I realise there is still some residual "frost" from the cold-war period between Russia and the west, with differences of opinion and frustration as regards certain matters, which the above article seeks to outline. My own opinion is that, soon, these sticking points in relations will fade into the background as we will all be forced to work more closely together to combat the terror threat to us all which is growing as the middle east destabilises even further and groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood threaten to seize more political power -
There has already been co-operation and intelligence-sharing between our nations, despite frustration and differences of opinion as regards details of policy and tactics, and desire to know what each other is doing in this, that or the other area. As you probably know, under the Bush administration the public opinion of the US (and faith in our own leaders) here in western Europe hit an all-time low, but this seems to have come up somewhat since the Obama administration, and relations are better. Having said this, there are some who are unimpressed with Obama's seemingly soft stance on what is happening in Egypt, and there is fear that he just doesn't have the "teeth" to really get to grips with the war on terror, with some feeling that Russia's much more direct and realistic approach is the way to go (for example, Russians appear to be much more willing to place the blame for Islamic terrorism squarely where it actually lies - in the heart of Islamic teaching itself. Few in the west are willing to do this openly, and those who do face public disgrace, dismissal from govt posts etc.) How can we fight a war if we don't know (or refuse to acknowledge) who or what the enemy really is? For too long the west has bowed to political correctness and adopted a policy of blindness as regards the true source of the terror (which, as has been said previously, has been with us off and on for 1,400 years!) In the midst of this willful blindness, we've started wars of questionable benefit in both Iraq and Afghanistan, when all the while terror cells have been growing spreading (in some cases quite freely) their messages of hate to young British Muslims. There is now a scandal here in the UK since investigative journalists have discovered that some Islamic faith schools here are little more than indoctrination centres for future Jihadists. It's not without reason that we've been referred to as "Londonistan" by some - our past colonial-era derived policy of "look the other way as long as they're not attacking us" has reaped a bitter harvest for us, and we've had a steep learning curve in our fight against terrorists on our home soil! That Jihadists at one time were able to use "softy" Britain as a safe-haven from which to plot attacks on other countries is a well-known fact (I'm not revealing any state secrets here!) This is to our shame, as is our failure to grasp the lessons of the past and remember what the likes of Churchill told us years ago about the Islamic world and the threat it could pose to us.
However, a possibly beneficial spin-off of these more recent wars has been the gaining of combat experience against Jihadists by our troops which could be very useful in future should things escalate (which they probably will..) The experiences of Russian troops in fighting Jihadi urban guerillas in places like Chechnya have also been very useful to the western coalition forces, and few may know (but nevertheless it's true) that such as the US Marine corps were ordered by their commanders to read about Russian soldiers' experiences combating Chechen rebels in an urban environment before they stormed the city of Fallujah in Iraq, since they felt that the tactics used by Iraqi insurgents would be very similar to those of Chechens (which was probably true). Ultimately though (and this seems to be the opinion of many in countries with a lot of historical experience of bloody Jihad wars such as India), it's possible we are wasting our time sending our troops to defuse (and frequently get blown up by) roadside bombs in places like Afghanistan, and instead should learn the lessons of the past, leave those countries to whatever the hel sort of govt they want for themselves, and concentrate on homeland security and domestic counter-terrorism.
Personally, I'm torn between hating our foreign policy and thinking "maybe I'd have just gone and done the same things if I'd been in charge - geopolitical realities can pull leaders in all different directions after all..." I also think to myself that, if I was Russian, because of historical events, I might think it better to co-operate with the west only so far and keep a sensible distance. I'm hoping that we can all work together on this, and who knows, maybe we'll get thrust yet again into a world war where we all end up fighting on the same side again anyway (i'm thinking this more and more these days..)
I'm eager to know what you guys think - here in Britain we've been soft on domestic terrorists way too long whilst criticising the anti-terror tactics of others, and you guys have had some of the worst of it with horrors like Beslan and the latest airport bomb etc. India is in the grips of ongoing wars against Jihadists (which if you look at their history has claimed millions of lives of Hindus, Buddhists etc over the centuries - the figures are really shocking!) Pakistan is a weird mixture of Jihadist and also more secular Muslims whose govt, police and military have been accused of orchestrating terror and exporting it throughout the world, whilst they also have counter-terrorism people in the midst of that trying to stop this and fulfil the (possibly woefully naive) egalitarian dreams of their first leader Muhammed Ali Jinnah (personally I sometimes think we Brits should have never interfered by drawing that damn line on the map which partitioned India and created Pakistan in the first place - that it would become a haven for Jihadi nutcases could have been safely predicted perhaps..) My guess is that if WW3 is going to start anywhere, it will be in Pakistan, and some area or other (probably part of India) will get blown to pieces by a nuclear warhead set off by some crackpot who manages to get their hands on the controls (am I being too dramatic? I don't know..)
I'm rambling here and thinking out loud as I write this - is all this too sensitive? Are there too many unknowns? Do we have more common ground and goals than differences in all this? How can we, as Heathens/Pagans, realistically respond to all this, especially since we're likely considered by the Jihadists as the absolute scum of the earth fit only for the beheading knife (they probably think of us in the same category as Hindus, sub-Saharan Animists and Jews...Christians are considered little better, but I'm not sure they hate them quite as much as they hate Jews and Hindus.) Is there anything we can do beyond supporting our own counter-terrorism services and standing up for our faith-freedom? Could disenchanted Muslims perhaps see our faiths as more attractive alternatives, like a return to the ways of their own pre-Islamic ancestors or something like that? Can we or should we try and reach out to such people? Hel, I think I'd even be happy if they decided to convert to Christianity - at least those guys don't complain by blowing themselves up in public places if someone criticizes them...
For years I wanted to resist the conclusion that I've ended up coming to, that Islam is pretty much just flat-out a bad politico-religious ideology. Even as a kid I can remember geting bad feelings when I heard the word Islam, and this feeling has continued into adulthood, despite my attempts to shrug it off and try and see the good in the religion. The thing is though, it has the same theological and doctrinal problems in my mind as other Abrahamic faiths such as Christianity and Judaism, only it's a whole lot worse than either of them, because it mandates so much violence, cruelty and intolerance. At least Christianity and Judaism have managed to move with the times a bit (ie they've stopped stoning adulterers, burning heretics etc) Thankfully we Heathens and Pagans have also moved on and modernised, and in the main no longer perform such as gory blood sacrifices etc (some American Heathens have resurrected animal sacrifice though, which I personally think is unnecessary and bad for our public image). Can the Islamic world modernise too - is Islam even capable of modernising, or is it doomed to be perpetually a "faith of darkness" because of its core teachings? Could there be a reformation in Islam as there was in western Christianity?
I know I've probably asked far too many questions here, and might be exploring stuff people don't feel comfortable discussing - hey, just tell me to shut up or argue with me if I'm annoying you or saying stupid things in your opinion! :lol: :lol: I like to hear your point of view though - you seem to like to look things right in the eye in Russia - it's refreshing!