Saving England's Citizens or Enraging Their Neighbors?

Five British citizens, going about their daily work have been kidnapped by Iranian Revolutionary Guard naval personnel. A domestic coup in London perhaps, or a daring strike in England's heartland? No. This happened to British sailors and marines as they completed a routine search of an Iraqi merchant vessel sailing through Iraqi waters.

That the Iranian crazies violated every known practice and expectation of sovereign nations, not to mention Iraqi and British territory, is really not the most dangerous part of the story. True, this incident heightens tensions between Iran and the West, but what's new? Iran has, in their view, been officially at war with us since the early seventies. And it's also true that this incident comes at a time when Iran is lumbering towards nuclear capability. But for the British, this incident holds far more dangerous consequences domestically than abroad.

A few facts:

-The total population of England is roughly 60-million.
-The total number of Muslims in England is roughly 1.6-million, nearly 3% of the population.
-Of England's Muslim population, 96% are Sunni's, the same strain of Islam once practiced by Saddam Hussein, and now followed by terrorists blowing up American and British troops in Iraq.

So what's the connection between London's Sunni's and the ones now fighting in Iraq with the blessing of the Shia regime in Iran?

Religion, mainly, but consider that this religion offers no compromise when it comes to assimilation with host countries. Followers of Islam do not migrate to other nations with the goal of becoming a part of that nation's tapestry. Rather, the stated goal of their religion is to devour non-Islamic cultures until none stand but "The One True Faith."

Unlike other ethnic groups that swarm our shores and, to a lesser extent the coasts and borders of European countries, these immigrants do not want to fit in; they want to transform the very makeup of the countries in which they settle, typically by force. And once they enter another country, they don't simply ignore the events in their sacred land. Make no mistake; they're intimately in tune with what happens to their brethren in the Middle East.

And should British response to this kidnapping consist of military force (most likely with American aid), is it a stretch to imagine the violence that could erupt in London or elsewhere in England? The British now find themselves in the middle of a political crop-field, learning firsthand the law of sowing and reaping.

In the almighty name of tolerance and enlightenment, they've allowed unfettered immigration, embracing Muslims by the thousands each year, with naïve expectations that they'll settle down and become "good Britons." Sowing in self-imposed ignorance, they're poised to reap violence, death and national dissolution. If the bullets start flying in Iran, the Molotov cocktails and car bombs could start flying in London. Witness France just last year. This makes a decision on how to respond to the kidnapping dicey indeed. A strong response could trigger massive violence at home. A weak or no response could trigger massive violence at home, as Islamo-facists understand nothing but superior strength.

Lest we sit back and cluck our American tongues in arrogance at English folly, we'd do well to tend to our back yard. True, the Muslim population in the U.S. is less than 1%, and most of them are converts, not immigrants, but we don't necessarily need a large bloc of Muslims to reap the same crop as the British. There are those in our own Congress sowing seeds of defeat in the Middle East, overtly signaling their intention to hand victory to the terrorists.

The recent vote by the House of Representatives ordering President Bush to withdraw all troops from Iraq by the fall of 2008 is treasonous. By codifying a timeline for withdrawal, they're telling the very lunatics murdering our troops to hang on just a little longer and victory will be theirs. They could not do much more to aid a victory for terrorists and a defeat for the U.S. if they grabbed a rifle and shot our troops themselves. The only difference is shooting them face-to-face takes guts; something in short supply on the Hill. They've taken the cowardly way out, using their positions of responsibility as blunt instruments of power.

We pat ourselves on the back and feel safe from the crucible of war. But a lesson the British are now learning the hard way is on our syllabus as well.