(I'm not sarcastically disagreeing with you)

I'm talking about Bosnians. Those Muslims that dare to think only about grill and beer. And bad turbofolk music.

Kosovo has Albanians and that's a whole new can of worms.

Thats all nice and well, ikalugin, but it all starts with one inevitable, non-negotiable precondition: that we all - and before anyone else: Muslims themselves - start to see Islam and take Islam for what it really is by it own standards as defined by the basis of Quran, Sira, Shariah, the whole Sunna. Instead the whole debate is based on wanted misonformation, decpetion, lacking insight and almost total absence of knpowledge about the fundaments of Islam and its ideology. In the west, people think islam to be what best suits their wishes: to see it as something they can reasonably deal with, can manage, can finally control.

You cannot manage it.

You can suppress it by brute force, but you can never manage it. If you do not believe me, see the lesson learnt from the socalled "Arab Spring."

But right this self-analysis by Islam gets actively prevented, refused, rejected by almost everybody.

I refuse any more special deals for Islam, for which islam alreayd claimed and gotten many many more of these than any other relgious or ethnic subgroup. We owe it nothing, but where Muslims come to Europe to live here, they owe us, it is a debt they have to fulfill, and that debt reads: integration, conformity with our values and ethical standards and according obedience to them - UNCONDITIONALLY. Because we did not move to their place to live there, but they came to our homes to live here. Our home, our rules. If this is not understood: farewell, my beloved foreigner. You won't be missed.

But we are confronted with as Muslim world whose leaders see demographic change and breeding through the wombs of Muslims women as its new primary weapon to enforce pro-Islamic change in Europe (also America, they just lag behind us in America, that is all), where wave after wave of Muslim attacks and wars of aggression and occupation in centuries before in the end for the most failed.

But when the Algerian president Houari Boumedienne told the UN general assembly in 1974 this: that "one day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory", - what has been the Western reply to this declaration of demographic warfare? A deafening silence.

The Palestinians practice demographic warfare since decades, too. Although thy always complain how miserably their living conditions are, this has never stopped to mutliply their population numbers by several factors. The more suffering faces the media report, the more sympathy in their fight against Israel it gets them. And the strategy works slowly, but extremely successful. I do not take it for granted that Israel will survive it.

Provocations like this are a common vogue since then. Gaddhafi parrotted much of what Boumedienne once said. Currently the Turkish Sultan Erdoghan the Great is the most prominent announcer of according fantasies, his speciality is propagandistic warfare to intimidate Western public opinion and blackmail it into conformity with Muslim interests and demands, namely Turkish ones.
You said our values should be exported to the Muslim world. You forget the two strategic defeats suffered by the West in Iraq and Afghanistan when attempting cultural change and nation building. The ME is not Japan or Germany. I think we currently all have a bit enough of trying to impose our values on them. It backfired us into our faces, didn't it. The establishing of a Soviet regime-copy in Afghanistan also failed, if you care to remember.

I know Iran quite a bit, amongst other countries in that region, I was there for a longer time, in the nineties. I witnessed the first youth revolt there that in America especially was seen as an uprise of the young against the Mullahs and in favour of democracy and freedom in American interpretation. The Americans could not have been any more wrong! What the young ones in the nineties wanted, was a bit more freedom of press, more access to media, more freedom to travel, some less religious repression. And already back then I met Mullahs - or better: my boss back then met them - who understood quite well that even the Iranian revolution by Khomenei could not just run on forever. However - a democracy and a canon of liberal values as the Americans demanded them to be implemented in Iran, these young students and generations DID NOT WANT. They wanted the state basing on shariah. They wanted the constitution founded on Shariah. And they certainly did not want to be lectured on what values they had to take over in order to be smiled at by Americans. America did not understand this and acted by an attitude of "either you go all way our way, or we will not help you to go any way". The youth uprise failed, and the hardliner establishment once secured power.

Mind you, in Iran you have a strong burgoise social class, still remembering the influence and education brought by the Brits. And still, that influence is waining quickly.

There are no shortcuts to evolutionary needs. The Muslim world will need to go the way the Christian world has gone by itself in past centuries, and the Jews as well. It will need to run - finally - a critical and self-distanced self-analysis, and needs to recongise severla very uncomfrotable truths about itself. It has to recognise cionsequences from this, and needs to relasie thnese consequences. Since the fundament of Islam is all hostile to this, this must necessarily lead to not a reformed Islam, but a replacement of Islam with something different, or a split in Islam with one part of it replaced with something totally new, and the other part staying the orthodox monument that it was and is. If you want to help it, you must not allow Islam to evade and avoid such self-testing, but must force it to face that, and not allowiung it to weasel any longer. That means in plain English: tid-for-tad, and uncompromised reciprocity. An eye for an eye. We have given so many advance investements for Islam in Europe while other cultures and religions in Islamic countries were pushed back more and more, that even reciprocity would be an extremely generous offer form our side now - they lag behind our offering to them so much that they will struggle to ever compensate for that in the coming times.

The chance for all this happening I can tell you in a probability. It is exactly zero. That is because Islam since always has been far more unscrupulous and far more successful in wiping out reformist movements and tendencies that could lead to a rift, than even the Catholic church ever has been. And second, Islam is a warrior ideology. It is fostering a warrior's spirit, and the conflict he brings over the world. It does not seek any of the values that were celebrated in Christian Europe. It seeks monocultural dominance, and rule over all and everything. Islam means submission, submission in the most radical consequence you could imagine, right to self-sacrfice and rutheless wiping out the other. Humanistic vbalues, Chri8stian attpotidue, the tradiiton of the enlightenment are not match for such a militant attitude,. they will not save us. The only language Islam understands, is superior combat power and superior ruthlessness ind moiung what is needed to overcome the other, ay it be violence, may it be treason. The only thing that can save us from Islam, is superior combatpower, fighting spirit, superior determination to do anything that is needed to push Islam back. Else it pushes us. But especially the fighting spirit is a problem, for many Westerners do not even see why they should even want to defend their freedom and values. This is where the cause starts to become hopeless. This conflict will never end as long as both islamic and non-islamic world exist, both cannot live at peace with each other, its always just a seize-fire until islam is strong enough to seek the offensive again (already Muhammad gets quoted in the Quran with that seize fires should not be mistaken for peace, and while any seize fire agreements should not be broken, any such seize fire with the infidels should be agreed to last only as long as is absolutely necessary to regain the power needed to pick up the fight again. But the war must last as long as there still is the house of war - the infidel world - standing. Peace there will be when the house of war has fallen. In other worlds: when all any evertyhing is Islam'S).

We have experienced the first two decades or so of the new historic offensive by Islam until today, and for demographic reasons (developement of age-structures in the Islamic world) it will run for another 5-6 decades, two generations. Then the Islamic world will be as old as the West is now, will have become weaker, desinterested, desillusionised again, and it will fall to sleep for another couple of generations, until it has come to powers again.

Nice outlook for the future. :dead: I can absolutely understand that people are not attracted by my predictions.

Too long, would read later.

You're too kind :D

I did not specify when :)