An interesting turn of events took place during the first week of the war between Israel and Hizbollah in South Lebanon. A new addition was added to the canard lexicon launched against Israel. Israel’s response to Hizbollah’s kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers and the murder of eight others on Israeli sovereign territory was characterized as “disproportionate.” That’s a new one. Usually Israel is referred to as committing all kinds of massacres, or as Arafat used to say, ma-sak-ras, with the accent on the second syllable. Hizbollah’s totally unprovoked terrorist act has tempered the Jewish hatred from the world. Or has it?
I was sitting and thinking about the best way to approach this subject. Should I argue that a “disproportionate” response was some sort of a variation on the same old accusations that Israel has faced almost as long as it has been alive? Or, was it something new, something better? Well, anything would have been better than the world describing Israeli actions to defend itself as criminal.
Let’s see, who could I criticize on this issue?
What about western reaction outside the United States? I could have lashed out at Russia and France for leading the charge of Israel’s “disproportionate” response? After all both countries have long histories of persecuting Jews. France and Russia, without the presence of the Holocaust, have by far the worst records of historical anti-Semitism. It’s understandable why France would condemn Israel, the country of Dreyfus, and the instigator of the 1840 blood libel almost forty years before the Germans began their climb of institutionalized Jewish hatred. Russia, being responsible for the Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the Czar’s famous three-thirds formula for solving his Jewish question, convert a third, drive out a third and kill a third. Oh man, this is just too much easy pickens.
The United Nations with its Islamic block was surely in line to pass another General Assembly resolution condemning Israel for the three hundred innocent deaths it had caused from the almost two thousand sorties it flew in its bombing raids during the first week of the war. This might even be easier than France because this impotent, do nothing, feminized world body with about as much backbone as a slug is always too weak to do the right thing. However, for a brief moment I was pleasantly surprise. Leader Kofi Anan criticized Hizbollah for provoking Israel, which was a first in the Arab Israeli conflict. But, Anan couldn’t just leave it there, like a heroin addict with a bad Jones he couldn’t finish the statement without drawing on the moral equivalency factor. Excuse the paraphrase but it went something like this, “Hizbollah is the aggressor but Israel is using a ‘disproportionate’ response in its defense.” Phew! For a second there I thought he was going to stand up for Israel’s right to defend itself with no preconditions or reservations. Oh well, back to being the United Nations we all know and love.
Better still, I could take on the Arab League which for its own reasons had taken an historic middle stand on the issue. Only tacitly condemning Israel while putting most of the blame for the incident on its own Muslim brothers in Hizbollah. What? Is this the planet Earth? I can scarcely believe it. When was the last time the Arab League condemned a hostile act toward the State of Israel? Could you imagine the Arab League condemning Arab terrorists for the Ma’alot massacre of 1974, the suicide bus bombings of 1996 or Sbarros Pizza Parlor in 2001? The only thing they condemned was Israel’s response to those inhuman acts. And, here they are blaming the right people for a change. It’s almost as if they’ve grown up or something. Well, the something probably had more to do with being scared stiff of Shi’ite Iran’s growing dominance in the area, than actually supporting Israel’s rights. But, I’ll take it just the same.
Did a “more proportionate” response, presuming that Israel’s opponents get it, include a “proportionate” exchange of prisoners for Israel’s kidnapped soldiers? Three prisoners in Israeli jails for the two in Lebanon and the one in Gaza. When that finally happens I would love to get a look on the Arab negotiators’ faces when Israel demands that parity. After the historical “disproportionate” swapping of thousands of prisoners for one or two Israelis I am wondering if Israel’s enemies will call foul.
Are you confused by all this? Well don’t be because there are still players that take the same position on Israel that they always did, insisting that no matter what Israel does under any context is automatically branded as evil.
Thank God we still have Imad Mustapha, the Syrian ambassador to United States. He stood as a reminder that the Arabs still hated Jews with a passion. He like so many of his talking colleagues of the past engaged in diplomatic three card Monty, hiding the Arabs’ own evils while putting all the onus on Israel. The difference is that he stood pretty much alone at least in the American media. If this had been ten years ago I am sure there would have been many Arab diplomats, articulate in English showing themselves on the news shows, writing articles and taking on speaking engagements, explaining how Israeli policies are a cancer on the Middle East and must be excised if there is ever going to be peace. But, this is not 1996 and Mustapha is a lone spark in the wilderness of Jew bashing.
For the first time in many years I was actually optimistic about Israel’s standing in the world community. I smelled a change in the air. I wouldn’t go so far as to say that Israel would become loved throughout the world, but it just might be that certain entities might be choosing the right side of history for a change. Once the winds of fairness blew their way I was hoping that even Russia and France would realize that the old regime positions don’t fly any more and would re-evaluate Middle East policies. I guess I was dreaming because it didn’t happen. I don’t think it will ever happen.
Unfortunately, it took a world wide effort of Islamic terror including 9-11, Iran’s version of Adolph Hitler and an American president, regardless of whatever else you may think of him, standing by Israel more than any other president since John Kennedy, to create this anomaly in the Middle East conflict. Of course, the way things go we were back to normal the following week, accusing Israel of atrocities, killing babies and spreading the aids virus. All right, one week of almost support from an un-supporting world in fifty eight years is pretty weak. It was short lived but it was nice while it lasted.
