Blankley's belief is existencial threat to our civilization.

Tony Blankley’s “great divide” between people like him who “believe that the rise of radical Islam poses an existential threat to Western Civilization; and those who believe it is a nuisance, if episodically a very dangerous nuisance” cleanly reflects the two predominant views on the global threat of terrorism ("Is there writing on the wall" 4-25-07). His simplistic dichotomy however, misses a third view that more accurately reflects our reality.

Blankley’s main thesis is partially correct. Radical Islam is a growing threat and the unstoppable growing capacity of individuals or radicalized groups to easily acquire enormously power technology means they will inevitably get their hands on nuclear or biological weapons. Technology they can use for unprecedented national or even global catastrophic destruction. Extinction of our civilization however, will only occur from a cataclysmic celestial event … unless we make a decision from within to abandon the foundations of our civilization (democracy, justice and the protection of basic inalienable rights) the rule of law, by launching a global jihad of our own.

Maintaining our civilizing methodologies in the face of any terrorizing chaos will require true national strength and civilian courage. Military power won’t help. In fact, by abandoning our highest ideals our unbeatable military power will become our greatest threat. Morally weak we will depend on military power and then demand a military state.

Those committed to mass murdering Americans are no doubt extreme, but they are also extremely few in numbers. Their only chance of wiping out western civilization is if we increase their numbers by insisting on war as a means of defeating them. These mass murderers thrive on chaos. The chaos of poverty, ignorance, and injustice that is perpetually fertilized by war.

The only way to stop terrorists is to make enough friends in the world (and good enough friends) who will help us detect and detain these criminals before they kill. Global warring without clear lines of combat will make us few friends and even fewer good friends in the places we need them most. It’s not “a few thousand terrorists using small explosives” as Mr. Blankley states that is “radicalizing the minds of increasing numbers of the world's 1.4 billion Muslims”. It is our warring in their territories and our past and current immoral support for their oil rich repressive rulers that does.

Blankly and others are rightfully alarmist. But it is they who are ignorant, morally cowardice, and even treasonous to reject our ‘lawful’ approach to human progress and our civilized approach to a truly terrifying global reality. Terrorist’s murderous efforts aren’t “funded by Saudi petro-dollars”. They are funded by American petro-dollars. Dollars we gave the Saudi’s because we were too weak to wean ourselves from dependence on their oil.

Blankly and his believers won’t be “false predictors of doom”. They could however, be doom’s instigators. We must insist world law, not world war. That’s what real civilizations do. That’s where Rome fell. In the long run, it will be the global application of our ideal of law that will prove to be the most devastating force against the rise of terrorism. And real courage, not competing foresights, is the only missing ingredient.