The Israeli left takes a hard right
I’ve quoted William Lloyd Garrison before, and I’m going to do it again:
With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plea; but to tyrants I will give no quarter, nor waste arguments where they will certainly be lost.
A while back I wrote about a group of Israeli peace activists whom the recent war in Lebanon has changed into hardliners convinced that Israel is now in an existential war against an implacable enemy dedicated to its destruction.
Well, it’s not just an isolated peace activist here and there; it seems to be a trend. Allison Kaplan Sommer offers a piece that appeared in the British Daily Express by Michael Diamond, telling of the shift to the right on the part of a great many Israelis who had previously considered themselves members of the “sane left.”
Diamond speaks for many who once considered the Palestinian position to be a case of a reasonable grievance against an injustice. Believing that “with reasonable men I shall reason,” these Israelis therefore advocated the return of the territories and the 2000 pullback from southern Lebanon, strategies they predicted would be met with a softening on the part of Israel’s enemies.
But it didn’t work out that way, although it seemed to the left as though it should have. Instead, the pullout from Lebanon six years ago, and the more recent withdrawal from Gaza, led to a moment of clarity that crystallized as the Katushas rained down on Israel and the press of the world mourned the plight of the Lebanese and ignored the context of what was actually happening there.
The intent of the enemy was exposed, and it turns out it was not the end of the “occupation;” it was the end of Israel. The two-state solution that had been pursued so vigorously was a sham, because the “reasonable men” were not in charge on the other side.
Where were those reasonable men? Perhaps they’d all been killed off a while back by the tag team of Yassir Arafat and the mullahs of Iran, as well as a few decades of civil war in Lebanon. Perhaps they were terrified and silent. Perhaps they’d emigrated. Perhaps, perhaps, perhaps.
So Diamond and others on the Israeli left found to their surprise and shock that they were dealing with tyrants, after all. And in dealing with tyrants, as Garrison said, there’s only one way to deal, and that’s to give them no quarter. But the Olmert government was neither willing nor able to do that.
“Give no quarter?” Aye, there’s the rub. When the Jacksonian impulse to wage all-out war is unleashed against aggressive enemies–a resolve that drove the Allies to wreak carnage on the Axis powers in order to utterly defeat them in World War II–it can lead to results that are hideous to contemplate, especially in the age of nuclear weapons.
Take a look at the comments in response to Sommer’s post. Most of them are from people wrestling with the consequences of their newfound knowledge that the current Mideast situation is not going to be solved by diplomacy, by half-measures, by wishful thinking, by restraint–or, in Garrison’s words, by reason or by pleading. But oh, how much we (and they) would like it to be!
Here is an example of the questions being asked:
…people continue to talk about “We have to win this war” without really explaining HOW. Ok, so appeasement doesn’t work. Let’s concede that point. Now what? Nuke the crap out of the arab and muslim worlds? All 2 billion of them? Will that solve the problem? (I’m thinking not) I think it’s hard time to stop pointing out the obvious, and start offering some realistic, pragmatic and constructive solutions.
But no one can come up with them; the cupboard appears bare at the moment. So the following is the reluctant response. It’s a description of the terrible choices faced by those who find they are dealing with tyrants rather than humane or reasonable men. These choices were faced, and made–first for appeasement, and then, reluctantly, for war–many years earlier by the members of “The Greatest Generation”:
The Allies fought, not because they wanted a fight or were sure they could win one, but because it had become understood that the consequences of not fighting were impossible to accept. To an apparently increasing number of us, there is a sickening feeling that we are now in a situation analogous to the 1930’s. Our side has not yet reached the conclusion that another great upheaval is inevitable, and we are casting around in increasing despair for the alternatives””which is why there is so much division amongst us. But war it may be, whatever we all want.
How to defeat an ideology? First, by presenting a compelling one of your own and second, by showing would-be supporters of your enemy the hollowness and evil of the one they are now tempted by…the rotten fact is that an ideology that places triumph of arms at its center will probably have to experience at least several shattering military defeats. I’m afraid I don’t see much chance of anything less transforming it into something that can live with the rest of the world.
Try as I might, I don’t see it either.
[NOTE: It seems that the stock of the Likud Party has risen.]
[ADDENDUM: Ralph Peters says, “You can’t win if you won’t fight.” Get ready for Round Two.]
I am still waiting for someone to actually respond to my three points.
It’s because we’ve already thoroughly debated these points to the point of exhaustion. Tell ya what – come across with something with a little more meat than just bald statements. Enter some arguments instead of just your opinions and I might be persuaded to fence with you.
“Modeling Appropriate Behavior” will only go so far. the West has been doing this for centuries vis a vis Islam and it hasn’t worked. How can anyone expect it to work now?
In confronting the Soviet Bloc during the cold war, NATO came up with the strategy of Combined Arms to make up for numerical inferiority.
And the portions of the West who still possess the will to resist Islamofascism will have to come up with a strategy for this struggle as well.
The opposition believes that in “not fearing death” they take away our strongest tool, deterrence, and force us into a corner. In characterizing the use of standoff weapons as “non proportional”, “cowardly” or contrary to some illusionary “international Law” hope to take away the military advantage.
By forcing the West into playing the hand of the “Calculus of Death” they hope to achieve goals that they can’t win militarily and they count on demographics to win the “Long War”.
What they fail to see is that they are forcing Attrition Warfare on the West. They hope by asymmetrical attrition to break the will to resist. From the point of view of the West, It will be reverse attrition in that the US will not use superior numbers, the usual “attriting”, but superior weapons systems. And, while we are developing more precision munitions, our most effective systems are area weapons and the most effective of all are the most fearsome of all.
