Patton on Islam

Bosch Fawstin is an Eisner Award-nominated cartoonist currently working on a graphic novel, The Infidel, featuring the anti-jihad superhero, Pigman. The first two chapters are now available in digital comic book form. Bosch’s first graphic novel is Table for One. He is also the author of ProPiganda: Drawing the Line Against Jihad, a print companion to The Infidel.


To compare Patton with today’s U.S. General in wartime: Click Here.
Patton-on-Islam-4-FPM

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

  • Andy Lewis

    Patton is not a useful source on this. Google "patton jews" to get a sense of what a vicious Jew-hater he was.

    • Alvaro

      Patton was wrong on Islam because he was a "Jew-hater"? Good one, Aristotle.

      • Andy Lewis

        Who said he was wrong about Islam, Ace?

    • guest

      This "Jew-hater" Patton smashed Hitlerism. The same cannot be said for the Jewish general compared to Patton who vowed to smash terror yet used the IDF to forcibly remove 10,000 Jews from the Gaza Settlements and let the rockets come in.

      No thanks, I'd prefer the anti-Semite Patton over the fat disappointment Sharon anyday.

      • tagalog

        Furthermore, Patton puked in public when he toured an extermination camp liberated by the Third Army, suggesting that the treatment of Jews by the Nazis was not OK with him.

      • watsa46

        Don't speak so fast. U have no idea if significant pressure was/is exercised or not on IL prime ministers.
        I believe that tremendous pressure is exercised on every single prime ministers. For obvious reasons.
        Even if IL is now energy independent, weaponery supply and economic boycott can always be used against the country.

    • daniel metz

      funny how people like you are so quick to condemn people that lived in the past but never say a word about modern day haters of jews and others. like farraconvict the rev sharpton and the black panthers. all hate jews and whites but every one is afraid to put them in the spotlight and call them what they are

      • Andy Lewis

        You don't know a damn thing about me. I condemn antisemitism wherever I find it.

        Typical rightard – assumes and condemns wihout a clue, much less evidence.

        • Pontotoc Bill

          And you don't know a damn thing about him..

          Typical libtard – assumes and condemns wihout a clue, much less evidence.

        • VonRussell

          You damned Nazi.

    • Defcon 4

      I read Patton's biography, I don't remember reading any antisemitism in it. I do seem to remember he had some sympathy for the Jews of N. Africa, who seemed to be treated worse than dogs by their islamo-nazi masters back in the 1940's.

  • http://fawstin.blogspot.com/ Bosch_Fawstin

    I don't know about that, but I Do know he Killed a Lot of Jew-haters.

    • Alvaro

      .. and sadly also Communist-haters.

    • Defcon 4

      Double thumbs up to Mr. Fawstin for that! A brilliant rebuttal. In point of fact, I used to know not one, but two JWV members (Jewish War Veterans), one of whom served under Patton at some time in his career on the Western front, a fact he was proud of.

    • Smote

      I'm right with you there, Mr Fawstin.

  • SamuelKhan

    George S. Patton Jr could have brought everlasting world peace if he had been turned loose towards the East. He would have rivaled Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan as a conqueror. But he was a liberator! The Germans were scared to death of Patton.

    • Alvaro

      There is no doubt in my mind that even the German army would have marched with Patton and the Western allies towards Moscow in 1945, smashing and discrediting communism once and for all.

      • Indioviejo

        Really Alvaro, did we want the Nazi Army marching anywhere with us? Communist and Nazis had socialist totalitarianism in common, even as they hated each other over world supremacy. I believe Islam is also a genocidal totalitarian ideology that needs to be defeated and destroyed. Last weekend I went on a pilgrimage to Auschwitz and I am at a loss for words to describe my disgust.

        • Pontotoc Bill

          Indioviejo,

          The German army was not a Nazi army, rather it was Nazi leadership with German soldiers. The German soldiers fought for their country, right or wrong (that time they were wrong), but the vast majority were not Nazis.

          Remove the Nazi leadership and the German army was just that, German.

