Saturday, September 15, 2012

They Can Dish It Out, But They Can't Take It



So the fundamentalist Muslims are rioting in Egypt, and Syria, and all the other Muslim countries, attacking American embassies and killing people, because some fool posted a short, amateurish, poorly-made video poking fun at Mohammed.  And of course various US politicians made a big point of apologizing for the film, just as they've spent the last few decades bending over backward not to "offend" the terribly-sensitive Muslims.  Those apologies haven't done anything to discourage the pious rioters;  if anything, they've been encouraged to go attack German and Belgian embassies too.  It's interesting that they don't attack Israeli embassies.  Perhaps that's because they know that Israeli embassies are heavily armored, and their guards are quite willing to shoot. 

It's more interesting that nobody has bothered to mention the large number of Muslim-made movies, videos, TV shows, editorial cartoons and so on that are astoundingly insulting to Christians, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists and any other non-Muslim religion which catches the Muslims' notice.  Download the movie "Fitna" to see some examples.  There are others available on YouTube.  The victims of those disgustingly offensive visuals haven't formed any howling mobs to go attack Arab embassies. 

In fact, when "The Onion" online magazine published an amazingly salacious cartoon -- http://www.theonion.com/articles/no-one-murdered-because-of-this-image,29553/ -- showing a jolly orgy between Jesus, Jehovah, Buddha and a hermaphroditic Ganesha, the only responses it got were a few short grumbles in their letter column.  Contrast that with the international squall over a few fairly-mild cartoons in a Danish newspaper, or the holy death-threats aimed at Salmon Rushdie, or the actual murder of one of the directors of "Fitna". 

Clearly, the Muslim fundamentalists are making a profession out of being easily offended.  They're demanding to be treated better than members of all other religions, while having no such compunctions about how they treat those other religions. 

And by apologizing, censoring and tippy-toeing as we've done, we've only encouraged them.  What no public figure will admit is that indulging a spoiled brats tantrums only trains the brat to demand more.  We know -- because they've announced it, often enough -- what the Muslim fundamentalists want, which is nothing less than to rule the world.  We can't give them that, and the sooner we stop encouraging them to think they can get it, the better.

The best solution is to do what the Israelis do.  When howling mobs approach their embassies, they call out the guards.  The guards fire a first warning shot over the attackers' heads, a second warning shot at their feet, and -- if that doesn't stop the oncoming mob -- then the moment the crowd sets foot on embassy grounds, fire the third volley straight into them.  The latest bunch of rioters, who tried to pull off their outrage a couple days ago in Jerusalem, were handily subdued with stunners and rounded up by the local cops;  the Israeli courts are presently arguing over whether to keep them in jail or deport them -- to Gaza.  Others argue that the pious Muslim rioters should be deported to Mecca -- after all, good pious Muslims are supposed to want to visit Mecca once in their lives -- but in any case not allowed to come back.  If all the western countries would follow that example, there would be a lot fewer pious-Muslim riots.

Ah, if only the president of the US had stood up and said: "Given the offensive things you've filmed and said about other religions, you have no right to complain.  And if you attack our embassies, then the moment you set foot on embassy grounds, we'll shoot you."  That would have put an end to the whole mess.

Alas, our current president won't do it.  Worse, I don't see anyone on the political horizon who will.  This means that for the foreseeable future the fundamentalist Muslims will go right on behaving like spoiled brats, and dishing out what they won't take.       

11 comments:

Antongarou said...

I suspect that the fact no Israeli embassies have been attacked owes a lot to the fact that there aren't Israeli embassies in most of these countries.

In addition, as far as I can tell from the reports at least in Libya the local security forces did fire at the attackers(and got fired on, losing several people). Here in Israel the local police have it easy since our populace is not heavily armed- organized crime and such have weapons(and way too many) but generally, getting a weapon is hard, especially when you compare us to countries that recently ended a civil war

Leslie Fish said...

Hi, Anton. I'm a bit confused here; I thought that Israel had a system something like Switzerland's -- that (almost -- from what I hear, the Arabs and the Orthodox are exempt) everybody who graduates high school gets drafted, takes training, serves in the military for two years, then goes home to join the Army Reserves -- and takes their military rifles with them. Switzerland is not only the most peaceful country in the world; it has the most heavily armed and intensely firearm-trained population in the world. I'd thought Israel had a similar system; what does it really have?

