• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

The Management of Savagery

The Management of Savagery is a Jihadi text written a little over a decade ago.The full text can be accessed here:
https://azelin.files.wordpress.com/...al-stage-through-which-the-umma-will-pass.pdf

Basically, the last 15 years has been the West doing everything possible to assist them in their aims. To be honest, I think they actually exceeded the imagination of the author.

Everything that has happened in the past few days, still assists the stated goals of the Jihadis. At what point should we stop doing exactly what the jihadis want? It is a bit late now though as the genie is already out of the bottle. Shouldn't policy be based on making it as hard as possible for them to achieve their aims, rather than bending over backwards to help them though?

Some of their goals:

a) Polarise the population (you're either with us, or you're with the terrorists/crusader zionist alliance)
b) Damage the economies of the enemy and the psychological health of their society.
c) Attracting new jihadis by showing them that a small group of people can cause great damage to the Crusaders
d) Radicalise young Muslims. The establishment of violent jihad will radicalise the youth exponentially more than education during times of peace.
e) Through warfare, prepare a generation of leaders who will have the organisational skills to capitalise on 'savagery' i.e. the breakdown of society. The test of battle will allow the best to rise and improve their capabilities.
f) Cause the collapse of societies in Muslim lands - creating the conditions of savagery that will allow them to accomplish their new caliphate.

Textual support for the above goals: (if it's tl;dr can stop here)

This was the policy of battle for the pioneers: to transform societies into two opposing groups, igniting a violent battle between them whose end is either victory or martyrdom, whose emblem is either glorious war or humiliating peace. One of the two opposing groups is in Paradise and the other is in Hell:
(p46)...

Additionally, note that the economic weakness resulting from the burdens of war or from aiming blows of vexation (al-nikya) directly toward the economy is the most important element of cultural annihilation since it threatens the opulence and (worldly) pleasures which those societies thirst for. Then competition for these things begins after they grow scarce due to the weakness of the economy. Likewise, social iniquities rise to the surface on account of the economic stagnation, which ignites political opposition and disunity among the (various) sectors of society [literally "social entity"] in the central country.

1 – Exhausting the forces of the enemy and the regimes collaborating with them, dispersing their efforts, and working to make them unable to catch their breath by means of operations in the regions of the choice states, primary or otherwise, even if the operations are small in size or effect. Although the blow of the rod may only strike a (single) Crusader head, its spread and escalation will have an effect for a long period of time.

2 – Attracting new youth to the jihadi work by undertaking qualitative operations [`amaliyyat naw`iyya] – when it is appropriate with respect to timing and ability – that will grab peoples’ attention. By “qualitative operations,” I mean qualitative, medium operations like the operation in Bali, the operation in al-Muhaya [in Riyad], the operation of Djerba in Tunisia, the operations of Turkey, and the large operations in Iraq and the like. I do not mean qualitative operations like the operation of September.

4 – The fourth goal of the stage of “the power of vexation and exhaustion” is the advancement of groups of vexation through drilling and operational practice so that they will be prepared psychologically and practically for the stage of the management of savagery. [pp17-18)

The terrible events, which capture the peoples' attention and which the mujahid movement endures, and the steadfastness of human exemplars in the face of the horrors resulting from these events firmly roots ideas in the hearts which could not be taught to people in hundreds of years of peaceful education.
(p56)...

"As for those who say how can there be jihad while the Muslims are dispersed, ignorant, and remote from the (true) meanings of their religion, the answer is: the prescription for all of this is to enter into the fields of battle..." to where he (May God have mercy on him) says: "The greatest field for education is the field of battle..."And he says: "Purifying souls and teaching piety in action must be done in the land of the Islamic community and in the fields of jihad. This is how the first Muslims were educated." (p57)...

This type of education is that which will bring forth a generation that is able to bear the trust of this religion and move the Umma to join the practice of jihad. By its means, true leaders will be brought forth for the Umma. That is because speaking on the pulpit is easy and in the newspaper even easier and in books even easier than that. As for having (one's) home destroyed and one's family made homeless and one's mother and sister torn to pieces, only the most extraordinary men are capable of (bearing) that. Great leaders and hardened troops will not come forth save in an atmosphere like this. (p58)

3 – Dislodging the chosen regions – regions in which it was decided to have focused movement, whether in all of the priority regions or in some of them – from the control of the regimes and then working toward the administration of savagery which will transpire in it. Note here that we said that the goal is to dislodge these regions from the control of the regimes of apostasy. It is the goal we are publicly proclaiming and which we are determined to carry out, not the outbreak of chaos. (p18)
 

Laika

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I can't begin to express my admiration that you're actually reading their ideas. most people just don't do it out of a vague sense the "enemy" are delluded or insane or have a fear of being "contaminated" by it and have a much poorer understanding as a result. Good on you!

