It's True!

Justin Logan watches Kay Bailey Hutcheson debate Iraq and is astounded: "If we let a caliphate take over the world, we are not going to live in freedom." I see progress in the right direction. Unlike a lot of things defenders of the president say these days, it is, if vacuous and dumb, at least true.

Comments

Well, I'd agree that the second premise follows logically from the first, but there's something about the phrasing of "if we let..." that makes the first premise itself highly questionable. It's like leading off with "if I let the boogieman steal my children..."

All in all, I wouldn't call the whole statement "true". Of course, IANAP (P = philosopher).

Posted by Old Charley | July 18, 2007 8:40 AM

12th Century Baghdad & Damascus weren't so awful bad. Good universities and water gardens.

Posted by bob mcmanus | July 18, 2007 8:55 AM

AP: Top al-Qaida in Iraq Figure Captured

The U.S. command said Wednesday the highest-ranking Iraqi in the leadership of al-Qaida in Iraq has been arrested, adding that information from him indicates the group's foreign-based leadership wields considerable influence over the Iraqi chapter.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Oh geez, I can hear it now, "See! Toldya! al-Qaida in Iraq isn't some homegrown group! It's overseen by Binny himself! We have proof! And it took waterboarding to extract the confession! A twofer! Nyah, nyah, nyah!"

Posted by steve duncan | July 18, 2007 8:59 AM

12th Century Baghdad & Damascus weren't so awful bad. Good universities and water gardens.

Let's not forget Islamic Spain either, which--in terms of good government, education, and religious tolerance--was arguably the most advanced nation in the Europe of its time. (A time in which trying to conquer the so-called Holy Land was a major focus of so-called Christian policy.)

Posted by James Gary | July 18, 2007 9:46 AM

it is, if vacuous and dumb, at least true.

I know you meant this tongue-in-cheek, Matt, but it's still a degradation of our discourse, as it's close to the same level as

If we let the apes and sharks take over the world, we will become their slaves and their dinner.

Posted by Steady Eddie | July 18, 2007 10:43 AM

Re: Let's not forget Islamic Spain either, which--in terms of good government, education, and religious tolerance--was arguably the most advanced nation in the Europe of its time.

For a while, under the Umayyads at Cordoba. What's often forgotten in paeans to Muslim Spain is that the place went to hell pretty fast when the Umayyads dwindled into decadence and illiterate Sahara nomads invaded and took over. They were so intolerant (rather like modern day Wahabbis) that even some Spanish Muslims ended up preferring Christian rule, while Jews like Maimonides' family fled elsewhere to escape pogroms.

Now, as for a Caliphate why does no one ever ask, What caliphate? I know of no such entity in the modern world, and even those groups like Al Qaida who seem to pine for one have never gotten around to making a serious proposal to establish such a state. I don't even think there's a legitimate (or even vaguely illegitimate) pretender for the title, although I think there are some Ottoman descendants who might qualify. Maybe we should put our caliphate fears on hold until there's actually a caliph or at least caliph wanna-be out there. as the old adage has, why borrow trouble?

Posted by JonF | July 18, 2007 2:13 PM

"I don't even think there's a legitimate (or even vaguely illegitimate) pretender for the title"

Ummm, I do believe the Saudis use a different Arabic word for their ruler than the Jordanians and others, all translated for the West as "King."

Posted by bob mcmanus | July 18, 2007 7:25 PM

Re: Ummm, I do believe the Saudis use a different Arabic word for their ruler than the Jordanians and others, all translated for the West as "King."

The Saudi king is not styled a "caliph", nor does he claim that title. He does claim to be guardian of the shrines at Mecca, but that's no where near being Caliph.

Posted by JonF | July 18, 2007 7:28 PM

Religious Shi'ites would certainly never call it a Caliphate. Historically, Shi'ism developed in complete opposition to that institution. Modern Shi'ites have little nostalgia for the Umayyads or Abbasids (see the Battle of Karbala). Hutchison's comment, then, is like warning of an Evangelical threat to create an American Papacy.

Posted by JPK | July 19, 2007 12:24 AM