I'd say the Nazis were worse only because they were more effective.

They were more effective because they were more organized. The Islamic world has a decentralized form of organization that it uses to its advantage.

That's why they can only resort to psychological warfare, which is all that terrorism is. Radical Islam won't be rolling tanks down the streets any time soon, largely because they don't have the organizational ability to even build tanks.

No organization ability to build tanks?

Perhaps, but they can buy them with their coffers full of oil and drug money.

Plus, you can't easily drive a tank into Israel let alone the US. Much cheaper/easier to buy/build some WMD.

Sneaking germs into the US is pretty easy. Especially if the carrier doesn't mind not making it out alive.

cough cough

Ace = Hitler

GOP Neocons = Nazis

I call Godwin.

We win!

The key to any lasting victory is organization. Islamic radicals may have enough money to buy a few weapons, but then what? Is America going to collapse because of a bomb or two? No.

Terrorism is not about reducing enemy personnel or materiel. Its purely psychological. That's why sensational (and sympathetic) media coverage is essential.

Radical Islam is a threat, don't get me wrong, but the number of people who are actually killed or even injured is miniscule compared to the number of people who were threatened by an organizational behemoth like the Nazi Wehrmacht, or the Soviet Red Army, or the People's Army of China, etc.

Radical Islam isn't totalitarian in the same sense. Sure, they may have wet dreams about the Burkas and the daily prayers mandated by law, but that's never going to happen, not in a million years.

Far and away the winning insane but contageous ideology measured in body count and human misery would be Communism.

I know everybody here knows that. It just needs saying because we haven't heard it enough.

Congratulations to this guy for having the guts to call Islamofascism a pack of venomous nonsense, but I don't think the Nazi parallel is that close. Nazism lines up pretty well with Communism: both were utopian ideologies that justified state-sponsored slaughter of millions of "undesirables" in pursuit of their goals. One ideology identified the bad guys by race, the other by class.

In terms of nihilistic, death-cult looniness, Islamofascism is a lot closer to the Bushido craziness that Japan descended into beginning in the late 1920s. I just re-read Studs Terkel's book about World War 2, and several soldiers remarked on the way that Japanese soldiers flatly refused to follow the rules of war--feigning death and then flinging a hand grenade at approaching US soldiers, stuff like that. Sounded a lot like Fallujah. The "root causes"--non-western cultures trying to come to terms with the modern world--were also pretty similar.

the Nazis were only worse because they had more physical power

Absoloutely! If Islam ever gets that kind of power we shall barbarism the world never, ever seen before. And what kind of religion promises that if one dies for Islam he will have sex with 72 vaginas! Islam is a Satanic Cult and the sooner the world realizes this, the better off we'll all be.

Ironically it is Islam itself that prevents the exploration of ideas necessary for a society to develop the tools Islam needs to conquer the west. The last technical innovation these clowns had was to catapult plague infested bodies of the walls of Constantinople.

Also of note speaking of Nazis and Islam, the Baath party was the Arab version of the Nazi party.

Arghh
it should read "over the walls" not "of the walls"

based on a hatred of "the other," blaming the scapegoat for all failure, humiliation, and economic stagnation, which sounds an awful lot like the Nazis.

Sound a lot like the democrats, too. And I don't mean that in a snarky way, but, geeze, the complete contrarianism of the Dems has been borne out of their complete inability to accept any responsibility for any of their failed social engineering. When the facts show that their scapegoat politics don't work, they resort to a basic temper tantrum of wanting it their way, even if it's bad. It's quite dysfunctional and immature. Like Islamo-fascism. But I would never doubt their patriotism.

What do you get when you cross a Nazi and an Islamic radical? A Communist who promises you 72 virgins as long as you are willing to wait in line.

Radical Islam is a threat, don't get me wrong, but the number of people who are actually killed or even injured is miniscule

SO FAR! But if Michael Savage is right (which I doubt) and there are 20 suitcase bombs in the hands of Nuclear Terrorists inside this country right now they could wreak massively more death and damage in five minutes than we have sustained throughout our entire history put together. Even one bomb can kill more than we lost in all of WWII. The threat of nuclear terrorism only gets worse as time goes on and we seem to be unable to deal with nuclear weapons being built and acquired by rougue states. And it doesn't help to minimize these threats by comparing them to the Wermacht, they are apples and oranges.

Islam is a disgrace to religions everywhere. What kind of a religion promises that one can have sex with 72 vaginas if one dies in battle for it? Only a Satanic Cult could preach this kind of barbaric, evil hedonism, and Islam today is by far the largest one in the world. The war between Islam and all other religions (including itself) goes back to the very founding of Islam and includes such atrocities as dimmitude, ritual beheading, stoning, cutting off appendages, suicide bombers, and various other types of assassins trying to earn their right to have sex with 72 vaginas in Heaven.

Even 50 suitcase nukes aren't anything truly significant in terms of the USA.

Messy? Yes.

Momentarily appaling? Yes.

Kind of expensive to recover from? Yes.

A serious bummer if you're close? Yes.

The grand total of destruction would be on the order of a major hurricane though. More dead of course of they're placed well, but infrastructure damage would be less than total destruction.

They have to decide if they want "body count" or a really lasting impact. A more significant lasting impact would target things like major dams, the CA aquaduct pumping stations, major bridges across the Mississippi, bridges into NYC, etc. I'll bet if they exist the fools will go after people though...

The suitcase nukes aren't particularly powerful devices and were never intended for use against population targets - they were designed as essentially guaranteed-success demolition charges for use against infrastructure/mil targets.

Its good to know that their someone there in suadi arabia who isnt a radical but i,ll bet he is marked for death by al queda