Monday, January 09, 2006

The Ruthlessness Of Churchill

Neil Brown (leader of the Liberal Party In Australia) theorizes how Winston Churchill would most likely be conducting the war against islamofacism, in this op-ed piece in the Australian.

I recommend reading the entire article, but here are some short excerpts, worthy of note:

Churchill had a very valid point in rejecting such nonsense. To win against a ruthless enemy, you have to be ruthless yourself.

Translation: Fight fire with fire.

Moreover, you cannot impose on yourself the burden of moral and legal constraints if you seriously want to win against an enemy who has no principles at all; you will earn endless accolades and honours for doing so, but you will not win.

One area this administration deserves criticism is, they have tried to fight a politically correct war. There is no such thing.

And if your enemy thrives on vitriol and hatred, the last thing you are obliged to do is give him a platform at a show trial to go on spreading more of his poison.

Which is precisely what the left desperately wants to do, give them a voice. They don't want a voice, they want to kill. But if you give them that voice, they just further proclaim the weak and lame reasons, they want to kill.

Most people would agree that Winston Churchill was one the greatest leaders Britain has ever had. Yet, it amazes me how very little they are willing to follow his example and heed his words, today.


gandalf said...

Hi LA.

I am a churchillian, in the UK at the moment his name is mentioned in most conversations regarding the state of the UK at the moment.

It has to be said we in my profession acknowledge that the great man was a constructive-creative psychopath, there are 12 types of psychopathy which I will not go into now, suffice it to say
he was NOT of the axe weilding type.

Churchill took decisions that only a person of such a psychological make up could take, Coventry is a typical example, he allowed the mass bombing of Coventry to go ahead, if he did not then the Nazis would have realized that the Brits had broken the Enigma code,
this action actually saved many many lives.

We need a leader , now more than ever who can make tough decisions and not just appease.

The English are a peculiar race, we are tolerant, when that tolerance is used up we go to the other extreme, nothing in the middle.

From discussions I have had with others, the tolerance is running out and angry words are being spoken quietly, this is very English, it is going to be very nasty here

Mike's America said...

I imagine it will be very nasty in the UK... More muslims go to mosques than Christians go to churchs in that country... Something is VERY wrong.

I too am a big Churchill fan. The man had enormous energy and a laser-like intellect. I visited his home, Chartwell, in Kent. When he was out of power he built, gardening, painted and wrote. And man did he write! I'm re-reading volume 6 of his history of World War II, over 600 pages for just that volume. Every thought expressed, written 53 years ago, sounds a prescient warning for us today.

You might also have seen the David Pryce Jones article I cite here:

Churchill in 1899:

Islam, or Mohammedanism as it was then called, in Churchill's "The River War" (1899): No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step, and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science . . . the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome.

P.S. LA: You're on the "A" list for the Reagan Party.