        • Alvaro

          "Really Alvaro, did we want the Nazi Army marching anywhere with us? Communist and Nazis had socialist totalitarianism in common, even as they hated each other over world supremacy."

          Yes, why not?

          I see National Socialism and Fascism not as leftist socialism, but as basically conservatives copying elements from the Communists to defeat them. The end result was in the political center, but also authoritarian. Similar in many ways to the communists, but mainly conservatives in spirit. No Communism, no National Socialism or Fascism. These two latter ideologies would die peacefully if communism was destroyed.

          • objectivefactsmatter

            "I see National Socialism and Fascism not as leftist socialism, but as basically conservatives copying elements from the Communists to defeat them. The end result was in the political center, but also authoritarian. Similar in many ways to the communists, but mainly conservatives in spirit."

            Nazis wanted to conserve what? Racial superiority. That's not conservative because it was based entirely on delusion about history and genetics.

            "No Communism, no National Socialism or Fascism. These two latter ideologies would die peacefully if communism was destroyed."

            Sure. You're just as delusional as they were.

      • Andy

        You're forgetting your history, Alvaro. Back then it was ''the enemy of my enemy is my friend." Winning the war was in doubt for quite a while early on; all anyone was focused on was defeating Hitler. The German army, what was left of it, had already tried marching on Moscow in 1941, and didn't fare so well.

    • Victoryman

      If you read, "The German General's Speak," they feared only two allied commanders: Patton and Montgomery. I agree with your theory. The Cold War would never have happened and millions would not have been mired in slavery for years under communist oppression. I still question how Gen. Patton died. Too many unanswered questions, coincidences and disappearance of key figures involved in the "Accident." The "Fact" that a general of Patton's stature was killed in an "Accident" is very suspicious. Read, "Target: Patton" by Robert K. Wilcox. Subtitled, "The plot to ASSASSINATE General George S. Patton."

    • ireAmerica

      Too bad General Patton did not turn toward the middle-east. Persia had already declared their solidarity with Hitler by renaming to Iran (Aryan) – due to Nazi adoption of the Islamic faith-genocide doctrine.

    • Asher

      He wanted to push on and go after the Russians too…Would have been a better world, if he had!

  • Michael Copeland

    No stronger retrograde force exists in the world – Winston Churchill.

    • objectivefactsmatter

      "No stronger retrograde force exists in the world – Winston Churchill."

      Churchill seems to have been the last honest national leader on Islam. He didn't pull any punches for communists and leftists either.

  • David M

    The U.S. has First Amendment, a courageous Bosch Fawstin and a lot of useless, corrupt and coward politicians and journalists. We have no First Amendment, no Bosch Fawstin but a lot of useless, corrupt and coward politicians and journalists in Europe.

  • jacob

    A lot has been said about the dislike of Jews from General Patton and I wonder whether it has been
    documented properly….
    As a Jew myself, I dislike New York Jews….

    Does it make me a Judeophobic Jew…????

    • Billiam

      No. It makes you a clearheaded person. The Jews in NY seem to hate themselves, or erroneously have the same mindset as Jews in Germany of the 30's.

    • Victoryman

      The true religion of self-hating leftist Jews is not Judaism, it is liberalism. How else does one explain the overwhelming vote for Obama by this demographic. Don't they realize he is a true anti-Semite, along with most of his administration, or do these people ascribe to the idea that, "If I'm "Nice," maybe the tiger will eat me last?"

    • Phil

      It makes you a bigot. You mean to tell me that there are no decent Jews from NY?

    • Defcon 4

      Isn't Pamela Geller from New York?

  • matt

    Patton wasn't anti jewish his entire life. he wrote some dumb things just at the closing of the war, while he was also fatigued physically and mentally. he was saying some other crazy things at that time too. Many of his biographers believed he was mentally ill from exhaustion at that point.

    • onecornpone

      Thanks matt, I'm glad you stood up for the general.

      Seems the 'history' of every single hero we ever we had, has been rewritten since Liberalism took hold of academia. I'm sick of it!

      • Knucklehead

        Amen!!!

