Comments on: U.S. Kills Jihadists with Stroke of Pen, Creating Violent Extremists as Byproduct

By: smurfy

smurfy — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:16:39 +0000

Did u mean Steve Benen?

Yes. I mix them up occasionally for some reason. - jhj

By: Bithead

Bithead — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 15:52:03 +0000

If it’s not obvious to you that such conduct is barbaric, I’m not sure that a new lexicon will do the trick.

I said it yesterday, in a slightly different context, but it works here, as well:

We're not going to get a handle on this stuff by clinging to legal and syntactical borders they don't respect.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 10:37:42 +0000

John: We're just talking past each other. I'm talking about the non-terrorist Muslims who watch beheadings and other murders-in-the-name-of-religion on television and are presumably on the fence enough about that to be influenced by jihad vice irhab. I fully agree that smart vocabulary makes sense and, at the very least, can't hurt.

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Sat, 26 Apr 2008 04:04:51 +0000

James: That's my point... the guys sawing off heads just aren't going to see the light, unless it's that light at the end of a tunnel some near-death reports suggest. They're a lost cause and either life in prison or death will be the only 'teacher'. They are simply not the target audience for any sort of PD exercise. Their education is handed over to the military or others in that line of business. We no longer care what they think. They are a lost cause, worth no effort to retrain. As they represent the minuscule minority, we can live with that. So can most Muslims. It's the majority that needs to be factored in, and here vocabulary can be useful and PD has a chance to get to the fence-sitters. It certainly has a chance to stop alienating those who can help us.

By: lunacy

lunacy — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 23:03:16 +0000

For what it's worth...
I've been seeing the words munifiq and munifiquun used to describe Musharaff and the Taliban (and other infamous political/warlord character) for the past 7 years, while lurking on Afghan forums.

By: floyd

floyd — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 22:20:00 +0000

Steve Clemons is clearly guilty of his own accusations.

By: James Joyner

James Joyner — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:37:08 +0000

John: I get that and think the idea overall makes sense. I can understand why, say, "Islamofascist" could get construed as "all Muslims are Fascists." At the same time, if you think murdering innocents in the name of religion is fine, I'm not sure that dubbing the perpetrators "Hirabah" is going to make a light bulb go off.

By: John425

John425 — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:33:52 +0000

I was amused by John McCain's saying that he'd quit using these words when the terrorists quit using them to describe themselves and their actions. OBL et al call for jihad etc.

A rose by any other name...

By: John Burgess

John Burgess — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:24:14 +0000

James: The target for the revised vocabulary isn't the ~~jihadis~~ irhabiyoun, but the non-violent Muslims who get tetchy when a word with good (and often religious) meaning gets thrown around, defaming the innocent. Sort of like the way many Muslims went batshit at 'crusade', actually, but the other way around! Both 'jihad' and 'crusade' have the same range of meanings, of course.

By: Dave Schuler

Dave Schuler — Fri, 25 Apr 2008 21:06:55 +0000

It's a good development. Spurred by David Kilcullen I've been whining about the term “jihadis” off and on for a couple of years now. Irhabis or Hirabis would be better. BTW, I've been vaguely acquainted with David Kilcullen since he was an infant (one of my dearest friends is his godmother).