Can the West Defeat Jihadism if it Doesn’t Respect It? скачать в хорошем качестве

Can the West Defeat Jihadism if it Doesn’t Respect It?

This is the question I pose to all my students: Who actually respects jihadists more? Someone who believes what they say? Who honors their stated capabilities—even when those are horrific? Or the person who refuses to acknowledge their faith and everything that entails? Think about it. The concept seems simple, but it’s the hinge point on which peace in the Middle East turns. When one side claims to want peace and the other openly declares it wants to murder the other side and eradicate them as a country, that’s not a recipe for peace; it’s the basis for every war from past to present—and present to future. Ironically, it’s the Western mindset that perpetuates more war in the Middle East. We in the West can’t conceive of anyone genuinely preferring war over peace. That’s where comically ignorant and bigoted people like @ComicDaveSmith show their sophomoric lack of respect for Arab and desert culture. Dave Smith is “anti-war,” but he defends and pushes propaganda on behalf of those who seek endless wars—wars of genocide and annihilation against Jews and Israel. The most gracious read of someone like Dave Smith is that he can’t believe the beliefs and faith of genocidal terrorists. That’s the MOST gracious read. Occam’s Razor suggests he just hates Jews and Israel, but giving people like Dave Smith—who are anti-war yet “understand” and rationalize acts of genocide—the benefit of the doubt is to say: “He just doesn’t respect them and their beliefs. He doesn’t respect their faith.” It’s a bigoted Catch-22: Because of your Western perspective, you don’t respect them enough to believe them when they say they want to murder all Jews and annihilate Israel—WHILE SIMULTANEOUSLY rejecting Western principles of agency, accountability, and free will. That’s what this all boils down to: A group says they’ll do a heinous thing, DOES that heinous thing, and Western “intellectuals” rationalize it from a Western perspective rather than just respecting them and their beliefs. Just look at the Palestinian Authority’s February 2026 draft constitution: It declares Jerusalem the “eternal capital” of Palestine, entrenches Islam as the official religion with Sharia principles as a primary source of legislation, protects only Islamic and Christian sanctuaries (omitting any Jewish ties), reaffirms the PLO as sole representative, endorses the “right of return,” and supports families of “martyrs” and prisoners—critics call it genocidal in implication, apartheid in framing, and anti-LGBTQ in effect. Do you think the PLO (still the core entity per the draft) wants peace with Israel? Do you think that’s even possible when it constitutionally claims Jerusalem as ITS “eternal capital”—ignoring history, archaeology, and religion? Jerusalem was first made holy by Hebrews, Israelites, and Jews. Then by Christians. And only centuries later by Muslims. But the draft claims it as theirs alone. To acknowledge the PLO’s demand that Jerusalem is the “eternal capital” of “Palestine” is to respect their religious and ideological compulsion to wage war against Israel and Jews. That respect explains the 1929 Hebron massacre—long before modern Israel. It explains why Arab armies rejected the 1948 two-state solution. It explains why Yasser Arafat rejected the most generous peace offer (Oslo/Camp David follow-ons) and immediately launched the Second Intifada. They don’t want peace. They say they don’t. They act like they don’t. So why don’t YOU believe them? So again: Who respects them more? The people who believe them and their faith? Or the people who don’t? #Peace #Israel #Palestine #Jerusalem #War