If the West every “screws its courage to the sticking place” with the US anchoring it, the results could be very bad indeed.
You could always just move the state of Israel to Florida.
If that seems crazy to you, you have some inkling of the arab grievance.
Whenever I hear the word “grievance” I cringe. “Arab grievance” then…
Oh
Words and expressions that should be abolished under penalty of death:
grievances
root causes
cycle of violence
quagmire
land for peace
religion of peace
disproportional reaction
violence only begets violence
militants
“supposed” suicide bombers
youths
Asians
peace in our time
Oh, I meant “youths” and “Asians”, of course.
Anonymous at 8:21;
did you not read Neo’s post, as usual? It is not a “grievance”, it is a full blown psychosis. Even if the Jews abandoned Israel, Islam would find something else to “grieve” about.
It is perfectly obvious now to anyone but an ideologue or the willfully unseeing that this whole “grievance” industry is a sham and a cover for the struggle of Islam against the non-Islamic world.
Dumb comments such as yours give you a continuing reason to remain anonymous.
The Allies didn’t have to kill all of the German, Japanese, and Italian people to win World War 2. They did have to destroy enough of their societies and leaders for the people to know that they could not further resist and that UNCONDITIONAL surrender was their only option.
I have recently re-read Churchill’s Second World War and the parallels to the 1930’s are almost exact. I doubt that most Muslims are any more militant than Germans and Japanese in the 1930’s. When the new war begins, the Pearl Harbor event will lead us again to unrestricted warfare and unconditional surrender.
Most of its natural history our species was at war, one tribe against other, with genocidal intent. All these behevioral traits are with us up today, only thinly veiled and repressed. It is quite easy for cultured men behave like savages, but almost impossible for barbarians to behave like cultural men. These basic facts of human psyhology are at play in ME and everywhere when barbarians are in contact with cultured people.
– amazing how 4,000 rockets can change an ideology in a matter of weeks – all the hugs and warm fuzzies and nurturing and concessions and feelings of guilt did nothing to save lives on the Israeli side – bomb shelters did and the infrastructure that comes with civilized nations did the rest, enabling them to evacuate out of range. the death toll could have been much, much higher….
By the way Mr Anonymous,
Can you explain what is the “grievance” of the Iranians against Israel, since they are not even Arabs (actually the persians have been invaded and killed in thousands by Arabs)?
And can you spell “scapegoat”?
Michael Barone and Dr. Sanity double team the “other opposition” the post modern left
Has anonymous ever *been* to Florida? I think every Jew in America retires there. 😉 I spent about six months in Boca Raton once and I swear there were more synagogues than churches.
Moving Israel to Florida would make as much sense as moving Palestine to Florida.
But what if… what if it didn’t matter that Israel is an Historic state with a Historic location and a “deed” for the land issued by G-d… Israel moves to Florida and… what? Living under Israeli law doesn’t seem that terrible even if gentiles lost some representation. No one would have to leave, (the Palestinians didn’t get kicked out,) but if they do decide to leave South Carolina and Georgia wouldn’t keep them shoved up against the border living in squallor.
I think a more accurate analogy would be if Oklahoma were given back to the Indians. Residents could stay but the government would become tribal government and participation limited to people who qualified as Indian.
Somehow I don’t think that residents would start wearing explosive vests and blowing up the customers at Mel’s Diner.
(The main problem with both Oklahoma and Florida as examples are they are hugely more huge than the territory occupied by Israel today.)
Wasp, none of your links work; they all look like this: [a href=”http:”]the post modern left[/a][br /][span class="byline"] only with the square brackets replaced by angle brackets.
Please repair: they seemed interesting.
I see the problem. It’s the first link that that didn’t work because I linked to a pdf doc. The other ones work alright for me. I’ll post the link to Modeling Appropriate Behavior with the naked TinyURL.
http://tinyurl.com/phm4f
Thanks for pointing that out.
Zeno makes the point that Iranians are not Arabs. It is also true, I think, that the majority of Jews and all Arabs are racially similar, i.e. Semites. The factor that separates them is religion; Judaism against Islam. Moslems kill in the name of their god but they do not kill only Jews, they kill other infidels; Islam against Christianity. The Jews seem not to want to kill Christians although some Christians are brought up to hate Jews.
If Moslems persist in killing peoples of the religions different from their own and necessarily doing it for religious reasons, then those who are attacked must ultimately declare war on Islam as a whole. No collateral damage in a declared war, just dead enemies.
One of the problems with what we are allowed to do in this type of conflict is that the line between civilian and combatant isn’t very clear.
I’m not just talking the uniformed vs ununiformed stuff, but is the banker that funnels millions into Hizbolla a valid target? IMO he is WAY more valuable a target that people launching rockets – yet he is off limits for specific targeting as a civilian.
The samething goes for Iran and Syria being the puppet masters for groups like Hizbolla. Treat them like they are – we do that in organised crime here. The crime boss is just as guilty as the guy that pulled the trigger, yet in this case there are excuse after excuse as to why we shouldn’t.
We are going about it the hardest way you can. We are allowing the enemy to pick what, when, where, how, and whom we fight. It doesn’t take a brilliant tactician to realise that is a recipie for failure. The only saving grace we have is that we are so much more powerful than them that we can sustain the loss and still win.
I also think our enemies greed and drive will eventually go far enough that enough people will decide to ignore the anti-war crowd (I think a great many of them will never be swayed no matter what).
If the entire state of Israel were indeed moved to Florida, as the idiot suggested, the results in the Middle East would be entirely predictable. Does anyone seriously think that the terrorists would settle down and become farmers/engineers/teachers? Of course they wouldn’t. They would merely seek out new enemies to kill, because it is killing that gives meaning to their lives.
