Tooth-to-Tail Ratio

Or, the illusion of the moderate Muslim majority

The following guest-essay by Frank Phillips was originally published in a slightly different form at LibertyGB.

Tooth-to-tail ratio, or the illusion of the moderate Muslim majority

by Frank Phillips

Why the claim that “the majority of Muslims are peaceful” is pure fantasy

1.   Tiny team wins — large crowd loses

All of us have heard, although in a different context, that it is not size that matters, but technique… Snicker as much as you like, but that is actually true.

A lioness cannot match a buffalo in one-on-one combat, and a pride of lionesses is certainly outnumbered and “outhorned” (outgunned) by a herd of buffalos. So how can they win despite these odds; how can five to six lionesses disrupt fifty to sixty buffalos to hunt down the one buffalo they want to seize?

Because the buffalos are just a crowd, but the lionesses are a team.

Victory is achieved not by a large but otherwise loitering and incoherent crowd, but by a core-sized, action-oriented and coherent team.

2.   The tooth-to-tail ratio, or the fighters and the supporters

This expression means the number of warriors who do the fighting, and the number of caretakers who sustain warriors so they can do the fighting. Hence, they are called combat troops and combat service support troops, respectively.

If you have no military experience, don’t panic, just pay attention!

A warrior needs ammunition, water, food, clothing, shelter and medicine. Fail to provide him the aforementioned items, and he will stand there empty-handed, dehydrated, hungry, shivering, exposed, and sick, and ultimately, he will die or surrender. Succeed in providing him these items, and he will sustain his function: fighting.

Or think of a football player! While it is true that the player does the “fighting”, he is supported by doctors, nutrition experts, fitness trainers, contract lawyers, financial advisors etc. to ensure his top-notch performance.

Or think of a novelist! While he does the “fighting” for sure, there are typists, editors, travel agents, accountants etc. who keep him on the roll.

The football player and the novelist are the combat troops: the tooth. The others are the combat service support troops: the tail.

As you can see, the tooth is always significantly smaller than the tail. And while it is the tooth that bites into you, his bite would not be a reality without the tail sustaining the sharp and pointy status of the tooth.

3.   Warriors in the community, or the insurmountable 15%

The tooth-to-tail ratio is understood not just within the armed forces, but also in any human community, let it be a village, a region, or a country.

By 1944, German forces had been pushed back to their country, and the Allies on the Western front and the Soviets on the Eastern Front were on the verge of entering Germany. It was essential for the Third Reich to mobilize as many able-bodied men as they could to fight for survival.

At that time, Germany had about seventy million residents, and the German forces had about ten million men in arms. That is about 14% of the population, so a minority compared to the remaining 86%. Why did they not set up an army of twenty or thirty million, considering the huge manpower of the Allies and the Soviet Union? twenty or thirty million are more likely to repel an invasion than ten million. The answer is easy — they simply could not afford it.

Or think of North Korea! This country has the highest number of soldiers per capita, meaning 24 million residents and 1.2 million servicemen. That is just a 5% minority, compared to the remaining 95% of the population. Even in this case, the country is staggering on the verge of economic collapse, is kept alive only by Chinese investments, and was plagued by famine in the 1990s, having caused death by starvation to about two million people.

Or think of the United States of America! This country has about 318 million residents and an armed forces of about 1.3 million servicemen; thus the latter forms only about 0.4% of the population. With its perpetual involvement in as many as 160 countries (there are 200 countries on Earth), the upkeep of this tiny 0.4%, compared to the 99.6% of the population, has pushed the U.S. into sky-high debt.

This is what everybody has to understand: you can mobilize all the men you want, but who will provide weapons and food and fuel and medicine for those men if there are no workers and farmers and engineers and doctors? Nobody. Thus, your gigantic army soon will start to crumble and fall apart.

Military history and experience indicate that at any given time, a community can field and maintain no more than 10-15% of the population — they are the “extremists” who do the fighting. Thus, at least 85% will always be “moderates”, a.k.a. average people who seem to just live everyday life and not engage in extreme activities like fighting, but who, in reality, are likely to work hard to maintain the fighting capability of the 5-10-15%.

This is the reason you will never see the majority (51% or higher) of Muslims becoming “extremists” and fighting the infidel — it is a physical impossibility. However, this truth also warns us that the so-called “moderate” Muslims are not moderate because they have chosen that lifestyle, but because they cannot surmount the barrier forced upon them by mathematics and logistics (war material supply).

