June 6, 2016: The West has had a hard time understanding and accepting the reality of Islamic terrorism. This has been a major problem when trying to deal with what appears to be a zombie death cult based on religious belief in the need for global conquest and the establishment of a worldwide religious dictatorship. The few non-Moslems who understand it, mainly experienced members of the U.S. Army Special Forces, have long been dismissed as, well, unbelievable by Western leaders. This despite the fact that the thousands of Special Forces operators who speak Arabic and have practical, up close and very dangerous experience with Islamic terrorism not only know the language and culture but also the history of Islam and religious fanatics this faith regularly produces. The solution widely accepted by knowledgeable outsiders (like Special Forces) and insiders (including many Moslem historians and reform-minded rulers) is that it is an internal problem that must be fixed via the Moslem equivalent of the Christian reformation and subsequent treaties and cultural shifts that made religious tolerance a widely accepted practice. This greatly reduced the number of Christian religious zealots. That will be difficult for Islam because it is the only major religion whose scriptures demand blind obedience and constant struggle (“jihad”) against infidels (non-Moslems) and Moslems who want a reformation.

The situation is further complicated by the fact that many Moslems do not understand Islamic terrorism either. Those Moslems who do understand the history and motivation of Islamic terrorists, which has been a problem, mainly to other Moslems, for over a thousand years, are regarded by most Moslems as misguided or worse (as in being apostates who should be killed). Thus there is a division of opinion as to the cause of Islamic terrorism among Moslems. One theory, long popular in the Moslem world and increasingly accepted in the West as well, is that the main cause of Islamic terrorism is Western attempts to destroy the Islamic terrorists who attack the West. This theory blames the West for not accepting Islam when first attacked by Moslem armies in the 7th century and defeat subsequent attacks as well. To many Moslems forcing non-believers (“kaffirs” or “infidels”) to convert to Islam is a duty and the ends justify the means. Fighting back is blasphemy.

Most non-Moslems in the West, and a growing number of people in the Islamic world, consider this nonsense. All agree that Islam was born in conquest (after finding that the missionary approach took far too long compared to military conquest) and has never discarded its mandate to convert the world, using force if necessary. Many Moslems defend their faith by calling it the “religion of peace.” The historical record says otherwise and ignores the fact that Islam literally translates as “submission.” But saying that to infidels is seen by Moslems as counterproductive even that is what is preached in many mosques.

Another fact not everyone agrees with is that Islamic terrorism is an ancient problem. This is an important point to remember whenever one contemplates the current outbreak, where it came from, and how to deal with it. How ancient is Islamic terrorism? Well, consider that the word "assassin" comes from a group of very successful Islamic terrorists who existed a thousand years ago. This group of highly organized killers used drugs (hashish) to give suicide assassins a taste of paradise before sending them out on missions that would get them killed. These guys were called “hashish eaters”, and that word, when picked up by English speakers, emphasized the murder aspect and were mispronounced as "assassin". Islamic terrorists groups still motivate their fighters with drugs and access to female slaves.

Okay, so ruthless men have been using Islamic radicalism and drugs to create terrorists for a long time. No argument about that. But where did the current crop come from? Historically a noticeable increase in violence by Islamic radicals occurred every three or four generations. Most Islamic countries experienced it, and some got a more lethal dose than others. The terrorists always lost, usually when a powerful ruler in the area launched a major military operation against the population, usually a tribe or part of a province that was supporting the terrorists. Much bloodshed ensued. Today these measures would be described as genocide and war crimes. But in the past, the "massive retribution" approach worked and the terrorists disappeared. This is how the Mongols got rid of the original “assassins.” So the second lesson learned here is that what worked in the past, won't work today, because customs have changed. We have become kinder and gentler and must come up with different methods of dealing with terrorists.

Where exactly did the current crop of Islamic terrorists come from? Basically, they came from oil rich Arabia, mainly Saudi Arabia. The Wahhabi sect of Islam had always been among the most strict and intolerant and it comes from Arabia. The Saud family owed their power, in large part, to a 19th century alliance with the Wahhabi sect. Holy Warriors from the Wahhabi tribes provided the crucial muscle that enabled the Sauds to conquer Saudi Arabia and establish their kingdom 70 years ago. But the Sauds realized that the more reactionary attitudes of the Wahhabis would hurt the kingdom in the long run. For example, many Wahhabi clerics were opposed to modern technology (unless it was a weapon). Radio, automobiles, and all manner of gadgets were resisted. The Sauds were constantly haggling with the Wahhabi clerics. Finally, in the 1970s, after a serious outbreak of Islamic terrorism, the Sauds made a fatal deal with the Wahhabi clerics. The Wahabbis could control education in the kingdom, and have their own "lifestyle police" to enforce proper Islamic standards on Saudis, in return for keeping Islamic terrorism under control.