  • watsa46

    Unless u violate the principle of proportionality which by the way is imposed only on one country, Israel, war according to this principle cannot be won anymore. And of course nobody can die! The multitude (poor & ignorant) controlled by genocidal fanatics, for whom killing is a Godly obligation, will be assured the victory. Is this what the West wants? China, Russia and India will not accept this. Is the left so corrupted? It looks like.

    • Tom

      It is more complex than that. Jew haters, new world order acolytes, liberals (including liberal Jews), Islamists, pacifists, and others inside and outside of Israel are united against the current state of affairs. The ones in this list that support the existence of Israel believe (wrongly) that if an autonomous Palestinian state is created and Israel returns to the 1967 borders all will be well.
      Those that hate Israel and Jews (liberal ones too) want them vulnerable. The communist utopians, one world government, types see Israel as a threat to their designs. The “doctrine of proportionality ” has been applied to our conduct since WW2. The only times we broke from it were Grenada, Panama, and the first Gulf War. President Ronald Reagan (Granada and Panama) and President George H. W. Bush (the first Gulf War) were derided for the use of overwhelming force. The fist Gulf War had limitted objectives due to the demands of our international “partners”. President George W. Bush would have used the same strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq if the military had not been decimated during 8 years of “Slick Willie”. The fact is that the use of overwhelming force saves lives.

  • digdigby

    Patton and MacArthur were anachronisms after 1945. The Korean War and the idea of 'limited war' in which Chinese hordes overrun and slaughter Americans and then fall back behind borders we are not allowed to touch…. that was the beginning of the end of American vision, clarity and strength. MacArthur was SO right. We have fought 'limited wars' ever since and will fritter away 200 years of glory and sacrifice for nothing.

    • Ansar al-Zindiqi

      If MacArthur was such an anachronism after 1945 then what was he doing in the early 1950's?

      • digdigby

        Getting fired by Truman.

    • Defcon 4

      Didn't MacArthur want to use nuclear weapons against the PRC during the Korean War? A PRC still aligned/allied w/the USSR?

      • digdigby

        In 1960, MacArthur challenged a statement by Truman that he had wanted to use nuclear weapons, and Truman issued a retraction, stating that he had no documentary evidence of this claim; it was merely his personal opinion.

        General MacArthur was VERY upset about the atomic bombing of Japan. He did not believe in using even conventional weapons directly against civilian non-combatants. Patton and MacArthur were the last of a breed.

        • Defcon 4

          Amazing. I never knew that. I still think MacArthur made huge strategic mistakes when he drove on the PRC border in N. Korea though, especially in splitting his forces along an East-West divide and ignoring intelligence that indicated mass PRC infiltration into N. Korea.

  • Drakken

    Digdigby, make no mistake, the total war concept will be dusted off and used once again because of neccessity. I completely agree with you about us not winning a war since Korea because of leftist limited thinking and total lack of imagination.

    • digdigby

      Leftists have PLENTY of imagination. They have imagined a world in which the U.S. is a third rate power.

    • JerryJ26

      Yup, the left will fight a war until they lose it.

  • Tom

    Drakken, I hope you are right. The UN force that we led did not “win” in Korea. We got a cease-fire/armistice. I think that we got that because Eisenhower took office. The Russians and Chinese respected him. They had managed to buffalo Truman.

    • Drakken

      Events have a real nasty habit of bringing home a reality far different from the current narrative. For example that god forsaken pos COIN manuel which the current crop of spineless leaders take as gospel is far removed from the reality that is doesn't bloody work and never did work. Patrius and others of his ilk are not warriors, they are effing politicians with no business of being on the battlefield. Gen Mattis on the other hand wasn't afraid to get his hands real dirty to get the job done and save American lives.

    • Defcon 4

      In retrospect, it would've been better to have fought the Korean War until both Koreas were united and not united under a puppet state of the PRC.

  • logdon

    I'm British so biased. My father was at el-Alamein under Montgomery so double biased.

    Patten fought tooth and nail with Monty who wanted a narrow massive Allied offensive in the north capturing the Channel ports and then hooking south. It was classic Liddel Hart, later adopted by Guderian and Rommel in their blitzkreig through France.