:thumbsup:
 
So what are you suggesting we do? Offer them flowers and hugs? I mean, really.

So do you think the best thing to do was to spend a trillion dollars + providing them with exactly the conditions that they dreamed of? The best way to defeat your enemy is to do what they want you to do, and damage your economy in the process?.

Terrorism is theatre, it's not an existential threat. It only affects you as much as you let it. In the modern world it is a fact of life, you can't reduce it to zero, just manage the problem. Harm reduction. People die, that's life and always has been. America can tolerate countless gun deaths without changing its nature, why quiver before terrorists?

America's reaction to 9/11 was the worst thing they could have done. Show you are afraid, overreact. Demonstrate that a few people armed with knives can terrify the most powerful country in the world.

Their had to be a response, but it should have been limited to destroying the al-Qaeda network in Afghanistan and going after bin Laden. Tightening law enforcement, but not remaking society.

Instead they showed fear. Created 'savagery' in Iraq, which is something they thought they would have to do themselves. Did the jihadis job for them.

The media narrative for 15 years has been 'terrorist threat', creating Jihadi superheroes to act as role models for a generation.

Media coverage of terrorism should be as close to zero as possible. It has to be covered to some extent, but the purpose is theatre, why give them an audience?

They understood the weakness of the West and exploited it. The west did their bidding. The response to terrorism should be low key, this does not mean 'do nothing', but respond wisely rather than with vengeful and indiscriminate violence.

Accept some degree of terrorism as a fact of life. Don't overreact. Live your life without fear.

It's like the "war on drugs", this is harm maximisation when it should be harm minimisation. When you have an impossible goal, "zero drug use", "zero terrorism" all you can do is escalate and double down on your folly.

Or has the last 15 years been an overwhelming success?
 

Saint Frankenstein

Wanderer From Afar
Premium Member
So do you think the best thing to do was to spend a trillion dollars + providing them with exactly the conditions that they dreamed of? The best way to defeat your enemy is to do what they want you to do, and damage your economy in the process?.

Terrorism is theatre, it's not an existential threat. It only affects you as much as you let it. In the modern world it is a fact of life, you can't reduce it to zero, just manage the problem. Harm reduction. People die, that's life and always has been. America can tolerate countless gun deaths without changing its nature, why quiver before terrorists?

America's reaction to 9/11 was the worst thing they could have done. Show you are afraid, overreact. Demonstrate that a few people armed with knives can terrify the most powerful country in the world.

Their had to be a response, but it should have been limited to destroying the al-Qaeda network in Afghanistan and going after bin Laden. Tightening law enforcement, but not remaking society.

Instead they showed fear. Created 'savagery' in Iraq, which is something they thought they would have to do themselves. Did the jihadis job for them.

The media narrative for 15 years has been 'terrorist threat', creating Jihadi superheroes to act as role models for a generation.

Media coverage of terrorism should be as close to zero as possible. It has to be covered to some extent, but the purpose is theatre, why give them an audience?

They understood the weakness of the West and exploited it. The west did their bidding. The response to terrorism should be low key, this does not mean 'do nothing', but respond wisely rather than with vengeful and indiscriminate violence.

Accept some degree of terrorism as a fact of life. Don't overreact. Live your life without fear.

It's like the "war on drugs", this is harm maximisation when it should be harm minimisation. When you have an impossible goal, "zero drug use", "zero terrorism" all you can do is escalate and double down on your folly.

Or has the last 15 years been an overwhelming success?
I'm not sure what makes you think that I believe the current and past approach to this problem is the correct one. o_O
 
I'm not sure what makes you think that I believe the current and past approach to this problem is the correct one. o_O

So what are you suggesting we do? Offer them flowers and hugs? I mean, really.

Mostly this.

I wasn't advocating engaging them in mutual masturbation, just not spending trillions to help them achieve their aims. There is a big difference between not giving them what they want and tugging them off.
 

dust1n

Zindīq
Mostly this.

I wasn't advocating engaging them in mutual masturbation, just not spending trillions to help them achieve their aims. There is a big difference between not giving them what they want and tugging them off.

Although tugging them off would make them guilty of a sin.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
A problem is that we're playing chess, wherein you win by capturing the top dog (king).
Terrorists using guerrilla warfare are playing go, wherein pieces are all of equal value, & are added as the game progresses.
Chess strategy won't work against terrorists.
It didn't work in Viet Nam, & it isn't working now.
 
Top