be divided into besieged demesnes; a new Dark Age arising on the foundation of the new tribalism. And the wonder of it all is that it will have been built in our faces. Perhaps this is the way civilizations finish; when the consensus to go on ends. If the West does not have the inner desire to continue then perhaps it has taken the subconscious decision to wind it all up.

As disturbing as this assessment is, it may be the collective reality for the remainder of my life and possibly, the lives of my children.

The enemy we face is implacable, bent on world domination. They may achieve their goals or they may not. The outcome, thankfully, is in our hands, not theirs. Their implacability, their barbarism, their religious certainly can be overcome, but not by appeasement or “understanding” or negotiation. None of those things will lead us back to the binary state we all desire. Why? Because Islamofascists and their sympathizers—possibly 100 million people or more—don’t want a binary state … until they prevail.

And what of the Moslem nations that are known as our “friends”—the same friends that fund Al Quaida, teach hatred of the West in their schools and media, vilify Jews and other non-Moslems? Or our non-Moslem “friends” who work behind the scenes to subvert every attempt we make to counter our mutual enemies? Again, Wretchard comments:

Just as the idea of a binary state of war and peace may have gone by, so to the idea of a "friend". Maybe all we have now, and can ever hope to have, is friends in some respect. Friends depending on the time of day and whether or not you are looking. Those who object to the futility of fighting for or against such inconstant allies should logically accept the equal futility of talking to the same. What a pass we have come to.