    Instead Eisenhower had to contend with Patten's ego, on a roll on a wide front. Patten was halted, not by the Nazis but logistics.

    Had those northern ports been secured the supply stretch would have been eliminated and the narrow punch would have succeeded thus ending the war much earlier and also saving allied lives.

    That's the story.

    • Phil

      Monty really knew what he was doing in launching operation market garden didn't he? In case you don't know, it was a poorly planned operation without proper intelligence that resulted in a defeat for the allies.

      • Viet Vet

        Yep, Montgomery was the one with the ungodly ego. He was so full of himself it was coming out his friggen ears.

      • logdon

        I do know. In fact my Uncle is buried there.

        Its not as simple or black and white as you suggest. I know of the catastrophic intelligence failure of the resting Panzers but so did the Bletchley Heath monitoring station.

        However had the troops who were meant to link not stopped thirty or so miles down the road it is highly likely it would have succeeded.

    • Defcon 4

      Montgomery's Market Garden operation was one such narrow front offensive that turned into a huge fiasco — especially for the British Airborne division at Arnhem as well as the Polish brigade parachuted into a "secured" drop zone controlled by German forces.

    • cjk

      A 100 % patriotic American here who thinks that Patton was an excellent tactical commander.
      The truth is that Eisenhower was the real problem. Eisenhower was also the only general among his peers in WWII who never saw combat in WWI. When you compare how Eisenhower ran the European Theatre with how MacArthur ran the Pacific it's actually embarrassing for Eisenhower.
      MacArthur would surely have done exactly what Montgomery wanted to do and with full force. Market-Garden was a defeat because of Ike's stupidity and half hearted backing.
      MacArthur would have seen the obvious superior strategy of taking the North Sea ports.
      I am a very biased American, but not a blind one.
      It was pure idiocy for the Allies to advance the way they did when as you say the real stifling enemy was logistics when they could have much easier struck devastating death blows to Germany from the North Sea ports
      To anyone thumbing down, the guy's indisputably right about the soundness of the British strategy.
      Even Germany's last serious offensive in the West (The Battle of the Bulge) was aimed at the Allies best forward port at the time; Antwerp.

      • logdon

        My bigger strategic picture of the importance of those ports and line of supply is ignored by those who talk about the tactical details of Market Garden.

        I'm glad you agree and your final line does show the seriousness of Antwerp in German eyes.

        Splitting the British in the North from the US in the South was also part of that plan. And, had the weather not cleared over Bastogne he may well have partially succeeded.

        I say partially because by that point Germany was finished. Burned out cities. No factories. And once the attack had been halted, no reserves.

        The argument goes that rather than attempting to repeat his previous Ardennes success he should have used those troops East of Berlin. But again even that would only have the end result of buying time.

        However moving on, what I'll never understand is Eisenhower's catastrophic halt outside western Berlin in order that Zhukov could take the city.

        That changed the map of Europe for sixty years.

        • cjk

          If a dope like Eisenhower ran the Pacific, Japan wouldn't have been defeated till 1947 and today we might be dealing with a communist North Japan a hundred times worse than North Korea.

          Bastonge showed that Americans were every bit as good and better than the Germans. It's hard to find a fight where the Germans actually had a massive advantage over Americans during WWII.
          I don't think the Germans would have made Antwerp even with permanently bad weather.

          • logdon

            And of course Suez where we, together with the French and Israelis had Nasser licked.

            Eisenhower, supposedly an anti-colonialist viewed it as imperial meddling (as if reclaiming rightfully owned property illegally commandeered is 'meddling') and summoned the UN to halt the expedition.

            Imagine the course of events had he kept his very own meddling to himself?

          • cjk

            Yeah the only American action that I find more outrageous and stooooopid than Suez off the top of my head is the obscene intervention on the part of the bad guys against Serbia

          • Defcon 4

            Wasn't the UK in on the Suez strike in the late 1950's as well?