WW3 has already begun but has taken place so far with the enemy using a technique and operating at a level at which the Western world cannot respond. Only Great Britain, Australia, Israel and the US have a significant constituency(of which this blog is a part)which perceive the reality. All the rest are captured by the anti-American/anti-Jew currents that sweep the banks of world-wide public opinion.
It has become more important to tweak the noses of the Jews and the Americans than to take steps for survival. To experience the giddy, self-righteous thrill of seeing those you envy and hate coming to harm or being shamed. Always time to take care of those pesky terrorists later after a bit of fun watching the US and the Jews get their just desserts. And of course there are counterparts, strong and influential, within the borders of the US and Israel.
Right now in Israel the supporters of the home-grown Israeli anti-war crowd are evidently beginning to comprehend certain realities. Several thousand rockets can do that. Getting one-sided, rigged and staged coverage from the MSM can also convince. The anti-war folks in the US are not yet at that threshold of consciousness. Many lives might be saved by taking strong actions now but their imaginations are not yet up to the task.
I don’t think the enemy wants to pull off a truly large-scale action in the West. The enemy walks a fine line: Kill just enough to keep anti-war crowd uneasy and wanting to mollify but not so much that pro-war elements could take vigorous reaction. The embassy take-over, the London and Madrid bombings, 9/11, Mogadishu, the barracks in Lebanon, all the relatively low-grade murder that has taken place to date, to our clever enemy the West’s reaction to all these were like a chemist’s litmus. As long as Iran doesn’t mount an invasion of the US Iran knows they have nothing to worry about. Iran and Syria are now seeing how far they can go with Israel. They are finding out that they can wage war on Israel as long as they use their proxy terrorist militias. For now they must be content with thousands; time for tens of thousands, or millions, after the West has been rendered helpless.
Soon Iran will have a nuclear weapon. Once obtained it will give them the leverage to raise oil prices; the Saudis, who have resisted so far, would have to go along. The Saudis currently kill a lot of terrorists but that would end, with the Saudi rulers accommodating the terrorists or more likely overthrown with the help of Iran. Once Iran could use the economic option(raising the price of oil), the nukes would need to be used as a threat only to their neighbors. The West could easily be manipulated with the oil, playing Western countries and others like China off one another because the oil is absolutely necessary for their economies. The beginning of the Great Caliphate.
About Israeli “peace activists”, the less is said the better. They care only about Israeli lives, not about Lebanese or Palestinian lives.
Peace Now and others in the Israeli “peace camp”, suffer from a severely blinkered vision. You might want to take a look at the article by Yitzhak Laor (who lives in Tel Aviv) in the current _London Review of Books_ (LRB):
“In Israel there is still no proper history of our acts in Lebanon. Israelis in the peace camp used to carry posters with the figure ‘680’ on them – the number of Israelis who died during the 1982 invasion. Six hundred and eighty Israeli soldiers. How many members of that once sizeable peace camp protested about the tens of thousands of Lebanese, Palestinian and Syrian casualties? Isn’t the failure of the peace camp a result of its inability to speak about the cheapness of Arab blood?”
— Yitzhak Laor in London Review of Books (click the link below):
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v28/n16/laor01_.html
~~~~~~~~
grackle wrote: I don’t think the enemy wants to pull off a truly large-scale action in the West. The enemy walks a fine line: Kill just enough to keep anti-war crowd uneasy and wanting to mollify but not so much that pro-war elements could take vigorous reaction. The embassy take-over, the London and Madrid bombings, 9/11, Mogadishu, the barracks in Lebanon, all the relatively low-grade murder that has taken place to date, to our clever enemy the West’s reaction to all these were like a chemist’s litmus.
grackle, the fallacy in what you said consists in this: you seem to think that there is ONE mastermind somehow co-ordinating all these attacks and carefully determining/modulating their intensity. However, all the evidence so far indicates that many (most) of these attacks are carried out by separate groups acting on their own. Also, the Lebanese militants are Shia and are completely distinct from the Sunni al-Qaeda, and seem to have very different agendas and goals.
“About Israeli “peace activists”, the less is said the better. They care only about Israeli lives, not about Lebanese or Palestinian lives.”
Oh, for the love of God, grow up.
grackle, the fallacy in what you said consists in this: you seem to think that there is ONE mastermind somehow co-ordinating all these attacks and carefully determining/modulating their intensity.
A “mastermind” isn’t necessary. The enemy in WW2 had no “mastermind” and this new enemy is no different.
However, all the evidence so far indicates that many (most) of these attacks are carried out by separate groups acting on their own.
“Separate groups” perhaps. But “acting on their own”? None of the terrorist groups would be much of a problem if they were “acting on their own.” If they were acting on their own instead of being used by clever Islamofascist nations to wage war by proxy, they could be easily countered. These are not gangs like the Mafia.
Also, the Lebanese militants are Shia and are completely distinct from the Sunni al-Qaeda, and seem to have very different agendas and goals.
Here again, “completely distinct” perhaps to another Muslim but “very different agendas and goals”? The agenda is always the same – they all want to terrorize. They all want to kill us, which should be the only significant goal to a Westerner. They all want to wipe out Israel, which I think may be kind of an important similarity if you are an Israeli.
grackle, dont be so hard on the boy. What he obviously meant is that there are slight differences in terrorist motivations, therefore slightly different methods of dealing with them.
It would be ridiculous to use the same appeasement methods on Al Qeada, say, than to appease Hezbollah. The trick is understanding the cultural nuances.
