The Neo-Crusader and You

Discussion in 'Warfare' started by renownedwolf, 29 August 2014.


A New Crusade

  1. I haven't reached my moral/physical/religious justification point yet..

    1 vote(s)
  2. Only if sanctified by my religious leaders..

    3 vote(s)
  3. Not at all, keep Crusader mentality in the middle Ages..

    0 vote(s)
  4. Deus Vult! (I'm already in the sand!)

    6 vote(s)
  5. Admiral Ackbar! (Gimme those virgins!!)

    0 vote(s)
  6. It must be done, but I'd rather leave my Government sort it out.

    0 vote(s)
  7. Other..please explain..

    4 vote(s)
  8. Coz j00z init

    2 vote(s)
  1. renownedwolf

    renownedwolf Heroic Member


    Many and varied questions could of course be asked, but..

    Would you consider a modern 'Crusade' a necessary thing? What would be the driving force or tipping point for you? How would you justify it as an ethnically European Traditionalist? Would you answer a call to arms?

    Despite our knowledge of Western machinations integral to the formation of the new and burgeoning Islamic Caliphate as a pretext for more involvement, it could still be said that they are an obvious and very real threat that needs to be stopped.

    So please vote in the poll and further elaborate your position..
    • Like Like x 1
    • Interesting Interesting x 1
  2. Olavsson

    Olavsson First Lieutenant Staff Member
    1. Lumine Boreali Gentlemen's Club
    2. Neoplatonism

    To consider waging a new Crusade against Muslims in the Middle East seems rather pointless today, when Europe isn't even Christian properly speaking anymore. Any Western "crusade" against the Middle East today would be in the name of democracy and liberalism, i.e. globalism. Instead, a proper Crusade in our times would have to be a war against our inner enemy, the Western establishments and their agenda of secularism, materialism, "cultural-marxism", feminism, multiracialism, "progress", democracy and other degeneracy, in the name of the Sacred Order to come. I would happily sign up for such a crusade.
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 3
  3. Celtic Skogsra

    Celtic Skogsra Heroic Member

    The IS needs to be destroyed, so do its Israeli allies who happen to squat in Jerusalem. If we had a new Crusade the Moslems would be with us this time.

    Emperor Frederick II would've known how to handle this I think.

    • Like Like x 1
  4. Pangloss

    Pangloss Senior Member

    It's Reconquista time!
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. Pangloss

    Pangloss Senior Member

    ...but then again, why go abroad? Our current leaders pervert all sense of justice and morality, degeneracy rules supreme, and infanticide is committed daily and without qualm. Why go abroad to kill God's enemies, when there are plenty in our living room?
    • Agree Agree x 4
    • Superb Superb x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Going to 'war' with them would be beyond ridiculous. Whatever they are doing over there in their deserts, good or bad, does not concern us (western journalists only have themselves to blame - they know full well that it's incredibly dangerous to be there, especially if they're reporting negatively about armed partisan forces in their immediate vicinity), and except for our liberal western ideology we really do not have anything resembling a moral jus ad bellum. As a Traditionalist I have more in common with them than with our current establishment, so yes, if I was forced to make that choice I'd be on their side.
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Interesting Interesting x 1
  7. Celtic Skogsra

    Celtic Skogsra Heroic Member

    I would point out the IS actually do Israel's dirty work in Syria, having destabilised Assad and currently at war with the true Al-Qaeda and Iran/Hezbollah, and, you know, its leader being trained by MOSSAD (and possibly named Simon Elliot.) The IS controls the Golan border crossing, but Israel don't shell 'em because the IS also opposes Hamas.
  8. Elessar