      • Defcon 4

        UM, "half-hearted" backing? All airborne divisions of the US Army in the European theater were employed as well as a brigade of Polish paratroopers thrown into a losing battle. A massive air to ground effort was also launched to clear the drop zones of any AAA. The 101st and 82nd Airborne divisions had significant casualties for such a "half-hearted" effort — including a charge across a river into withering machine gun fire.

        • cjk

          An intelligent commander would have seen the absolute wiseness of an overall North Sea based strategy. I guess you need to study a little more because you don't grasp the concept of just how important logistics were in WWII and even today. A serious strategy would have consisted of the use of all the stuff just sitting around to the south and amphibious operations on North Germany at the same time.
          North Germany is an open plain close to the main Allied source of supply whereas south and central Germany increase in easily defended hilliness the farther south you go and also the farther you stray from the Allied supply source. If you can't see that I guess it was guys like you who were Ike's advisors

  • Christopher Riddle

    This quote(Patton)is in the book"War As I Knew It".Yes,George S. PattonJr. had an anti-semitic side to him (nobody is perfect except Obama),but because of his extensive studies of history (and The North African campaign)he REALLY "sussed"out The Arab.I would recommend this book for a number of reasons,not the least of which was his understanding of The Arab.The Pentagon would do well to buy(and distribute this book)to their strategists and fighters!

  • Phil

    Patton was a great general but was not all there. His slapping of the soldier with severe psychological problems nearly led to his dismissal. He also had little sympathy for the survivors of the nazi death camps and referred to them as if they were animals. Also, his grandiosity and insults of The USSR could have caused a disaster between the Soviets and the Allies considering how paranoid Stalin was. As much as we don't want to admit it, the Soviets suffered tremendously during the war and killed many more Germans than the British and the Americans. I don't know if Normandy would have been possible if not for the Russians diverting so many German troops from France. As far as a previous comment about invading the East (The Soviet Union), it would have been a bloodbath for all. Stalin had the largest army in Europe and tens of thousands of tanks and millions of battle hardened soldiers. After fighting Germany since 1939, Britian had no desire for another war. Ditto the US who had been fighting both Germany and Japan since Dec. 1941. Our soldiers wanted to go home and the country would not have tolerated the millions of American casualties that a war against the USSR would have meant.

    • Viet Vet

      The pacifist room is down the hall, second room on the left.

    • digdigby

      The Hitler-Stalin Pact started WWII and the two jackals gobbled up Poland together. The Russians got JUST what they deserved.

      • Defcon 4

        What the USSR did post-WW2 in Eastern Europe was no less despicable.

  • John Stone

    My apologies to the British, but the Germans rated the British officer corps as the least effective of all the major armies they faced. (The British troops were well thought of.) I suspect what happened was that the British needed somebody to celebrate for propaganda reasons. Not having a good candidate, they picked out Montgomery because he liked attention, and like our General MacArthur, was good at strutting around for the news reels.

    Also pardon me again, but the idea that Eisenhower would sacrifice an entire army to satisfy the ego of a general is borderline goofy. Eisenhower was the supreme commander. If he wanted to be rid of Patton he could have been rid of him at any time. Either dismissal, or if he was too popular for that, boot him upstairs into a committee were he would be impotent. Or, you know, send him off to some obscure location.

    What I believe was going in is that we deliberately delayed the push across Europe because we wanted to partition Germany. Justifying that required that we allow the Soviets to take the eastern portion of the country. That required that we slow our advance across Northern Europe. And so we took the much celebrated but marginal general, Monty, put him in charge of the north, and then sent the best combat general, Patton, off on an unnecessary mission into Southern France.

    And oh, by the way, why did we take Italy with ground troops? The Italians had already turned on Fascism. Did we suppose that the German occupying troops would fight on if Germany fell? You know, in the middle of an unfriendly population and lacking supply. Not likely, not even possible. We were in Italy for the same reason we were in the South of France, to delay our advance until the USSR took the eastern half of Germany.