“A “mastermind” isn’t necessary. The enemy in WW2 had no “mastermind” and this new enemy is no different.”
Hitler, Tojo, Mussolini – ring any bells? They were the masterminds for the Axis during WWII.
Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin – Any bells ringing, yet? These guys were the masterminds for the Allies during WWII.
They were mostly political, though. How ’bout militarily? Eisenhower, MacArthur, Montgomery, Bradley, Nimitz, Rommel, Yamamoto are just some of the military masterminds of WWII that come quickly to mind. There are so many more. However, all of the military masterminds answered to their civilian masters.
Charlemagne is far more correct than most folks think. There is no central authority in Islam except the god (al’lah.) The Koran is the word of the god and Mo’profit is his mouthpiece.
Mo’profit supplied a blueprint for Islamic warfare. Al’Qaida and Laden established a functional modern doctrine of Islamic asymmetrical warfare.
With the internet and the wide disperssion of terror information, open source terrorism is the strategy du jour. Anyone can be a terrorist today, if they are willing to put in the time. And no terrorist need answer to any civilian mastermind; they all answer only to the god.
Until the west comes to the realization that the ideology of suicidal Islam cannot be fought by traditional rules, and finds our Custer, Patton, Rommel, Grant, Sherman, or Attila, soldier masterminds willing to fight beyond the rules, the best we can hope for is dhimmitude.
Cluster bombs.
To deal with a situation like this, you have to go back to first principles.
What is it the enemy wants? That’s easy, they want the destruction of Israel. But what is it the they want more than the destruction of Israel? You have to find that out, and make it clear that if the war continues, then they lose the thing they value more than Israel’s destruction — AND Israel survives anyway.
Some suggestions:
The Geneva Convention sets forth rules of warfare between civilized combatants. Israel needs to publicly break all those rules, quite conspicuously. In particular, those who don’t wear uniforms and bear arms openly need to be executed, on the spot, by hanging with swine leather.
Arabs, and Muslims generally, want respect. This must be denied them. ‘You want to surrender? Good. You can start by crawling forward with your face in the dirt, and begging for mercy. But wait a moment, we have to set up the camera first.’
The leaders talk tough, but don’t risk their lives. Israel must go after them. I explicitely include the governments of Syria and Iraq.
No more smart bombs against rocket launchers. Carpet bomb any site where rockets were launched from. Use fuel-air explosives and napalm. ‘What, you say the village was full of women and children, and we killed 90% of them, and the rest are in a hospital. We’re sorry. Please tell us which hospital, and we’ll kill everyone there too.’
The Muslims want their paradise. So, issue the troops hollow point bullets with lard inside the hollow points — ‘Not only are we going to kill you, we are going to defile you first.’
Israeli intelligence needs to find those imams preaching the destruction of Israel, and put smart bombs through the doors of the mosque in the middle of the sermons. Bomb one filled with pig urine or lard or pork, to contaminate everyone and everything in there. Bomb two to kill everyone inside. And THEN, after everyone in the mosque is dead, carpet bomb or shell the neighborhood on general principles. ‘Yes we know they were probably all non-combatants. That’s WHY we killed them.’
The Muslims of southern Lebanon value their land. Ruin it. I’m talking building a small nuclear power plant and a pipe line, pumping sea water uphill, then evaporating the water, so that what is left is too salt to grow anything.
Arabs value their families and clans. Start making it a point to find a fighter’s entire clan, and kill all of them, or sell them into slavery.
Also needs t
Hmm, somehow the end of the post got chopped off. As I was saying:
As for the international news media, they should be treated as enemy combatants too. ‘You want to live? Good. Crawl forward etc.’
Most importantly, no peace talks, truces, any let up except with those who start, by announcing publicly, in Arabic, that Israel has the right to exist in its present borders, before Israel even acknowledges their existance.
Hez’bollah and its ilk do not grant Israel a moral right to live. Israel must deny the same to them. It’s time for Israel to play by the Hama rules.
WWII has absolutely nothing to do with anything. “the pullout from Lebanon six years ago ,and the more recent withdrawal from Gaza ,led to a moment of clarity..” Please,does anyone here think starving Gaza while continuing to build settlements on the West Bank was an honest attempt at creating a lasting peace with Palestinians? While building a Wall which separated villages, while maintaining checkpoints, while destroying homes etc etc ? Ludicrous , and yet every one of you will insist Israel did everything it could.( not you Richard) Shebba Farms? Golan Heights? Moment of clarity all right.Try reading something by Rabbi Michael Lerner, or try Sabbeel, a Christian Palestinian organization before you are totally irrelevant.
Too late, fish. Far too late for leftist smoke screens and talking about what is now ancient history. But, hey, keep reading if it takes your mind off just how bad it’s going to get. And, if fantasies like your citations help, well go for it.
The cat’s out of the bag and we know there are two enemies and one is covert and internal. I’ll post this link again.. The time is here where everybody is going to have to choose sides. If someone can’t do that they are well advised to get out of the way and not make any trouble.
Can you explain what is the “grievance” of the Iranians against Israel, since they are not even Arabs (actually the persians have been invaded and killed in thousands by Arabs)?
You can listen to Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad explain it to Mike Wallace, and read the transcript.
It is perfectly obvious now to anyone but an ideologue or the willfully unseeing that this whole “grievance” industry is a sham and a cover for the struggle of Islam against the non-Islamic world.
Ah, so the masses clutch sham grievances manufactured by their powerful leaders. You’re so right you’re left.
Dumb comments such as yours give you a continuing reason to remain anonymous.
And you’re ugly.