If the Libyan cops did get fired on by the mob, enough to drive them back, then it's pretty clear that (a) the mob was carefully and deliberately organized for this, (b) the Libyan cops need better weapons and training, (c) in any case, American embassies have got to have more and better guards, and to get tough with pious rioters.

Antongarou said...

People are considered to be reserve until released either for age reasons or because they aren't needed.They *don't* get to take weapons home when discharged: these weapons get issued to them when they're called back on duty if and as needed.

The Swiss model works for a country that's mostly at peace, with a terrain that allows a handful of people with the right handheld weapons to delay a couple of companies through knowing the terrain. Most of Israel isn't built like that, and is definitely not at peace.

Ori Pomerantz said...

And the Israeli embassy in Cairo did get attacked. Al Jazeera and Latma.

Leslie Fish said...

Hi, Anton. Hmm, seeing that (as in America!) the Bad Guys already have guns, it would make sense to insure that all the Good Guys have guns too. And (big secret) Switzerland is not entirely at peace; it's been getting swamped with a lot of Arab immigrants in the past few years, they've begun pushing for more power and privileges, and the Swiss have been pushing back. This rarely hits the news outside of Switzerland.

Hi, Ori. So what happened? What did the Israeli embassy in Cairo do? The US media haven't said anything about Israeli embassy staffers getting killed, so I assume they did a better job of fighting back than the US one in Libya did.

Paradoctor said...

The poorly-made video is just an excuse. The Arab's complaints are real enough: US troops here, there and everywhere; drone strikes here, there and everywhere. Empires accumulate resentment.

Leslie Fish said...

Hi, Nat. Hmmm, aren't you forgetting something? Like, Arab history. The US troops wouldn't be there if various Arabs hadn't made a point of biting the hand that paid them. All Arab countries were dirt-poor (except for their obscenely wealthy kings, of course) until westerners discovered oil under their sands and started paying them huge amounts of money to pump out the stuff. Before that, the only western military invasion of the Mideast was the Crusades -- and their rule had ended some 4 centuries earlier. What Arabs did during the intervening centuries was to fight and conquer each other. That's also what they did before the Crusades. It isn't a question of "empire", but of the Arabs' own culture.

As for "drones", a drone is nothing but a model airplane. As such, it has a very limited bomb-load, much less than that of a manned airplane. It's also much easier to shoot down. There's no rational reason to complain about drones as versus fighter-planes of bombers. It's just another excuse.

What the Arabs are doing is hollering "foul" at everybody else for doing, if anything, less than they've done. We've just got to learn to stop believing their excuses.

Ori Pomerantz said...

Most of the Israeli embassy in Cairo evacuated to the US embassy. A few security people stayed behind, but they hid in a safe room locked from the inside. There were no casualties.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_attack_on_the_Israeli_Embassy_in_Egypt#Rescue_of_embassy_staff_and_end_of_the_riots

This seems to be standard for diplomatic missions. They aren't equipped to defend themselves.

Paradoctor said...

Further complexities:
http://truth-out.org/news/item/11700-angry-libyans-target-militias-forcing-flight

Turns out that lots of Libyans liked the ambassador, who helped oust Ghadaffi. So there's a post-revolutionary chaos factor here.

Also it's clear that the assault in Libya was pre-planned; not so elsewhere.

One more factor worth noting; testosterone. The Arab world has a lot of unattached young men without prospects; a classic recipe for trouble. Hey, look at the wreckage we Boomers left behind us in the 60s! There, as here, time will prove the cure.

Ori Pomerantz said...

I think the big elephant in the room is food prices. For most of us here, the rise in food prices due to the droughts in the last two years is no big deal. Maybe we eat less chicken, and more mac-n-cheese. Or maybe less mac-n-cheese and more ramen. But we get to eat.

The Arab Spring was triggered by food prices. People will accept a lot of despotism in the name of social stability to keep their families safe. But if those families go hungry, their patience runs out.

Leslie Fish said...

Hi, Nat. Heheheheh. Recall that a lot of those Baby Boomers became hippies, preached and practiced lots and lots of free sex. There was also a little annoyance called the Vietnam War, which gobbled up young men who *could not vote* about it.

Hi, Ori. IIRC, the French Revolution was likewise set off by unendurable food prices, and look how that ended up. Achmedinejihad is clearly licking his chops and planning to be the Arab version of Napoleon.

Hmmm, why *don't* embassy (particularly Israeli!) security staffs have enough firepower to fight off attacking mobs? You'd think they'd have learned after the takeover of the US embassy decades ago.