    I am not a big fan of Patton’s geopolitics; he was not that much of a thinker. But at least he did understand that once Germany was defeated it was defeated. The big brains in Washington thought that Germany was the eternal threat. With that in mind they attempted, briefly, to turn Germany into a partitioned and pastoral state. Either owing to lack of insight or communist influence, they simply did not notice the USSR colossus to the east. The kick in the pants came with the Berlin Crises, and the parts of Germany the West controlled got to reunite, re-industrialize, and rearm.

    • tagalog

      Montgomery was not as bad a general as Americans like to believe. He was highly effective in North Africa. In his own way he was a little like Patton in holding out for advancing on a particular line (as with Operation Market-Garden), an operation that came close to succeeding in getting a bridgehead across the Rhine, breaching the Siegfried Line, and entering into Germany in the fall of 1944, despite hasty and poor planning. To many the worst field commander in Europe was Mark Clark.

      Eisenhower pushed hard against the politicians, including FDR, who wanted to bring Patton home and get him out of the spotlight. Eisenhower acknowledged that Patton was his most aggressive field commander (but Patton wasn't the only one). Eisenhower pursued a strategy of even advancement for a number of good reasons, among which was the military desireablity of avoiding creating salients that the highly skilled Germans could exploit. There were also unavoidable political reasons among the Allies for the broad front strategy. Patton was in error in advocating for giving all-out support to the Third Army. They wouldn't have gotten very far before they were cut off and wiped out. Example: Task Force Baum and Hammelburg. Remember, in fall 1944 Allied forces in Europe were still being supplied from the Normandy beaches, not from anyplace closer. If nothing else, they'd have run out of gas and ammo.

      We took Italy with ground troops because Churchill, who erroneously thought of the Mediterranean area as the "soft underbelly of Europe" wanted it that way. Churchill had the very same ideas in World War I: he was the force behind Gallipoli in the first war. The Italian campaign also had political use in holding Stalin's importuning for a Second Front in northern Europe off until the Western allies could succeed at that effort. The convoys bringing supplies to the Allies from the U.S. and Canada were being decimated in the Battle of the Atlantic at the time.

      The idea of turning Germany into a bucolic, non-industrialized state was the brainchild of one of FDR's advisors, Harry Morgenthau. The Morgenthau Plan didn't get a lot of traction because the FDR administration, the Brits, and even the French were looking to the Soviet influence in Europe in the postwar years and they knew that Germany was going to be important strategically. Adding to the complexity was the justified hatred and suspicion of the Germans as a people. A species of sentimentality became attached to the USSR because of the huge casualties they suffered in bearing the biggest burden of the war with Germany, and that interfered with the West showing resolution in the earliest days of Soviet expansion into Europe at the end of the war and in the postwar period.

      • Drakken

        Sorry to rain on the Monty lovefest, but Monty could never hold a candle to Rommel period, the only reason Monty won was he continued to throw men and material at the problem,and had no clue about manuver warfare, he just charged straight forward, where the Germans were the masters of maneuver warfare and always outflanked the Brits at every turn, had severe supply problems. The Brits had a 20 to 1 ration in men and a 500 to 1 in tanks. Had Rommel had the same supply as Monty, he would have ran Monty into Iran and had coffee in Tehran. Rommel for all the problems that he had, continued to bleed the Brits all accross North Africa until withdrawl.

        • PamM

          Rommel gave the Americans a good pasting too when he met them at Kasserine. Had he been well supplied he would probably have pushed them all the way back to Casablanca.

          My father fought in North Africa and, like all those who fought against him, had tremendous respect for Rommel. He was, as you say, a master of the mobile armoured warfare to which the desert was so well suited and gave the British a torrid time for the two years he spent there. The German generals were usually a cut above everyone else's in WWII, particularly during the early years. Along with Manstein and Guderian, I would rate Rommel as one of the very best.

        • tagalog

          Well, there was that moment when Montgomery defeated Rommel at El Alamein. With superior generalship, I might add, not more materiel.

          I'm no fan of Montgomery (Caen was a mess, and neglecting taking Antwerp and the Scheldt Estuary), but I think Americans have tended to underestimate him for a variety of reasons.

