The problem with our public intellectuals and politicians is that they cannot believe that everybody does not want to live as we do, and live with our values.  Thus the provenance of the search for "moderate Muslims," meaning Muslims who want to live as we do.  

But suppose that in order to be a good Muslim you have to participate in jihad, in the advancement of Islam through the slaughter of its enemies – i.e., nonbelievers.  We call these warriors terrorists because they make war on non-combatant men and women and children – activities prohibited by the Geneva Conventions, which prohibition is the purpose of the Geneva Conventions.

But suppose that Islam has a different theory of war – that infidel women support infidel warriors and infidel children will grow up to be enemies of Islam.  Then, if you are a Muslim who opposes eliminating them, you are a bad Muslim, not a moderate Muslim.

The position of Israel is similar.  Fools like Obama and Kerry imagine that there can be no other goal of Palestinian society than to be like ours – to embrace homosexuality, free love, and consumerism.  But suppose they don't.  Suppose their view of the world is that they attain a higher spiritual state and a greater reward in the afterlife if they eschew these things.  And suppose that the existence of a Jewish state diminishes their possibility of getting into Paradise if they have not engaged in jihad against it.

Then it is logical for them to work for the elimination of the Jewish state, which (a) is a carrier of the despised Western values and (b) is a theological affront to the Muslim community.  In this case, what "peace process" can there be?  Negotiations have to end in failure.  Successful negotiations would be dishonorable to the Muslim side, in this case the Arab Palestinians.

The situation described here is known by a word that seems to be un-known by our political and intellectual leadership.  And that word is…war.  

Islam is making war on the West – on its people, but more on its values.  Sayyid Qutb was the theoretician of this war.  He found the Western civilization he saw in Colorado in the late 1940's – a halcyon period by our reckoning – as hopelessly, offensively, alarmingly corrupt.  And he is the theoretician of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the organizing force of the Islamic war on the West.

This is war.  We should look to our defenses and plan the aggressive action that will win it.  No war has ever been won on the defensive, not even Mao's wars.  The rebels, swimming in the sea of peasants, work while you are wearing down the enemy.  But the war is not finished until you are marching in triumph through the capital of your enemy and hearing the lamentations of their women.

We just had the Battle of Paris in the Muslim Brotherhood jihad against the West.  I won’t keep you in suspense.  We lost the engagement.  Fortunately, we were able to pick up some of the pieces when someone decided to send in armed troops, but this was cold comfort to the hostages who were murdered.

This is war.  Are we going to fight it?  Or not?