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
A Little Warmongering is Good for the Soul
I hate to say it but I guess I’m a warmonger. At least, I think the label became popular through people like me. I never thought I would prefer war over peace but that day has come.
I’m someone who really believed peace was possible in the Middle East. I supported the Oslo accords against the better judgment of my settler friends. I turned my back on the fact that Israel became a more dangerous place to live in the late 1990s, in view of the coming “final status talks,” which I was sure would make it all worth it. I swallowed hard but also supported the pullout from Lebanon in 2000 and more recently from Gaza, all in hopes that Israel would be able to finally bring some peace and security to its people no matter what the Palestinians did. But, that's all over now. The Arab world has turned me into a warmonger. I’m now convinced that more war is necessary before peace is possible.
It’s hard to be a warmonger. But, this somewhat embarrassing stand is overruled by an overwhelming fear that the “Clash of Civilizations” that Samuel Huntington wrote about fourteen years ago is dangerously close to becoming a prophetic truth. In order to win the war over Islamic terror we are going to have to fight it, not only with bank records and wire taps but with guns and bombs and anything else at our disposal.
I did not support the ceasefire agreement—excuse me, the cessation of hostilities brokered by the United Nations over the Israel-Hizbollah war. We needed to encourage Israel to keep on fighting until Hizbollah was utterly and completely destroyed. But, apparently, thanks to the U.N., that will not happen.
Stopping Israel before they had a chance to disable Hizbollah is a huge strategic mistake in the war on terror. This coming disaster will not only affect Israel but everyone else involved in this war. There will be less peace and more war if we continue with policies that can only be interpreted by the enemy as weakness. Anything short of defining victory as the complete destruction of the enemy will spell defeat for us and victory for the terrorists.
U.N. Resolution 1701 does exactly that.
It does not allow Israel to finish the job it set out to do. It not only leaves Hizbollah in tacked, but they will emerge stronger and more lethal. They are looked at as heroes in the Arab world. And, more ominous for all of us, the strengthening of Hizbollah further raises the status of Iran in the Muslim world. Not killing off Hizbollah gives the enemy the opportunity to rebuild, to continue to spread their influence, to give a measure of confidence to like minded groups outside the sphere of the Islamic world in Europe or the United States. Essentially, Res. 1701 ties Israel’s hands, and gives Islamic terror a huge victory.
Resolution 1701 has many winners of which Israel and the United States and its allies cannot possibly be happy about.
1701 raises the international bravado of countries that actively work toward supporting terror against us. Achmadinijad of Iran and Assad the younger of Syria have taken a quantum leap towards the euphoric hope that they can indeed someday destroy Israel. Of course, lurking out of the shadows is Kim Jong-Il of North Korea who watches all of this with extreme interest. And the baby of the pact but he’s learning fast, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela knows this is good for him too, he just doesn’t know how yet.
It does not surprise me that Hassan Nasrallah, the not so amiable leader of Hizbollah, has accepted the cease fire and declared victory. I can understand why Nasrallah would support this resolution. He wants to stop Israel before it has a chance to complete its objective. What’s wrong with this picture: Hizbollah accepts a U.N. resolution in which the United States had a major role in writing. There is something definitely wrong with preventing Israel from taking the proper action to secure its Northern border and then allowing the enemy to use it to declare victory.
Does anyone really believe that the Lebanese army will be able to disarm Hizbollah now when it could not do it for the last six years? Even if they could, do they have the will to do it? I don't think so.
Continuing policies that oversee resolutions like 1701, which seek to appease rather than punish the bad guys will eventually lead to our defeat. In the catastrophic event that such a situation would ever occur I’m very sure that future historians would look at the political correctness of such policies as a deciding factor in the defeat of the West. I hope for a different future, that’s why I support getting serious about this war.
This is not 1956, 1967 or even 1982. Holding Israel back no longer serves American interests as it once did. We must realize that Israel’s fight is now our fight, their survival is our survival. Don’t we at least owe it to the State of Israel to back it up in its quest to help us with what we can’t or won’t do ourselves? Why is it so hard to realize that Hizbollah and all other Islamic fascists are the clear enemy of Western democracy? Why can’t we accept that?
We should be working more closely with the Jewish State, coordinating operations and planning future battles with the intent of removing the enemy that grows stronger every day, not throwing our weight behind U.N. Resolutions which result in the opposite.
Hizbollah and all groups like them across the Islamic world need to be destroyed, either with Muslim help or without it, but they need to be destroyed. Placating, negotiating, and appeasing will not work with an enemy who is committed to the death, our defeat. They intend to kill us and will not stop until they succeed, or until we kill them. That is what Israel wanted to do with Hizbollah. Now, with Res. 1701 it will not be possible.
Yes, I’m a warmonger. This U.N. resolution is a major defeat for Israel and the West. This is not the time for cease fires. This is the time to fight. I want Israel to ignore the United Nations Resolution 1701 and finish what we all know must be done. I want to survive. I want my kids to survive. Western Civilization needs to unite and defeat this enemy before it is too late. And, we can begin by killing off Hizbollah right down to their miserable leader.
