The Jihadists are insane. Seriously. Not in a clinical sense, necessarily, but in any pragmatic review of the facts their cause must be regarded as uniquely ill-suited to their goals. Yet, the statements by such men as Iran’s Presidentr Ahmadinejad carry the evidence that they mean to win. And the election of terrorist groups like Hamas to leadership of the Palestinian Authority also play that same two-edged game, running against reason by supporting leaders they know the world at large will not respect, but putting the hopes of millions behind such thugs all the same. We should be uneasy when facing such evidence of insanity, especially knowing the history of such behavior.
Fortunately, there is also a bright side to such madness. The Jihadists have essentially locked in the philosophy and methods of Fascism, which makes them predictable to a degree, and which reminds me of a fatal flaw in their plans.
Rage is a powerful emotion, and the Nazis rode it. They used it to gain seats in the German government, then to blame the Communists for the Reichstag fire, then to support preparations for the invasions of Austria, then Czechoslovakia (we only want ‘living room’, promised Der FruitLoop ) and finally Poland before the West came to its belated sense. Rage whipped the troops into a frenzy, especially the Stormtroopers (yes Virginia, there were Stormtroopers before ‘Star Wars’), and the ‘blitzkrieg’.
But rage runs out, and is ultimately no match for a hard resolve. The Nazis could not finish the job in Russia, and never even crossed the English Channel to roll the dice against Churchill. And this was no one-time blunder. Long ago, the early Muslims raged across the Middle East and into Europe, finally being stopped at Poitiers in 732. Yes folks, Europe was saved from the Jihadists in 732 by the French army.
Rage also ran out for the Hun, whose armies were unstoppable until they simply tired of always fighting, and stopped to enjoy what they had. Contentment drains rage, as does doubt. Many empires have slowed down and stopped because their subjects began to doubt the purpose of their conquest. Even Rome could not spur the legions in simply because there was more land and more people out there.
Also, as I have noted before, Islam has a serious problem with its Jihad. In the seventh and eighth centuries, the Jihadists enjoyed a culture which was as technologically advanced as any on the globe, and a religious doctrine which was comparatively honest. Not so now, where the Jihadists face weaponry and orders of battle against which they literally cannot prevail without hope of Divine intervention. That divine intervention is less likely than they believe, because the Jihadists’ version of Sharia is corrupt, manipulated by Mullahs in every situation where it serves them to change the practice. Stoning a woman to death for showing her face may feed the rage of some of the men, but others will wonder where the Mercy and Compassion of Allah, so often written of in the Quran, is to be found, where even a minor indiscretion is brutally treated, and where the powerful can replace traditional law with personal interpretations. This is one reason why so few Muslims ran to support the Taliban in Afghanistan, or to prop up Saddam’s regime; these men were apostates in actual fact, and to my mind many Muslims view a Jihad of conquest in much the same light. Not that many will protest in the street about it, but there is not the support for the campaign that the Jihadists envision, and so if they move to take over other nations, the Jihadists will certainly overstep their mark. As heavy as the price will be to stop such men, it is nonetheless a comfort to know this fact.