Article by WN.com Correspondent Dallas Darling
Republicans are giving a whole new meaning to Carl Von Clausewitz’s famous military theory “war is the continuation of Politik by other means.
”The Great Debate: Radical Islam and Political Correctness
Immediately after the Orlando shooting, for instance, Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump accused Obama of not knowing who the real enemy is because of his reluctance to use the term “Radical Islam.” Meanwhile, House Speaker Paul Ryan and other Republican leaders said telling the truth about violent Islam was a prerequisite to a strategy, a strategy that must include identifying the enemy as Radical Islam.
Obama defended his choice of words and strategy by claiming the use of Radical Islam has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with actually defeating extremism.
“Groups like ISIS want to claim that they are the true leaders of over a billion Muslims…who reject their crazy notions” said the president. He also cautioned about lumping all Muslims with Radical Islam, let alone singling them out.
Political Parties Have Ideologies Too
Since political parties have their own ideologies, mind you, it is hard to speculate about the overriding political goals Republicans have in mind by declaring war on an ideology. More so, what new roles would corporations, the media, and Pentagon play? And since there is no decisive blow in war, how long would this war last and would it include a war for and within the minds of Americans, even leading to the defeat of critical thinking?
Radical Islam is not only an ambiguous term, but most Muslims disagree over its meaning.
Indeed, some view it as either a conservative or liberal movement dependent on their notion of Islam. Still, some believe it is a revolutionary internal and spiritual struggle to live for Allah while others recognize it as a call to defend against foreign invasions and military occupations. And then there are those Muslims who reject the term outright.
Ideological Wars Are Open Ended, Detached from Reality
What Clausewitz meant was war is simply the means to a political end that might well be achieved through other means.
Indeed, his point was not to highlight the cynicism of politicians who go to war, but to ensure those who wage war are always aware of its overriding political goal.
Moreover, he believed war was a clash of opposing wills, an act of violence intended to compel the conquered to fulfill the will of the conqueror.
By wanting to issue a declaration of war against an ideology, Republicans want to go where even angels fear to tread.
In fact, the United States has always declared war on clearly defined states or groups but never an ideology. It might be true the U.S. was fighting Nazism during World War II and Communism during the Cold War, but still they were simply byproducts of a more traditional battle of the wills between nations.
Whether Republicans get their ideological war, nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance. American history is in fact filled with examples of where traditional wars were sometimes confused for ideological conflicts with devastating consequences. Any state or individual with just an inkling of the abhorrent ideology was thought to be an enemy and quickly eliminated, no questions asked.
It should also be remembered in order to declare a war on an idea or ideology, a state or political party must be prepared to promote and provide evidence of maintaining a better one that meets the needs of all people.
http://article.wn.com/view/2016/06/17/GOP_Wants_to_Declare_War_On_Islamic_Ideology_In_Wake_Of_Orla/
hello