NOVAE MILITIAE

Rod Dreher posted this recently:

Many can't reconcile themselves to the existence of the kind of evil represented by Hamas and Hezbollah. These are people who literally want to murder Jews and subjugate infidels for the greater glory of Allah. Why can't we take them at their word, and act accordingly? Auster gets it right: we refuse to accept the jihadists on their own terms, because to do so would force us to act in ways we'd rather not. So we fight the war we'd like to fight, not the one we're actually in.

http://dallasmorningviews.beloblog.com/archives/2006/07/what_we_wont_se.html

I say Amen. Time to think outside the box. Only problem here is that the liberals (and this includes a goodly number of Republicans) are incapable of doing so. That's why the problem of Islamic terrorism will never be solved as long as the meacockish monoparties that rule America, England and Europe remain regnant.

Thankfully, Scotland Yard was able to thwart the latest plot. I would say that they were successful in spite of what England is these days, not because of what she is. And until and unless she reaches deep inside herself and rediscovers her former greatness, she's history.

Here’s what an Englishman with balls says:

Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;

Or close the wall up with our English dead.

In peace there's nothing so becomes a man

As modest stillness and humility:

But when the blast of war blows in our ears,

Then imitate the action of the tiger;

Stiffen the sinews, summon up the blood,

Disguise fair nature with hard-favour'd rage;

Then lend the eye a terrible aspect;

Let pry through the portage of the head

Like the brass cannon; let the brow o'erwhelm it

As fearfully as doth a galled rock

O'erhang and jutty his confounded base,

Swill'd with the wild and wasteful ocean.

Now set the teeth and stretch the nostril wide,

Hold hard the breath and bend up every spirit

To his full height. On, on, you noblest English.

Whose blood is fet from fathers of war-proof!

Fathers that, like so many Alexanders,

Have in these parts from morn till even fought

And sheathed their swords for lack of argument:

Dishonour not your mothers; now attest

That those whom you call'd fathers did beget you.

Be copy now to men of grosser blood,

And teach them how to war. And you, good yeoman,

Whose limbs were made in England, show us here

The mettle of your pasture; let us swear

That you are worth your breeding; which I doubt not;

For there is none of you so mean and base,

That hath not noble lustre in your eyes.

I see you stand like greyhounds in the slips,

Straining upon the start. The game's afoot:

Follow your spirit, and upon this charge

Cry 'God for Harry, England, and Saint George!'

(Henry V, Act III)

Away with the wisps of men who "lead" us, such as any number of modern heads of state, and who "shape opinion," such as Rich Lowry: http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/006210.html . (Heather MacDonald is right: if, as the Prez sez, we’re fighting Islamic fascism, why are we “targeting ourselves” at the airports of this nation?)

Or so I think.

There's a lot of hand-wringing taking place in the conservative media today over what may be in store for the future.  Things are not going well in the Middle East, either for us or for Israel at the moment.  The Jihad appears to have the "Big Mo" in the Middle East, and Eurabia will be a reality soon.  Stanley Kurtz writes of "Hawkish Gloom":    http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=OGFlY2Q5Y2E5ODNlZjcyODNmZTRlMTY4YzZhZWJmY2E .

These days, I find myself in agreement with Eugene Genovese, who thinks the conservative base of the Republican Party will finally come to the realization that the GOP really does not support or advance the conservative cause, and walk away.  And that will be the end of GOP ascendancy, perhaps forever.  But as Genovese notes and as I believe, this might be a good thing at the end of the day.

Let the Republican Party self-destruct and let the liberals come. The latter have been destroying souls and cultures since the 18th century anyway, and their suicidal destruction of Western culture is almost complete. When it happens, and when all the people in the muddled middle finally see who is to blame, something far different is likely to arise from the ashes, and it likely won't be tame.  When it comes right down to it, a nation will do whatever, and follow whomever, to preserve itself.  If liberal democracy proves to be not only incompetent to preserve Western culture but actually adverse to it, people will drop it like a hot potato, and there will be blood in their eyes.  Then and only then, I believe, will the West do what it needs to do to perpetuate itself.

Unfortunately, it may be bitter medicine, possibly entailing things like this:   http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13532 .  And the main reason it will be unfortunate is because it will have been made necessary by the pusillanimity of those who currently "lead" the post-Christian West.

http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=domesticNews&storyid=2006-08-09T181311Z_01_N09298074_RTRUKOC_0_US-CLINTON.xml&src=rss&rpc=22

What's with the Hitler hairdo, anyway?

http://www3.baylor.edu/~Ralph_Wood/misc/BiblicalTragedySouth.pdf