          • Drakken

            I really do hate to quibble with you my good friend, but, Monty sure as hell didn't out General Feld Marshal Rommel in any way shape or form, Rommel simply couldn't hold due to resupply. Plus Monty had a 20-30 to 1 advantige and still Rommel bled you Brits dry. It was a hollow victory at best. Monty acted stupidly for wanting to beat Rommel at all costs.

          • tagalog

            I'm not a Brit, so I don't understand what you mean when you say "you Brits." My family left Britain 400 years ago because they hated the English for oppressing them due to their being Separatists and not approving of the Anglican Church. We disliked the Brits right into the present day in my family, although I admit that I am marginally in the Anglophile camp because of my devotion to the Anglo-Saxon system of law and Churchill and Thatcher.

            I don't think you're giving El Alamein its proper due when you call it a "hollow victory at best." At best it was the turning point of the war in North Africa, which is how the Allied world saw it at the time and how all the world still does today. It was the Western equivalent of Stalingrad in the east, the first time the advancing Germans had been stopped and turned back.

  • logdon

    Our dhimmis are still banging on about how we saved Serbia/Kosovo from genocide.

    But rest assured that one is far from over. Serbs will never forget the Battle of Kosovo. And the disease of pc hasn't addled their brains yet.

    • Defcon 4

      Isn't Kosovo being essentially ethnically cleansed of non-muslims?

      • logdon

        Kosovo is.

        And much to the chagrin of Serbia who threatened by an EU intent on islamising the continent, have had to concede.

        For the time being.

        • Drakken

          The Serbs given the first opportunity will take back Kosovo, the EU continues to treat them as dirt and are looking to the Russians for help and are going to get it.

          • logdon

            As former Yugoslavia they have close connections.

            Good.

          • Drakken

            The Serbs do, the Croats and Sloviens are close to the Hapsburgs and the Catholic Church.

    • tagalog

      I've thought, right from the beginning of the latest episode in the Balkans, that that conflict is just the latest chapter in the Muslim incursion into Europe. The last chaper in that story ended with the Battle of Vienna in 1683, with Muslims establishing a colony in the Balkans that temporarily escaped for some reason the general reckoning with the Muslim invasion of Europe.

      • logdon

        The Ottomans were kicked out of the Balkans in the late nineteenth century.

        And as a touch entirely in line with Islamic sadistic rage then ejected the Armenians from Greater Turkey.

        This death march is reckoned to have cost around a million lives. And still denied by Turkey.

        A number of their German allies were present at this slaughter including many who then went on as architects of the Holocaust. They obviously learned the lessons of mass slaughter all too well.

        • Drakken

          The muslims of Europe are about to learn that lesson once again.

          • tagalog

            Maybe; in the West we've lost touch with the idea of militant Christian unity in the face of a threat from Islam. There are no Charles Martels or Jan Sobieskis in the present day. But maybe Christian resolution will be revived.

          • Drakken

            It probably won't be a christian Crusade in nature, but it will be a spirited nationalistic approach that will make the Serbs pale by comparison.

        • Defcon 4

          Another million to a millon five Assyrian Christians were slaughtered at the same time — their genocide at the hands of the islamofascist Turks goes untold.

  • Smote

    Ya gotta love the line; "He is exactly as he was around the year 700'. Islam has not progressed one iota since then. Certainly, Arabs have raped, enslaved and slaughtered millions since 700, but today they still have that same 'Planet of the Apes' mentality. To them, time must, and has, stopped. And for them, it must remain so.

    The worst thing a crushing dictatorship can allow is progression. Stagnation and being 'frozen in time' is paramount. It is their mantra. It is crucial to their survival.

    • Asher

      Right on….these Islamists have not helped their human condition or plight one iota…Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and getting the same results.

  • Asher

    They called Patton Blood and Guts for a reason…there was no cowardice in him…his dedictation was to Freedom and against tyranny, he stared into the face of death so many times and never backed down!

  • k9base

    patton was wise=Islam sucked/Jews suck=Nail on head Sir

  • Asher

    Before the 3rd army went into Bastone, he said, 'If we are not victorious, Let no one come back alive."

  • Fosch Boston

    Is he talking about Arabs or Islam?