The time is here where everybody is going to have to choose sides.
“War allows us to rise above our small stations in life. We find nobility in a cause and feelings of selflessness, even bliss. At a time of soaring deficits and financial scandals and the very deterioration of our domestic fabric, war is a fine diversion. War, for those who enter into combat, has a dark beauty filled with the monstrous and the grotesque. The Bible calls it “a lust of the eye” and warns believers against it. War gives us a distorted sense of self. It gives us meaning.”
— 2003 Joe Alex Morris Jr. Memorial Lecture
Hitler, Tojo, Mussolini – ring any bells? They were the masterminds for the Axis during WWII. Roosevelt, Churchill, Stalin – Any bells ringing, yet?
Yes, loud and clear. In fact you help make my point.
Charlemagne’s point was that I was posing a lone “mastermind” for the enemy, which is composed of different groups. My retort was that I meant no such thing, citing the Axis powers of the WW2 era as an example of different groups acting in concert, i.e.: Who could be more different than the Germans from the Japanese? Of course each group had their “mastermind” in the sense of each having ‘supreme’ leaders. But that proves my point, not Charlemagne’s. It’s obvious from even a cursory examination of history that groups can be different, can even have long-felt enmity against each other and yet act together against a mutual foe. Are things a little more clear now?
I am grateful that the US has managed to conduct war with so few US casualties. I’m sure all our hearts go out to the families of those who have suffered and died for their country. To allow that sacrifice to become meaningless would be the true outrage.
grackle wrote:
“Right now in Israel the supporters of the home-grown Israeli anti-war crowd are evidently beginning to comprehend certain realities. Several thousand rockets can do that. Getting one-sided, rigged and staged coverage from the MSM can also convince. The anti-war folks in the US are not yet at that threshold of consciousness. Many lives might be saved by taking strong actions now but their imaginations are not yet up to the task.”
I don’t think you’d be refering to the anti-war crowd in Israel for that summation.
Nor do I believe Neo’s hypothesis – though it sound’s appealing to her for obvious reasons. Neo never was on the left – evidently.
“Several thousand rockets” landed in Israel after several thousands tonnes of Israeli/U.S funded/made bombs destroyed half of Lebanon. Thats a fact.
The anti-war crowd are all about root causes, justice, and truth.
What an ignorant lot, eah?
And grackle-your claims about the American MSM are ridiculous and a casual look at the evidence would reveal that as such( rigged smoke pictures notwithstanding).
The American MSM is heavily biased in favour of Israel – thats not even debateable.
You’d do much better to argue something based in reality – rather than expressing your hate-filled fantasies through complete analytical absurdities.
 
I don’t think you’d be refering to the anti-war crowd in Israel for that summation.
Meaning what, exactly? May the gods save us from obtuse hecklers.
Nor do I believe Neo’s hypothesis – though it sound’s appealing to her for obvious reasons. Neo never was on the left – evidently.
Notice that none of the “obvious reasons” are touched upon. And the all-knowing assumption about past political orientation is, well, “laughable” is the kindest adjective that comes to mind.
“Several thousand rockets” landed in Israel after several thousands tonnes of Israeli/U.S funded/made bombs destroyed half of Lebanon. Thats a fact.
Yes but before that Hamas and Hezbollah were creating mischief – the suicide bombers, the Qassam rockets, etc.
http://hrw.org/english/docs/2005/06/09/isrlpa11106.htm
The anti-war crowd are all about root causes, justice, and truth. What an ignorant lot, eah?
The anti-war crowd is itself a ‘root cause.’
And grackle-your claims about the American MSM are ridiculous and a casual look at the evidence would reveal that as such( rigged smoke pictures notwithstanding).The American MSM is heavily biased in favour of Israel – that’s not even debatable.
I guess the writer didn’t notice Neo’s link of a while back – worth repeating:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/947701/post
 
Pete,
It’s good to see that you are supporting YOUR military (if you are American). But 1st, check some facts. How? Read any/some/many of the American milblogs. Media HEADLINES are made for the marginally intelligent who like propaganda, as you know. Pete, you do KNOW what happening in Iraq, don’t you? I couldn’t tell.
2d, the ‘idiot son’ to whom you refer is OUR American President. He doesn’t have to protect you and other ‘idiot son(s).’ Someday he won’t.
3d, when the terrorist bomb comes FOR YOU, Pete, it won’t ask whether you opposed America, the War, or our President. It’ll just take you to Paradise.
You can tell them you were on the ‘left’ side when you arrive.
grackle – your link doesn’t work….
Yup, Pete – the 3rd Marines just helped get some water turned on for some folks, but as of yet, no Marine has converted to islam – maybe the islamic lack of humor has something to do with it – whataya’ think?
Try as I might, I don’t see it either.
Neither do I, Neo. I think it’s clear what happens (or what ought to happen) when the illusion of the enemies of freedom being reasonable, is destroyed, in the minds of legitimately reasonable people.
It doesn’t mean one has to shift to the right, but in Israel’s case, it appears that’s what’s happening. Olmert might just find himself replaced the next election.
We know who “Anonymous” is don’t we?
Pete, I failed to mention that in the Anbar provence, 500 Iraqis are getting ready to join the police force, recruited and screened by the Marines – darn them Marines anyway, eh Pete? They just won’t let folks like you win the propoganda war….one purple finger, one dead terrorist, that’s the motto of the Marines Pete – if they ain’t wasting terrorists, they’re getting the water flowing and Iraqi cops recruited. And Pete, I wish you would start giving us some tid-bits on murder and mayhem here the States since Bush as at fault for such things ya’ know….