Then came the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan in 1979. The Wahhabi clerics saw this as an assault by communist atheists (which is what Islamic conservatives considered the Soviets) on an Islamic state. The Wahhabi declared jihad (holy war, although a more appropriate translation would be “crusade”) against Russia. Billions of dollars and thousands of Arabs (most of them Saudis) went off to help the Afghans fight the Russians. The Pakistanis cooperated because, at about the same time, the generals running Pakistan had seized on Islamic conservatism as a cure for the corruption that was making the country ungovernable and bankrupt. The Wahhabis, and their money, were welcomed. The Americans were there as well, as the "Afghan Freedom Fighters" were popular in the United States. The Americans provided some high tech weapons, intelligence, and trainers but most of the aid, and weapons, came from the Saudis.

In addition to guns, the Saudis also brought in Wahhabi preachers to set up religious schools for the millions of Afghan refugees. Pakistanis were allowed to attend these schools as well. The result was that some of the Pushtun tribes on both sides of the Afghan border were radicalized with Wahabbi beliefs. At this point Saudi Arabia was also exporting billions of dollars, and thousands of Wahhabi preachers, to many other Islamic countries in Asia and Africa. Some of that money went to Moslem communities in Europe and the Americas as well. But in the 1980s, Pakistan was where the Wahabbis were creating a new generation of Islamic radicals.

In the mid-1990s, Islamic radicals in the Pakistani military created the Taliban, by arming Afghan students in Wahhabi religious schools in Pakistan, providing some training and technical support, and sending the lads off to end the civil war raging in Afghanistan. But when the Taliban gained control of Afghanistan the Pakistanis began to have second thoughts. In fact, by then, many Pakistani generals and politicians had abandoned Islamic conservatism, for it had proved no solution to Pakistan’s problems. It was too late. When September 11, 2001 came along, and American troops engineered the overthrow of the Taliban government two months later, the Pakistanis found Islamic terrorism had become entrenched among their Pushtun tribes on their side of the border and was spreading to some urban areas of Pakistan.

After al Qaeda was chased out of Afghanistan the terrorist group declared war on the Pakistani government, for siding with the Americans. That war continues, with al Qaeda losing but not yet destroyed. ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant), an even more radical al Qaeda faction showed u, Meanwhile, back in Saudi Arabia, the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003 set off the Islamic radicals in Saudi Arabia. While the Wahhabi religious establishment did not back the Islamic terrorists, it had to come out against Islamic terrorism once Saudi al Qaeda members began making attacks inside Saudi Arabia. Within two years all the al Qaeda activity in Iraq, which mainly consisted of killing Iraqis, led to a sharp drop in the popularity of Islamic terrorism throughout the Moslem world.

Because of international media networks, Islamic terrorism was no longer a bunch of separate problems, occurring in different cycles. There was now one, world-wide, movement. As in the past, the Islamic terrorist recruits came mainly from those who felt most oppressed. These days that includes the young population in most Arab states that are run by dictators or monarchs. The dictators and kings don't want democracy, and Islamic radicals consider democracy un-Islamic. So the only way to vote is to set off a bomb somewhere. That somewhere, it turned out, was not at home. These Arab despots had equipped themselves with an efficient police state security apparatus, which had managed to shut down Islamic radicals wherever they have shown up in Moslem nations. That led to al Qaeda's campaign against Western nations. This was seen as an indirect way of bringing down Arab tyrants, which al Qaeda now believed were being propped up by the Western infidels. That was never the case, as the historical record clearly shows, but blaming an outsider is a popular technique for distracting restless subjects.

The American invasion of Iraq forced the Islamic terrorists to rush home and fight against an outbreak of democracy in their heartland. So how do you fight Islamic terrorism these days? Can't use the old ("kill 'em all") methods, so all you can do is keep the killers out of your own territory and wait for the madness to die out naturally, as it has done many times before. Changing the poor and misgoverned Moslem nations that generate Islamic radicalism is another option. But that takes time as well and the current wave of Islamic terrorism may die out before democracy takes root in the Arab world. The Arab Spring is helping that along but there is still a lot of resistance from the Islamic radicals. Another nasty aspect of Islamic terrorism is that, while only a small percentage of Moslems are willing to become Islamic terrorists, a larger percentage (ten percent or more, even among Moslems in the West) will support the Islamic terrorists and a majority of Moslems will, if asked, say they believe Islamic terrorism is justified when used to “defend Islam.” Unless the Arab world reforms itself, the terrorism will keep returning until it does because the appeal of Islamic terrorism has, for over a thousand years, continually inspired young Moslem men to step up and kill for the cause. Because the victim populations, especially non-Moslem ones, will not stop fighting back, it’s either Islamic reform or continued mayhem.