Most of the world’s population understands that one cannot negotiate with terrorists.The only solution is to annihilate them completely . Why has every American president since Carter thought he could convert terrorists ? This is stupidity in the extreme . The peoples of the middle east and the world will only benefit when terrorists are totally and utterly destroyed - please , America and Israel , carry on until this is acheived .
This is one of the sharpest and most unflinching analyses of the West’s recurring failures in dealing with radical Islamic regimes. The author masterfully highlights a 250-year pattern that is no longer a “mistake” in the 21st century it is a form of strategic and historical self-deception.
From Jefferson and Adams’ negotiations with the Barbary pirates to Carter’s Algiers Accord, Obama’s JCPOA, the Qatar-brokered Taliban and Hamas deals under Trump, and now the latest round with Iran through Qatar and Pakistan, one consistent outcome emerges: the other side is never seeking “peace” in the Western sense. They practice temporary truces (hudna) not as an end goal, but as a tactical tool to regroup, extract concessions, and resume jihad when the time is right.
The most profound point in the piece is its emphasis on the ideological dimension. When the Tripoli ambassador told Jefferson and Adams that war against non-Muslims was a “right and duty” according to the Koran, it wasn’t just the opinion of one old diplomat ,it reflects a dominant juristic foundation in many Sunni and Shia streams.The concept of taqiyya and the permissibility of deceiving “infidels” in treaties is exactly what Adams understood: “The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.”
Modern history confirms the same pattern:
• After the JCPOA, Iran expanded its terrorist network across the region instead of moderating.
• Choosing Qatar (backer of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood) and Pakistan (protector of Bin Laden and supporter of the Taliban) as mediators is like asking the fox to guard the henhouse.
• Every “agreement” temporarily reduces violence to relieve diplomatic and economic pressure, only for it to return with greater intensity later.
The core problem is not “extremism on the fringes,” but a fundamental incompatibility of values. When one side views “peace” as the eventual submission of the world to Sharia, and the other as “live and let live,” negotiation becomes a one-sided deception.
It is time for America and the West to relearn Jefferson’s hard lesson: sometimes the only effective language is decisive power and real deterrence not pieces of paper signed with those whose religious doctrine permits them to break them. Two and a half centuries of history scream that this cycle will continue until the underlying mindset changes. Forgetting this history is the most expensive mistake we can repeat.
Muslims and communists have been a thorn in our side forever. Kicked down the road again and again.Gadi Saad says the Muslim problem is”Suicidal Empathy' I've watched it too long. I call it suicidal cowardice.
Most of the world’s population understands that one cannot negotiate with terrorists.The only solution is to annihilate them completely . Why has every American president since Carter thought he could convert terrorists ? This is stupidity in the extreme . The peoples of the middle east and the world will only benefit when terrorists are totally and utterly destroyed - please , America and Israel , carry on until this is acheived .
This is one of the sharpest and most unflinching analyses of the West’s recurring failures in dealing with radical Islamic regimes. The author masterfully highlights a 250-year pattern that is no longer a “mistake” in the 21st century it is a form of strategic and historical self-deception.
From Jefferson and Adams’ negotiations with the Barbary pirates to Carter’s Algiers Accord, Obama’s JCPOA, the Qatar-brokered Taliban and Hamas deals under Trump, and now the latest round with Iran through Qatar and Pakistan, one consistent outcome emerges: the other side is never seeking “peace” in the Western sense. They practice temporary truces (hudna) not as an end goal, but as a tactical tool to regroup, extract concessions, and resume jihad when the time is right.
The most profound point in the piece is its emphasis on the ideological dimension. When the Tripoli ambassador told Jefferson and Adams that war against non-Muslims was a “right and duty” according to the Koran, it wasn’t just the opinion of one old diplomat ,it reflects a dominant juristic foundation in many Sunni and Shia streams.The concept of taqiyya and the permissibility of deceiving “infidels” in treaties is exactly what Adams understood: “The commands of the prophet may be performed alike, by fraud, or by force.”
Modern history confirms the same pattern:
• After the JCPOA, Iran expanded its terrorist network across the region instead of moderating.
• Choosing Qatar (backer of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood) and Pakistan (protector of Bin Laden and supporter of the Taliban) as mediators is like asking the fox to guard the henhouse.
• Every “agreement” temporarily reduces violence to relieve diplomatic and economic pressure, only for it to return with greater intensity later.
The core problem is not “extremism on the fringes,” but a fundamental incompatibility of values. When one side views “peace” as the eventual submission of the world to Sharia, and the other as “live and let live,” negotiation becomes a one-sided deception.
It is time for America and the West to relearn Jefferson’s hard lesson: sometimes the only effective language is decisive power and real deterrence not pieces of paper signed with those whose religious doctrine permits them to break them. Two and a half centuries of history scream that this cycle will continue until the underlying mindset changes. Forgetting this history is the most expensive mistake we can repeat.
Outstanding and refreshingly candid analysis.
Only ignorant rookies fall for the same tactics throughout history.
Muslims and communists have been a thorn in our side forever. Kicked down the road again and again.Gadi Saad says the Muslim problem is”Suicidal Empathy' I've watched it too long. I call it suicidal cowardice.
Never ! only braindead godless morons try it .
FJB!