‘orphan roasted on backyard grill in Dallas while Bush hunts ducks’ – something along those lines would be nice.
Apparently, if Israel tries to stop arms smuggling into Lebanon it is a violation of the ceasefire. Smuggling should be reported to UN diplomats. Yeah, that should work well.
Getting close to the time that a large building in New York City needs to be converted to more productive use and the money spent by the US on the UN added into the defense budget. I’d say right after the UN proves to be toothless in dealing with Iran. Support for the UN is looking like as futile as pouring water in a bucket with no bottom.
jgr: Pete responded once in comments. Turns out he is only “marginally intelligent”.
Anonymouse at 8;22. Like your link to a lecture given at Harvard by a New York Times reporter who opines against war is supposed to be a telling point? The scales should now fall from everyone’s eyes? I don’t think so. About the kind of thing I’d expect from Chris Hedges who also writes for the The Nation and is a self identified “progressive”, short hand for leftist.
I’ve been in two and a half wars and was on the pointy end a couple of times in the first one. Didn’t like ’em at all, uncomfortable, bad food and all the dying was a bummer. But, like they say, “Duty is a bitch”.
I don’t think the “progssives” are even really trying to convince anybody any more, they’re just spouting lies and abuse because it’s as close to violence as they dare get.
Funny thing is, every lie they tell and every insult they fling means another vote for the neocons. Why do you think, when Charles Johnson was getting peak traffic for his coverage of the Reutersgate scandal, he started posting links to Daily Kos, encouraging the crowds of readers to “go there, look for yourselves, and make up your own minds?”
Keep on trolling, boys. We might actually have a Congress that’s less than 20% “progressive” next election. Not to mention seeing the first Republican elected to office in CN since the Civil War.
I don’t know why the link to the MSM coverage doesn’t work. I’ll try once more.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/947701/posts
About Israeli “peace activists”, the less is said the better. They care only about Israeli lives, not about Lebanese or Palestinian lives.” what is to be said about palastinian peace activists? or is the sole responsibility for peace always up to the israeli side?
I’ve assumed temporary duty as Chairman of the Let’s-Trash-Pete Committee, and as such, I would refer readers to:
http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/08/blackfive_inter.html
for a rather telling interview with a Marine Gunny and how things are really going in areas of Iraq. Nope, Pete, he tells no stories of Sunni youth sicing starving dogs on a disabled Shia widows while Halliburton employees take bets on how long she can stay on her feet before the dogs take her down.
How does this relate to Israeli lefties getting a dose of much needed reality intelligent readers may ask? Well, it doesn’t, not directly anyway, except that they are like the fictional Shia widow who could not stay on her feet for long. With rabid animals yammering for your blood, an ideology of hugging and kissing such enemies simply must end by death or conversion to an ideology more sane.
And yet, the further right Israel tilts the more insecure they become and the more dead they suffer. Go figure.
Bush, the idiot son, is protecting me. That’s a hoot! From what? And at what cost? I am in greater danger from my bathtub than terrorists. Slip and falls kill thousands in the US every year. Year after year. If he gave every US citizen a pair of those nice no-skid bath/shower slippers I might agree that he had done something that, from a cost benefit perspective, is money well spent.
This is the only radical-right blog that removes my posts of Iraq news headlines.
“WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The U.S. Marine Corps will start recalling thousands of inactive service members in the coming months to counter a steady decline in the number of non-active troops volunteering for duty, the service said on Tuesday.”
Marginally intelligent seems to fit.
He cites al-Reuters. But, never cites the boots on the ground mil-blogs. The recall will involve only 2500 service members who still have time left on their contracts. It would not have been necessary if the Clinton administration had not drawn military preparedness down to dangerous levels.
Correct me if I’m wrong but I seem to remember that the Clinton era was a Democrat administration and were the same people who refused Somalia’s offer of bin Laden and the people who sent Sandy Berger to steal documents so that an accurate history would be harder. This being the same Sandy Berger who actively hindered the apprehension of terrorists.
Pete–Such a military expert. I guess you probably never heard the phrases “cross-decking” or “hollow Army,” or “stop loss orders” either. Clinton, the bent one, and his cronies were too busy doing, er, other things, to pay any attention to national defense, which they thought was a crock anyway. Things are better than they were but not great by any means and the U.S. military, in terms of numbers of soldiers and divisions, numbers of aircraft, ships and equipment, is far smaller than it was in past decades. Procurement and training cycles being what they are it takes many years to build up what took little time to dismantle. Think maybe five years from order time for the delivery of a propeller for an aircraft carrier.
Pete,
if you consider this a radical right blog, you’re political spectrum is out of the Vis range. Also, a blog is the extension of a persons home, if they decide that you are useless pest, they can delete your spam. And your headline posts are spam, nothing more. There is no question of “freedom of speech” as you implied in another thread.
Bloviate all you want. Every day more and more Americans are coming to agree with what the likes of me have been telling them for the past five years
which is that:
(1) Relative to threats to our safety which we face daily, Al Qaeda-like terrorism is of little significance,
(2) The cost of fighting such terrorism with the US army is too high and counter-productive and,
(3) This type of terrorism is a law enforcement problem.
Incidentally, I rather enjoy folks insulting me by way of my intelligence.
Pete wrote
“I rather enjoy folks insulting me by way of my intelligence.”
Interesting sentence structure.
Apparently you also enjoy spamming, trolling, heckling, shouting others down, disrupting discourse,and all the other tactics of a shallow, smug, child with an over acitve ego and the knowledge base of a roasted peanut.
pete, please. We’ve only gone over those same points of yours several times. Im not sure you’ve ever participated in the debate outside of cutting and pasting casualty headlines as if that substituted for argument.
