ISIS on rampage - How tolerant can we be?

While ISIS is at killing the ‘others’ Game theory says…

I have often thought of muting my own thoughts, as written here, along the lines of this piece but the restraint just  breached with the limitless terror ISIS unleashes with impunity.

ISIS is pure breed, pedigree Islamists and their call appears to be based on Islam. I have not heard any religious heads find flaw with their call to establish the ‘Caliphate’. I have seen Indian Journalists from Liberal camp, or Islamic journalists who have camped there till their Sharia arrives, in fact wishing ISIS would go and help Hamas. There is no shred of morals, even for showing.

ISIS kills people, puts up severed heads on stakes to terrorize the living into submission, converts the rest and hunts down the residual. This is the second time a Genocide has been carried out successfully, under the watchful eyes of UN, the first being Darfur. Ooops, third, almost forgot Rwanda.  Both times the culprits come from same stock  The victims, all of them have only one thing in common. They are not Muslims or the kind of Muslims that ISIS Islamists approves of.  Need to remember the newpaper and media reports that say that ISIS Islamists have robust support in many countries amongst the Muslim population. ISIS flags have appeared in Tamil Nadu and Kashmir in India and all over Europe and in other parts of the world.

 

While the killing goes on, there is hardly anyone in a hurry to stop them. In the case of non-Muslims, it is overwhelmingly the sensibilities ingrained in our society, filtered by politically correct expression actually drive us to bury our head in the sand while the crime goes on. In the case of Muslims, one is not sure as there is no protest except from a small sane minority who have overcome the effect of the teachings of religion.

Let us look at it from a Game theory perspective

Options are:

1.       That is, if Islamists kill and non-Islamists do not kill, non-Islamists get eliminated.

2.       If Islamists kill and non-Islamists also kill in return, both may have some survivors left

3.       If Islamists do not kill and non-Islamists kill Islamists will get eliminated

4.       If Islamists do not kill and non-Islamists also do not, both thrive

The best option is, option for civil and democratic society is 4. But since Islamists are not willing to follow the strategy of not-killing the others, compelled by their belief system that imposes a duty on them to kill or convert the other, as claimed by ISIS, the only option left to non-Islamists is to destroy ISIS  as short term objective.
As a long term objective, the non-Islamists also should impose sufficient restrictions on Islamists so as to prevent the repeat of this mad violence ever again. Mostly in the countries where democracy is in force.

If ISIS is allowed to kill non-Islamists, it is a no brainer, the number of ISIS kind of people, Islamists, will increase and non-Islamists will decrease. With less men amongst non-Islamists and their women /womb being converted to make more Islamists, the strength of ISIS will only grow. The strategy of showing the other cheek does not work in 21^st century.

The pure Islamists also do not shy away from stating that ‘secularism’ is not acceptable. For them it is “Islam or bust’ which, if achieved, means we, the rest are all bust. The real fight is between Islam pedigree and democracy. The moderate Muslims are most likely to line up behind the Jihadist as the threat of ‘Apostasy’ is pregnant with dire consequence, including ending up as a human ornament on stakes.

(Secularism is religion of Kafirs- Board in Pakistan, #ISIS not yet there )

There is one thing that Game Theory says that is logical. When adversary attacks, you too respond with attack and when the adversary ceases to attack (having learned the lesson that it is the act of attacking that begot attack from the other side) cease to, to bring and enforce the most favorable behavior in the adversary.

Without getting emotional, I see only there are only two options left to those following democracy.

1.       Attack anyone who resorts to killing without any feeling of remorse, the terror Islamists variety. This is like doing a surgery. Removal of cancerous growth is to be approached as a rational act and not an emotional one.

2.       Deny benefits of democracy to any country that follows Islamic law , including education, citizenship and domicile benefits.Consider repatriation also. 
           Make it clear that it is an ‘either’ or ‘or’ option. Either one is a follower of Islam that demands Sharia codes to be the ‘governing  jurisprudence’ or a believer in democratic values. Believer in both is from ‘Taqqia’ constituency. Renunciation of select parts of Islamic teachings is prerequisite to gain entry into 'democratic' world. It is akin to banning Nazism.

The dead have rights too and we cannot afford to bury those rights without being reminded of our collective guilt. If someone has taken away their right to live, with force, consequently, such criminals also lose their right to live. No mercy with them who carry out murders to achieve a political goal that will make me, you and all others who are not pedigree Islamists, a slave in their scheme of things. If you do not stand up to challenge, we all are kicking the can down the road.

Time to stand up and eliminate the political Ebola altogether! There is no time of niceties. Those who wish and implement death to men, women and children as means to establish their version of politics are evil incarnate. Any mercy shown to them is spitting on the graves of those innocent human beings, killed in the last 1300 years, who unwittingly paid the price for some supremacist's blood-thirsty evil ambition to impose a demonic will. And on those being killed in Iraq, Kurdistan and Syria daily.