Quote Originally Posted by JJackson View Post
Again, with regard to the argument in the second paragraph, I am not sure I see the difference.
They are both ideological disagreements, I would argue the asymmetry is military. While in the Cold War the two power blocks were both comprised of Westphalian Nation States with comparable military components the fighting was principally done by ‘buying’ influence within other Nations States with economic cooperation and military support. This ideological conflict is with a confederation which largely ignores the Westphalian model opting for a pan-national coalition in opposition to the export, into traditionally Islamic areas, of a system they – like the communists – would view as decadent, and corrosive to a way of life based on Koranic values. In the longer term they may hope for a Caliphate which was Westphalian in nature but probably only because this has become the established post colonial norm for dividing up the world’s landmass not because it is inherently necessary for their world view (here I am referring to the Westphalian nature of the caliphate rather than the caliphate itself). The aim, is at heart, irredentist.
The point I was trying to make is that communism promised a better life in the here and now. When the West could show that it didn't provide that, it's validity crumbled. Islamic militancy is promising reward in the afterlife. There's no way we can disprove that. We cannot demonstrate that AQ is wrong. We're promising people a more comfortable life; AQ is promising them eternal bliss. That's the asymmetry.