An awfully pessimistic outlook it is, but unfortunately I can't feel optimistic about the way the world looks towards tackling terror, especially and primarily Islamic terrorism. Frankly, I thought twice about using the word "Islamic." You know why? Well, because it is supposed to not be politically correct. It is supposed to be taboo (sort of in public fora). Well, quite frankly I'd like to call a spade a spade and say so openly that --- most of the terrorism that has occurred in the recent past has been committed in the name of Islam and extremist Muslims as well as closet extremists (read publicly moderate Muslims) have condoned or tried to justify such attacks, targeted at Westerners as well as other non-Muslim groups.

I do not understand why we are so mindful of "hurting Muslim sentiments." Why? Why - when they do not mind hurting Christian sentiments or non-Muslim sentiments in their own countries? Do they allow religious freedoms in their countries? No - they don't. So, why be apologetic all the time. Why curtail freedom of speech and self-censor (as in the matter of the Danish cartoons).

The reason why I say the world would never win the War on Terror is because most Westerners live in a fantasy world. They think that there are moderate Muslim and extremist Muslims. Well, there is no clear-cut distinction such as that. Fact is the so-called moderate Muslims too (who live within Western societies) seek to justify attacks on Western targets. They ask to look at the "causes." They ask you to question, "why young Muslims are frustrated enough to give up their lives in suicide missions." So, they do not condemn the act outright, but seek to sympathize with the perpetrator.

Countries such as the UK allow radical extremists to carry out their brainwashing of youths in mosques openly. Why? Well, of course, in the name of freedom of speech and democratic rights. How wonderful for the extremists - wouldn't you say. They get to live in a democratic country and enjoy democratic freedoms to indoctrinate young Muslim minds. And yet they show no respect to their host country. They spew venom against the United States and UK and France and so on and so forth right under their very noses.

The very freedoms that define the West are channels for these extremists and so-called moderate Muslims to gain inroads into the institutions of the host country and define public policy. Thankfully, they've not been very successful yet, but for how long. You have them cry about human rights and defend hate mongers and cry about religious persecution. Why can't Western Governments act tough on these good-for-nothing mullahs and extremists and preachers? Why? Why be so polite and oh-so-goody all the time? Why be so sensitive so as to not offend? Why???

A fight defined as the War on Terror should be fought against terrorist groups all over the world, especially those that espouse an Islamic ideology linked to their acts and their stated goals of wanting to effect the downfall of the United States and other Western powers. However, the West chooses to be selective in its fight on terror. So, if an American or a Westerner isn't killed in a terrorist attack - then its fine. Well, it isn't fine. It might be that very same group that attacks America next. So, why wait for that to happen. The world needs to coordinate to win this War on Terror totally.

It can only win that War on Terror if it forces countries such as Pakistan to rid themselves of Saudi-sponsored Islamic religious schools that breed thousands of children and raise them into believing that the Americans and Israelis in particular are Evil and have to be destroyed. The War on Terror can only be won if countries such as Pakistan are dealt with more firmly because these are the countries from where these brainwashed individuals come from.

The Americans and the West give countries such as Pakistan billions of dollars to fight poverty and terrorism in the mistaken belief that poverty spawns terrorism. Well, if that were the case, how would you explain today's conviction of a British (Muslim) doctor in the attempted Glasgow bombing in the UK. Its not the poor necessarily that are carrying out these attacks in the name of Islam. Its well-educated and tech-savvy Muslim professionals who are increasingly volunteering to become part of Al-Qaeda and their ilk. These guys love the Western freedoms and become successful in the West, yet they have some grand delusion about establishing Islamic rule of some sort all over the world.

Its about time the West develops some spine and stands for its rights and freedoms. Why duck for cover when Muslims protest the Danish cartoons? Why self-censor? Why bend over backwards to please minority groups? They enjoy full democratic rights - isn't that enough? The War on Terror cannot be won when you have a group within you that feels so diametrically opposite to your own views. The War on Terror cannot be won when you have sections of your population sympathizing and in fact celebrating the 9/11 attacks as some sort of a response to "American atrocities." The War on Terror cannot be won when you have so-called moderate Muslims add a "BUT" after every sentence condemning attacks like the 9/11 attacks.

I do not believe all Muslims are terrorists or terrorist sympathizers; however, at the same time one cannot deny the fact that there are a large number of Muslims that do sympathize and justify attacks against the West. Does one imagine that away or pretend that those folks don't exist. If that were to be done, it would be akin to living in a fantasy world. Reality bites and terrorism bites each one of us. You might not be the affected ones today, but terrorism is increasingly becoming all pervasive and increasingly civilians (women and children included) are becoming fair game for these terrorists.