This was repeated by Muslim scholar Abul Ala Maududi who explained that jihad was not only combat for Allah but all efforts that helped those waging combat (qitaal): “In the jihad in the way of Allah, active combat is not always the role on the battlefield, nor can everyone fight in the front line. Just for one single battle preparations have often to be made for decades on end and the plans deeply laid, and while only some thousands fight in the front line there are behind them millions engaged in various tasks which, though small themselves, contribute directly to the supreme effort.”

4.   Position in power reveals your true face

“A man’s character is most evident by how he treats those who are not in a position either to retaliate or reciprocate.” — Paul Eldridge

It is easy to claim to be a “moderate” when you have no chance to win an open-out conflict. However, we must take a look at dozens of countries where Muslims have supreme power: there are 57 Muslim states, plus many city districts in Europe, America and Australia where they form the majority, or where they are numerous. What do we see in those places: the fair treatment of people of different religions, of the fairer sex, of dissenting opinion, or ruthless knockdown on them? Exactly — it is the latter attitude that prevails, without any exception. Where are those so-called moderates calling for the abolishment of Sharia (the law of Islam)? Nowhere.

This must be no surprise as survey after survey indicates that both Muslims in Muslim countries and Muslims in the West favor, either as a majority opinion or in significant numbers, the execution of apostates, honor murders, the corporal punishment of women, and other rules set by Sharia.

5.   A Muslim likes the Quran and the Prophet Mohammed. Duh!

“Show me the man you honor, and I will know what kind of a man you are. It shows me what your ideal of manhood is, and what kind of a man you long to be.” — Thomas Carlyle

The so-called “moderate” Muslim is still a Muslim — he believes what the Quran teaches and takes the Prophet Mohammed as his role model. He would not be a Muslim if he did not believe in those things. Duh!

Therefore, the so-called “moderate” Muslim is not a peaceful person — if he were peaceful, he would contradict the teachings of the Quran and the actions of the Prophet Mohammed, which would be blasphemy.

So just because he does not wave a sword, roar “Allahu Akbar!” and demand the jizya, it does not mean that he is peaceful — maybe he prefers that his comrades do the dirty work for him and for the cause of Islam.

6.   We must win the hearts and minds of moderate Muslims to beat radical Islamists. *facepalm*

Did we win the hearts and minds of moderate National Socialists to beat radical National Socialismists?

Did we win the hearts and minds of moderate Communists to beat radical Communismists?

Instead of creating and using non-existing words to pussyfoot around the problem, let’s face reality:

A Nazi is a Nazi. Period.

A Commie is a Commie. Period.

A Muzzie is a Muzzie. Period.

If you lie down with dogs, you will get up with fleas. Anything else is just lazy excuses.

24 thoughts on “Tooth-to-Tail Ratio

  1. Only sentient beings, those who can see and hear and take in what their senses tell them will accept the above essay. The others who only take in what their brainwashing has told them to take in will never accept the above factual assessment of the enemy now in our midst and actively planning for the day when they will take control.

    So we must also include them as being of assistance to our enemy.

    • I think many of the ‘others’ know what the state of play is – they just prefer not to think about it because it disturbs them too much. They do what the majority of people do when something is worrying them, they try not to think about it.

      • I agree with your assessment, but until their ‘actions’ prove otherwise, we must accept that those who hold no opinion will become collaborators.

  2. A lot of Muslims are moderate in the sense that they are only nominally Muslim, and therefore do not harbor secret hatreds or warlike attitudes based on Islamic texts.
    The Christian Bible, the Gospel of John, says that Jews are the spawn of Satan, and that’s just a taste of what’s in there. That doesn’t make Christians Jew haters.
    The difference is that Christians have done a far better job of dealing with the problematic aspects of their faith than Muslims have over time, though times do change.

    • Here is the million-dollar difference:

      a) Christians believe the Bible is divinely inspired but the work of men. It is subject to change.

      b) Muslims believe that the Qur’an is the direct and unalterable Word of Allah. To change it in any way is blasphemy (if you are non-Muslim) or apostasy (if you are Muslim) – and punishable by death. While the Qur’an is unalterable, the interpretations are not – but all the official interpretations from the four Sunni and one Shia school support Sharia and al jihad al asghar (violent expansion of Islam).

      THAT is the difference, and why Islam can never be reformed as Christiniaty was.

    • jewdog, your comment suggests to me that you have either misunderstood the above article or you are one of those who believes that since Christianity had an enlightenment Islam will have one too?

      If that is the case then you know nothing at all about Islam and what Islam truly is.

    • “A lot of Muslims are moderate in the sense that they are only nominally Muslim, and therefore do not harbor secret hatreds or warlike attitudes based on Islamic texts.”

      Here, you are making a false assumption that you CANNOT prove – an assumption that is actually disproved by a recent comprehensive survey of Muslims who support Sharia Law which is THE working definition of Islam.

      “…solid majorities in most of the [39] countries surveyed across the Middle East and North Africa, sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia favor the establishment of sharia, including 71% of Muslims in Nigeria, 72% in Indonesia, 74% in Egypt and 89% in the Palestinian territories.”

      Additionally, as Andrew C. McCarthy notes, “It is intimated that Pew’s study is exhaustive, involving interviews with 38,000 Muslims across 39 countries. But, as my friend Andy Bostom pointed out to me this morning, guess which countries are not included in the survey? That would be Saudi Arabia, Iran and Sudan — perhaps the three most sharia compliant countries in the world, home cum[ul]atively to nearly 150 million Muslims.”

    • “The Christian Bible, the Gospel of John, says that Jews are the spawn of Satan, and that’s just a taste of what’s in there.”

      Anyone who talks in a such a way about the Christian Bible should be willing to address and criticize the Talmud which is equally as bad – probably worse – in the way that Jews refer to non-Jews.

      A failure to draw attention to this matter would be an abject betrayal of Christianity and Christians.

      • You forget that the Christian Bible is, in large part, the Jewish Bible (TaNak), and as such is the inspired word of YHWH. The Talmud however, is, at best, a work of men, a commentary on Tanack and opinions of the ‘Pharissaical’ tradition in the Christian context. You are therefore not comparing like with like. One could compare Talmud to Schofield/Matthew Henry in Christianity, or the Sunna/Hadith in Islam.

        • Regarding Islam:

          “We have been taught that the Koran is the source of Islamic doctrine. However, the Koran is only 14% of the total sacred texts. Actually, the Sira and the Hadith are 86% of the total textual doctrine.”

          Regarding Judaism:

          While I appreciate your effort to address – and mitigate – the content of jewdog’s comment, I am STILL concerned to learn how much credence Jews give The Talmud. If you would be willing to point me to sources that indicate that various sects of Judaism have repudiated inflammatory parts of The Talmud, I would be interested to read those sources. There are many modern examples of quotations by prominent and powerful American and Israeli Jews that seem to indicate a Talmudic influence.

    • The Gospel of John (8 v 44) says that Pharisees ( and unbelievers, see John 8 v 13, 31 & 33) are the spawn of Satan, not Jews, everybody there was a Jew including Yahushua himself (Jesus). Context is everything!.

      There are still many pharisees around, and not all of them are Jews.

      Christians have done a mediocre job in dealing with anti-Semitism in the church, I was called a ‘Christ Killer’ to my face less than 5 years ago.

      Look at the attitude of the Church of Scotland :

      “Today, things have changed so dramatically that in 2010, M’Cheyne’s old church hosted a conference featuring Rev. Stephen Sizer, a British vicar who is so opposed to “Christian Zionism” that he has had to fend off charges of anti-Semitism. (In June 2011, Sizer gave an interview to Malaysian television “in which he alleged that ‘the Zionists’ had formed an alliance with the British far-right — ‘the very people who favored the work of Hitler’ — because ‘their common enemy are the Muslims.’”) Also aired at the 2010 conference was the preview of a film that I have openly referred to as “anti-Semitic hit piece.” What would M’Cheyne have to say about that?”

      and they are not alone,,,,,,

      • I would also point out that the term ‘Jews’ as used in the Gospel of John is not a good translation of the Greek, where the term is geographical ‘Judeans’ rather than a religion, all concerned were ‘Jewish’ as such.

      • Generally agree w/ your 1st paragraph, although after reading and re-reading John ch. 8 in the KJV, I think Jesus wasn’t referring to all Pharisees as of the devil, just those who sought to kill him. Now it may have been that all Pharisees to a man sought to kill him, but I doubt it. Beginning w/ verse 37, Jesus makes a clear distinction between the biological descendents of Abraham (i.e., all Jews) and his spiritual descendents, those Jews who would do as Abraham would have done and not seek to kill Jesus.

    • “A lot of Muslims are moderate in the sense that they are only nominally Muslim, and therefore do not harbor secret hatreds or warlike attitudes based on Islamic texts.”

      Unless you’re an amazing mindreader, capable of reading millions of Muslim minds, your hypothesis — even if true — is worthless for our #1 priority: protecting our societies from Muslims.

      In fact, such a hypothesis is worse than worthless: it is positively harmful, in that it tends to reinforce the TMOE meme (Tiny Minority of Extremists) that is currently jeopardizing our societies.

    • Brigitte Gabriel certainly gives the muslimah from the Relegation of Peace it tight, nice one!

  3. “. . . everybody there was a Jew including Yahushua himself (Jesus). Context is everything!.”
    That’s the best and accurate answer. By “spawn of Satan” Yeshua was referring to those he was addressing at that moment whose hearts and feelings did not change by what he was claiming/ saying.
    Unfortunately, when we were growing up, the preachers and sermons included bad references to Jews in general. ( But in their mind Jesus was not included, although he died a Jew, strange isn’t it). If that indicates anything indicates how much human beings misunderstand even simple things.
    When lived among Muslims for 12 years and they would say to me all types of things, and accuse me of all types of accusations: Why did you alter the Bible. The original bible referred to Ahmed (i.e. Muhammed) would be coming. Jesus said to his disciples that the last prophet would soon come after him and told them to follow him. Why do you drink human blood and eat flesh? Why do you eat unclean meat? Why do you eat pork? Although some of them would happily eat pork and drink alcohol.
    After I was bombarded with this torture for years then one day I said to myself: Goodness we have done this to Jews and we never had empathy to put ourselves in their shoes and feel what they felt. Christianity was built on the solid TEN Commandments that were handed down to us by Jews. Jesus fine-tuned them. “Thou shalt not commit adultery, but I tell you if you look at . . . .
    Unfortunately all adherents of any religion break their most noble tenets, and we focus on other people things. But Islam has no noble tenets at all. It’s a selfish, supremacist, Jihadist, land-grabber, city grabber, continent grabber, cult. 1435 years have given us enough proof.

  4. The basic difference between Christianity in Islam is that the first is the religion of love, the second – a religion of submission.

    Of course, many Christians, including Popes, bishops and other highest church leaders have sinned against love in a most atrocious way and some have never repented. Of course, many Muslims have not been submissive either to God or to the Quran or to highest Muslim spiritual authorities.

    But these were deviations from respectively the true Christian or true Muslim path.

    Essentially, Christianity cannot be imposed by force – or it will be a travesty of Christianity. If you convert to Christianity not because of your love for God (as Christianity sees Him), but out of fear or for material gain, you are a not a Christian.

    Islam, on the contrary, can be imposed by force or by deception, because a Muslim is not necessarily required to love Allah, he must be merely submissive and obedient to Him. That is why conversion by force is a natural thing in Islam, while in Christianity it is a perversion.

    That is why there is no Jihad in Christianity.

    This also explains the different concepts of martyrdom in the two religions. A Christian martyr is somebody who dies for Christ without doing any violence to those who kill him. A Muslim martyr dies in the course of killing infidels.

    Of course, most people fall short of their religious ideals. So, there are Christians who are as violent as Muslims, and there are meek and kindly Muslims who are unable of violence even for the sake of converting infidels. But this does not change the basic principles of the two religions, which are totally different.

  5. Yesterday – after having the doubtful pleasure of seeing and hearing a demented flock of angry leftist and arabs having a boycott Israel rally nearby my home – to see what they was up to – I sat down with a friend that companied me to calm down with a beer. I live surrounded by arabs and Somalis – and my friend, living in much more friendly surroundings was asking me about the problems we have in the neighbourhood. I told him – the same sad story as in all such neighbourhoods all over Europe: crime, drugs, radical Islam on the rise etc etc.

    A muslim a few feet away obviously listened in and felt it was his right to stand up for the Somali and arab people which I just have told my friend some facts and statistic about: they are 20 times more criminal than the average Norwegian when it comes to serious crimes, 90% of Somalis in my part of the City Oslo are divorced to get the most out of social security payments. (The couple still married according to Islam – get two apartments – they rent out one of them – easily a $2000 extra each month, the lonely mother get big payouts for each child etc) Facts.

    The muslim was angry said I was a racist. He said he believed in the equality of all humans (sic) – and could not listen to may racist talk without standing up to me. I do believe he was educated – spewing the leftist slogans they are teaching at the Universities. To make a rather long talk short: the muslim insisted that facts about crime actually was racist. After I asked him if his human equality also applied to 1. two bearded married muslim men – which had regular sexual intercourse – sometimes after Friday prayer, because its a fact there is a lot homosexual muslims 2. Muslim apostates 3. Muslim women marrying Christians – he got really angry. No answer bearing any common sense. Deeply insulted of course. He even started to threaten us to call some friends of his there if we didn’t leave.

    Funny thing – my friend is an instructor in Thai Boxing – he started to laugh, gave the muslim his phone and said – call or [depart]. He [decamped]. I’m not happy about the incident – if I meet him alone and the guy is with some friends – there is trouble coming my way.

    Yep – a muzzie is a muzzie. And from the rally: white leftists is traitors as Nemesis is saying in his comment. Collaborators to the enemy.

    • What I find surprising is that people complain of anti-Muslim racism. Islam is not a race, it is a religion and a way of life based on that religion. However, in modern Godless Western societies a negative attitude towards a religion is not considered something bad, while racism is a new deadly sin. In fact, one of the worst sins known to the human race.

      Modern society is being gradually undermined by incorrect use of words which prevents people from thinking clearly and understanding reality.

      Let us use every opportunity to make it clear that there can be no anti-Muslim ‘racism’, because Muslims are not a race.

  6. this 15% nonsense from the writer of this piece indulges in a major fallacy with regard to our problem of Islam: it superimposes upon the Mohammedan system factors and structures that only make sense to the West and to the Rest of the world. For one thing, Muslim armies rely to a great extent on booty and piracy and plunder. For another, all Muslims are part of the Army of Islam in more ways than his simplistic “combat service support troops” meme (which, again, only applies to non-Muslim systems) implies.

    In the Army of Islam, many of the soldiers deployed don’t readily fit our categories.

    street thugs;
    seemingly moderate propagandists using organs of the media (with “bad cop” propagandists sprinkled among them to heighten the false distinction of the “good cop” propagandists);
    ordinary garden-variety Muslim residents simply being Muslim in any given Western society (indeed, their military function is to appear to be harmless);
    lone wolf terrorists;
    small terror cells;
    larger terror cells —

    each one of these is as surely a part of the Army of Islam as would be, by analogy, the infantry division or the cavalry division or the alpha unit or the independent brigades are part of the U.S. Army.

    • A muslim/muslimah employed as even a low-level British civil servant with access codes to government databases could be worth 100 times more than a small terror cell – knowledge is power.

  7. There is much merit in Mr Philips “Tooth to Tail” ratio, notwithstanding the criticisms above.

    Another apposite analogy is the Iceberg analogy: the Jihadist combatants are visible about the waterline; below the waterline are other nine tenths of Jihadist enablers, apologists and sympathisers : those attending demonstrations, those running interference in the academy and media ( Tariq Ramadan, Medhi Hassan*, CAIR), those thugs out on the streets intimidating Kaffirs as they go about their daily business, the criminals selling drugs to help fund the Jihad, those laundering the money from said criminality, those taking advantage of misguided Western “affirmative action” policies and positioning themselves in public service positions where they can influence public policy and bureaucratic decision making in favour of Muslim interests, those mild-mannered everymen who pose as simple unzealous Muslim citizens who know what the foregoing do but present a reasonable face to Kaffirs.

    * I have only recently encountered the execrable Medhi Hassan: it is unbelievable that this obvious, vile, taqqiya artist has wormed his way onto the Guardian and as a regular guest commentator at the BBC. Although they are dhimmi MSM outlets par excellence, Hassan must still wake up every morning pinching himself and chortling at the naïveté of the West that he has these public platforms to spout his mendacious nonsense.

Comments are closed.