Be honest. The only real issue you have with the current GWOT is that Bush is President. Nothing more.
Make an argument or admit your wrong.
If you can not do that then why bother addressing me.
All the news you are unfit to read.
08/22/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Sgt. Gabriel G. DeRoo, 25
08/22/06 DoD Identifies Marine Casualties
Cpl. Adam A. Galvez, 21
08/22/06 DoD Identifies Navy Casualty
Hospitalman Chadwick T. Kenyon, 20
08/22/06 DoD Identifies Army Casualty
Staff Sgt. Jeffrey S. Loa, 32
08/22/06 Reuters: Gunmen killed a family of five in Mosul
08/22/06 ktvz(AP): Central Oregon Marine killed in Iraq
08/22/06 Reuters: Gunmen kill bodyguards of the governor of Anbar
08/22/06 Reuters: Motar fire wounds 15 in Muqdadiya
08/22/06 Reuters: Gunmen kill 2 people near Kirkuk
08/22/06 Reuters: The body of Dawoud Salman found in Baghdad
08/22/06 Reuters: Body found near Hilla
08/22/06 Reuters: Gunmen kill police major in Baquba
08/22/06 Reuters: Gunmen kill man in Mosul
08/22/06 Reuters: One civilain killed, two wounded by roadside bomb
08/22/06 Reuters: Eight Iraqis have their throats slashed
08/22/06 NPR: Journalist Says Iraq Security Outlook is Bleak
08/22/06 NPR: Iraq Violence Grows Despite U.S. Security Plan
08/22/06 AP: Two suspected death squad chiefs captured
08/22/06 AP: Two civilians were killed in crossfire in Amarah
08/22/06 AP: Shiite engineer was shot dead in Baghdad
08/22/06 AP: Bomb kills 2 in Baghdad
08/22/06 KUNA: Mortar attack wounds 11 people
08/22/06 AP: Iraqi Panel Launches Own Rape-Slay Probe
08/22/06 mosnews: Ukrainian Peacekeeper Charged with Smuggling Cash from Iraq
Anonymouse at 8;22. Like your link to a lecture given at Harvard by a New York Times reporter who opines against war is supposed to be a telling point? The scales should now fall from everyone’s eyes? I don’t think so. About the kind of thing I’d expect from Chris Hedges who also writes for the The Nation and is a self identified “progressive”, short hand for leftist.
Did you read the article? It’s brilliant. That you write it off glibly speaks volumes.
Do you actually watch the entire Naruto tv series or is it just your son that watches it?
If a person likes Naruto, he’ll probably like Bleach. Which is another tv series in Japan.
It’s unfortunate that both Bleach and Naruto are no longer following the Manga storyline and character concepts with their latest anime episodes.
Because the authors of the Bleach and Naruto mangas are such good ones, you can really tell the quality decrease when other writers attempt to write the story line for the anime.
I think my favorites are DBZ around the Super Saiyan 1 time set, Hunter X Hunter, Naruto, and Bleach. Other anime shows are interesting, like Princess Monoke. But, it doesn’t have the same psychological impact and presence of truly impactful psychological games as Naruto and Bleach has.
Whoops, had the wrong text in my clipboard.
Well, Neo, if some of these “hard left” dudes hadn’t been blind, it would not have taken thousands of Israeli deaths to wake them up to what we all knew was the case after a sufficient level of study in psychological warfare and wars to the knife.
They feel guilty about having to fight the Arabs instead of talking? They should talk, they were the ones that made negotiation impossible because they were treating the Arabs as those who negotiated in good faith. They were the ones that allowed thousands of israelis to die. Now they’ll have the blood of Arabs on their hands too, what else is new?
Israel has two choices as I see it. Either they fight a limited war, to which the question then becomes what limitations should Israel impose on themselves. Or they fight a Total War, to which the question then becomes, where will Israel get the firepower and logistics to lay waste to their enemies? Israel isn’t the United States, after all, and the sane leftin Israel has done much to cripple their war making abilities.
A not-Reuters headline not-to-be posted by Pete:
(Why mess with my world?!)!
“.. would you predict that we are beginning to see a new wave of suicide bombings outside the Middle East?
Every successful terror attack is considered a victory by the radical Islamists. Everywhere Islam is expands there is regional conflict. Right now, their are thousands of candidates for martyrdom lining up in training camps in Bosnia, Afghanistan, Pakistan. Inside Europe, hundreds of illegal mosques are preparing the next step of brain washing to lost young men who cannot find a satisfying identity in the Occidental world. Israel is much more prepared for this than the rest of the world will ever be. Yes, there will be more suicide killings in Europe and the U.S. Sadly, this is only the beginning.”
–excerpt from:
New Movie Opens Window Into Terrorists’ Suicidal Culture
By Andrew Cochran
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2006/08/new_movie_opens_window_into_te.php
So pete, Somalia, Kosovo, Darfur. Any particular war or conflict you think we should be or should have been legitimately involved in?
WW2 even?
Would you have found it necessary to post casualty lists on every topic to avoid discussion then? Or just wars and/or conflicts you disagree with?
How is your casualty list an honest argument about whether or not we should be militarily engaged somewhere, rather than it just being cheep, emotional, dishonest and simple minded?
Are there no casualties in the wars you approve of?
If you want to discuss something with me try responding to this:
(1) Relative to threats to our safety which we face daily, Al Qaeda-like terrorism is of little significance,
(2) The cost of fighting such terrorism with the US army is too high and counter-productive and,
(3) This type of terrorism is a law enforcement problem.