Wow! That feels better.
Larry Hart
I’m someone who really believed peace was possible in the Middle East. I supported the Oslo accords against the better judgment of my settler friends. I turned my back on the fact that Israel became a more dangerous place to live in the late 1990s, in view of the coming “final status talks,” which I was sure would make it all worth it. I swallowed hard but also supported the pullout from Lebanon in 2000 and more recently from Gaza, all in hopes that Israel would be able to finally bring some peace and security to its people no matter what the Palestinians did. But, that's all over now. The Arab world has turned me into a warmonger. I’m now convinced that more war is necessary before peace is possible.
It’s hard to be a warmonger. But, this somewhat embarrassing stand is overruled by an overwhelming fear that the “Clash of Civilizations” that Samuel Huntington wrote about fourteen years ago is dangerously close to becoming a prophetic truth. In order to win the war over Islamic terror we are going to have to fight it, not only with bank records and wire taps but with guns and bombs and anything else at our disposal.
I did not support the ceasefire agreement—excuse me, the cessation of hostilities brokered by the United Nations over the Israel-Hizbollah war. We needed to encourage Israel to keep on fighting until Hizbollah was utterly and completely destroyed. But, apparently, thanks to the U.N., that will not happen.
Stopping Israel before they had a chance to disable Hizbollah is a huge strategic mistake in the war on terror. This coming disaster will not only affect Israel but everyone else involved in this war. There will be less peace and more war if we continue with policies that can only be interpreted by the enemy as weakness. Anything short of defining victory as the complete destruction of the enemy will spell defeat for us and victory for the terrorists.
U.N. Resolution 1701 does exactly that.
It does not allow Israel to finish the job it set out to do. It not only leaves Hizbollah in tacked, but they will emerge stronger and more lethal. They are looked at as heroes in the Arab world. And, more ominous for all of us, the strengthening of Hizbollah further raises the status of Iran in the Muslim world. Not killing off Hizbollah gives the enemy the opportunity to rebuild, to continue to spread their influence, to give a measure of confidence to like minded groups outside the sphere of the Islamic world in Europe or the United States. Essentially, Res. 1701 ties Israel’s hands, and gives Islamic terror a huge victory.
Resolution 1701 has many winners of which Israel and the United States and its allies cannot possibly be happy about.
1701 raises the international bravado of countries that actively work toward supporting terror against us. Achmadinijad of Iran and Assad the younger of Syria have taken a quantum leap towards the euphoric hope that they can indeed someday destroy Israel. Of course, lurking out of the shadows is Kim Jong-Il of North Korea who watches all of this with extreme interest. And the baby of the pact but he’s learning fast, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela knows this is good for him too, he just doesn’t know how yet.
It does not surprise me that Hassan Nasrallah, the not so amiable leader of Hizbollah, has accepted the cease fire and declared victory. I can understand why Nasrallah would support this resolution. He wants to stop Israel before it has a chance to complete its objective. What’s wrong with this picture: Hizbollah accepts a U.N. resolution in which the United States had a major role in writing. There is something definitely wrong with preventing Israel from taking the proper action to secure its Northern border and then allowing the enemy to use it to declare victory.
Does anyone really believe that the Lebanese army will be able to disarm Hizbollah now when it could not do it for the last six years? Even if they could, do they have the will to do it? I don't think so.
Continuing policies that oversee resolutions like 1701, which seek to appease rather than punish the bad guys will eventually lead to our defeat. In the catastrophic event that such a situation would ever occur I’m very sure that future historians would look at the political correctness of such policies as a deciding factor in the defeat of the West. I hope for a different future, that’s why I support getting serious about this war.
This is not 1956, 1967 or even 1982. Holding Israel back no longer serves American interests as it once did. We must realize that Israel’s fight is now our fight, their survival is our survival. Don’t we at least owe it to the State of Israel to back it up in its quest to help us with what we can’t or won’t do ourselves? Why is it so hard to realize that Hizbollah and all other Islamic fascists are the clear enemy of Western democracy? Why can’t we accept that?
We should be working more closely with the Jewish State, coordinating operations and planning future battles with the intent of removing the enemy that grows stronger every day, not throwing our weight behind U.N. Resolutions which result in the opposite.
Hizbollah and all groups like them across the Islamic world need to be destroyed, either with Muslim help or without it, but they need to be destroyed. Placating, negotiating, and appeasing will not work with an enemy who is committed to the death, our defeat. They intend to kill us and will not stop until they succeed, or until we kill them. That is what Israel wanted to do with Hizbollah. Now, with Res. 1701 it will not be possible.
Yes, I’m a warmonger. This U.N. resolution is a major defeat for Israel and the West. This is not the time for cease fires. This is the time to fight. I want Israel to ignore the United Nations Resolution 1701 and finish what we all know must be done. I want to survive. I want my kids to survive. Western Civilization needs to unite and defeat this enemy before it is too late. And, we can begin by killing off Hizbollah right down to their miserable leader.
Wow! That feels better.
Larry Hart
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)