    Elessar Senior Member
    1. Cascadians

    The current situation in the Middle East is the logical outcome of Western colonialism / involvement since before WWI, particularly since 2003. To them, it has everything to do with religion; to us, geopolitics. What we have is a collisions of two very different civilizations. What religious impulse has compelled Western countries to involve themselves in war for a higher purpose in the last 400 years? What's more is that we have no religion to being with, let lone being a motivating factor in waging war. The primary concern in eliminating IS(IS) is not solely because they defy national borders in their de facto burgeoning theocracy, but their proud acts of unspeakable horror and brutality. We aren't dealing with barbarians, who by nature at least have shreds of morality and admirable cultural traits, but demons. I expect nothing short of insanity whenever the legacy of Mohammed touches new heights.
    Yet here they are. They pose legitimate threats to their neighbors as well as to Europe and America, yet we're still mulling about. It's a shit or get off the pot situation that American and EU leaders must face. The most logical solution would be to back the Syrian Assad & Iranian Rouhani regimes in combating Islamism and to continue airstrikes in IS controlled areas, but as such that will never happen unless by some ulterior motive, seeing as we have only interests not allies; and a stabler middle east isn't in our best interests, evidently.

    As for the Crusading issue, I have no interest in flying across the globe to fight for a country which isn't mine, government which isn't mine, a religion which isn't mine, and a people who are not mine. The innocent men, women and children, Christians, Yazidi, Kurds, and other besieged minority groups have all my support, but this isn't my conflict. We men of the West ought to be more vigilant from within to protect what culture we have left, but this is not happening, in fact the opposite: in our traitorous and backwards "progressive" states we invite the demon in to kill us, rape our women, dismantle the fabric of society, yet we should sacrifice our lives in the desert? Seems sort of counter productive.
    • Like Like x 4
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Superb Superb x 1
  9. Raisin

    Raisin Senior Member Staff Member

    We read: "Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye? Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye."

    An invocation against hypocrisy can just as well be used to note that one must fight the enemy within, before the enemy without. Why go to the East, when there is far worse in the West?
    • Agree Agree x 3
  10. Sindri

    Sindri Guest

    I partially agree with your first points Elessar, but its hard to know whether muslim fundamentalism and terrorism would develop because of the West or if it is an integral part of Islam to conquer all nations (like jewish and christian monotheism/universalism). In my opinion muslims got a "kick-start" from the west in the 1980's-2000's but would still do what they do today regardless of external factors. Hating the west (especially Bush) for going into Iraq and killing brown people is essentially playing into the anti-white narrative since the driving force of whites supporting these conflicts were idealism (an almost exclusive, white quality) and the muslims have always been our sworn enemies out for our blood (preparing for terrorist attacks independent of western transgressions).

    IS is in my opininon a great thing from a white, strategic standpoint, although a sad development from a compassionate or universalist moral standpoint; we can sympathize with the foreign races that are slaughtered, but none of these people will feel this way if it happened to us. Empathy is a white quality, for better or for worse. Today empathy is something we need to purge from our minds since it is the main source of the destruction of the white race; every foreign conflict should be viewed as meaningless in this regard, since the destruction of white homelands is more relevant to us as a race and since our catastrophe will be permanent, while the brown races will still exist. Desensitizing yourself from the cute face of Muhammed (age 4) and his rejection as an immigrant into Sweden is the same thing as not caring about brown people in the middle east. Only when Swedes can view the thousands of palestinians in their homeland as cockroaches will they be able to kick them out; having symphathy for palestinians in the west bank influences your mind as a white, empathic person and will only lead to doubt when push comes to shove.

    What i mean when saying IS is a good thing is the fact that its bringing to light not only the inherent brutality of Islam and black/brown races but also the futility of "integrating" these people, especially since a large bulk of IS soldiers are born in "tolerant" europe, the UK for instance.
    Also, the IS is fundamentalist and extreme, something that draws young people (women and men) to its group; this is something WN's should learn from and support in its essence since only extreme action will combat the extreme system we have today (the muslims understand this, but not the most radical Nazis, apparently).
    Last edited by a moderator: 30 August 2014
    • Superb Superb x 2
    • Interesting Interesting x 1
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice