Although if Islam were take over the world, they would indeed turn it into a massive $hithole, the problem with the doomsday-caliphate theory is that the Islamists are not at all unified - even though they have in fact established many theocracies, they still are divided among several dozen nations - and more importantly, Islamic people are so generally antagonistic that they fight *each other* constantly. As a result, they will never be able to unify and organize to the degree necessary to attempt an actual war which gains real estate by military control, against Christian/Hindu/Buddhist/Non-Muslim nations. Hell, look at how the Sunnis and Shiites kill each other (Iran/Iraq war) incessantly, on and on. It's not a real threat - at least in terms of a shooting-war-driven, Hitleresque takeover.
So using such a bogus fear to attempt to justify abridgements of civil rights is a ludicrous propoganda piece worthy of hannity and the other blowhards. It may be correct however, to point out that IF you are going to do something, do it right. IF the war in country X is justified, then by all means, win it by using the mentioned brutality necessary to win it. I agree with that. We don't have to look to ancient greece to figure that out; just look to a little country in SE Asia. In Iraq, a war that never should have happened, we ought to leave OR get ridiculously brutal to win - the proverbial $hit or get off the pot. But taking over their airwaves and controlling everything they see in the media with a massive, contrived propoganda war is a much better and more humane way than killing every able-bodied male. In any event, we can win it WITHOUT abridging our domestic civil rights! We are smart enough and discerning enough to do that - it's a false dichotomy to say that you can't win over there without attacking the Constitution over HERE!
Having said that, Islam is spreading rapidly throughout the world through simple accretions which are natural to such a dogmatic religion. This IS something to fear, in the long, long, long, looooooong term, in my view, but not because Muslims will ever unify, but because they can theoretically, possibly, simply slowly change every nation from the inside out, into the (rightfully) dreaded theocracies.
The author DID hit the nail on the head about the error of defining the enemy itself incorrectly. *IF* we are fighting radical Islam, or Islam itself, then we must define it as such to be successful, and the "war on terror" is indeed just as much of a farce as if we were to have a "war on aviation" - only more so, because it at least might be theoretically possible to end the existence of all planes.