Otherwise please read the headlines
and the corresponding articles that I post.
petey: Points 1-3 are assertions, not facts.
We’ll soon find out if Every day more and more Americans are coming to agree with what the likes of me have been telling them for the past five years. we’ll have elections and find out who Americans agree with.
What you do is simply propaganda defined as: Propaganda is a specific type of message presentation aimed at serving an agenda The “define” modifier in Google is your friend.
You are deleted for a peculiar type of trollage. You should gain some insight from that and not let the door… on the way out.
Pardon this hopeless leftist for his ignorance, but I just can’t understand why we must fight so. We all want peace and security, don’t we? Amd yet, it seems like ever major action which the neocons took in the name of ‘fighting terrorism’ -invading Afghanistan, invading Iraq, invading Lebanon, to name a few – has ended up in more terrorism.
We needn’t worry ourselves whether America or Israel was ‘right’ in an abstract sense to do these things. The only real justification they need is that it will make themselves safer, yes? And so, at the very least, the neocons are toweringly incompetent and incapable of producing results.
HLVS,
What is your verifiable and quantifiable evidence for the common assertion that what we do creates more terrorists? Where is the evidence that the increase is not related to this stage of human history, rather than a response to the west?
I see the idea that fighting terrorism and terrorists produces more terrorists invoked over and over again, which, in addition to being wrong, of course, is totally unprovable. Its like saying that because we fought the Nazi’s in WWII we produced more Nazis. Isn’t it rather the case that there were a hell of a lot of Nazi’s in being with more being turned out each year by Germany for the Nazi’s own purposes. It was merely a matter of where these Nazis were going to fight, not if they were going to fight.
The same thing is happening today in the fight against Islam. There are thousands of fundamentalist madrasses in Pakistan and elsewhere churning out tens of thousands of jihadis; oil wealth has made it possible to reanimate the old Islamic imperative, sanctioned, indeed commanded by the Koran, to kill, enslave or convert Infidels and rule the world. Like ants seeking food, the jihadis are following the trail to the fight in Afghanistan, Iraq, Lebanon and elsewhere. If the fighting were to stop today in all these areas, the tens of thousands of jihadis would still be there, with more in the pipeline. Does anyone seriously think that these jihadis would then settle down to peaceful lives as grocers and shoe salesmen? They would merely mass on another front, with more, always more, coming to the fight.
The Muslim fanatics behind this war see this as their golden opportunity to finish the drive to conquer all the lands ruled by Infidels, that the West stopped at Tours in the 8th century and at the Gates of Vienna in the 16th century. As before, they will not stop unless we stop them again.
We all want peace and security, don’t we? Amd yet, it seems like ever major action which the neocons took in the name of ‘fighting terrorism’ -invading Afghanistan, invading Iraq, invading Lebanon, to name a few – has ended up in more terrorism.
The argument goes like this: We mustn’t anger the terrorists by fighting them. So what’s the alternative to fighting the terrorists? Usually that subject is carefully avoided, but if revealed it almost always involves diplomacy, a failed strategy tried for the 30 years preceding 9/11.
There is a war. It’s been waged by the enemy since at least 1979. When fanatics are confronted instead of talked to one can always expect them to redouble their efforts. In war there should be no prattle about “proportional response;” the enemy should be hit with as much weaponry as it takes to put the enemy away. And the US needs to demonstrate to terror-sponsoring states like Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Palestine that there is a terrible price to pay for using terrorism to war by proxy against the US and US allies.
pete says Al Qeada isnt really a threat. HLVS says fighting terrorism only creates more terrorists.
I suppose both belive terrorism is nothing more than a law enforcement problem and not one that requires military force to combat.
But wait…in the Federal Republic of Germany, 21-year-old Youssef Mohamad el Hajdib, was arrested on suspicion of placing one of two suitcase bombs in German trains.
Germans are surprised. They had nothing to do with the ‘ileagal, immoral, racist war’ in Iraq.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060822/ap_on_re_eu/germany_terror_connections_1
They’re beside themselves as to why they would have been targeted.
“The planned attack here stunned Germans who thought the country’s vehement opposition to the Iraq war would insulate it from becoming a terror target almost five years after the attacks on Washington and New York.”
Looks like even benign methods of fighting terrorism also creates terrorists.
Im afraid only abject appeasement will produce results.
Ha ha! It is to laugh. Your antics amuse me.
You see, I cannot think of anybody who says ‘We shouldn’t fight terrorism’. The thing is, there are ways to fight terrorism other than invasion. It’s not an issue of getting the terrorists mad at us, but rather that the people who live on the same block, or in the same city, or in the same country might be more inclined to fight us if we attempt destroy their society through carpet bombings in the vague hopes of catching a few bad guys.
Unless, of course, you think of all Arabs and Muslims – or all Afghans, Iraqis, Lebanese, and Palestinians – as inherently terrorists, in which case your plan makes perfect sense.
al-Reuters? That’s a new one. I didn’t know you could dismiss any news story by implying it has somthing to do with Arabs somehow. I’ll have to remember that trick.
Oh yes, and the rise in terrorism:
Washington Post, 2005:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/04/26/AR2005042601623.html
CSMonitor, 2006:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0421/dailyUpdate.html
Thank about it. Israel lost more people to Hezbullah in the time from July to the middle of August then they had the six years previously. And good luck trying to find someone who says they’re stronger now than they were before. Another push in the neocon direction and they may be finished.
“Amd yet, it seems like ever major action which the neocons took in the name of ‘fighting terrorism’ -invading Afghanistan, invading Iraq, invading Lebanon, to name a few – has ended up in more terrorism.”
Except it hasn’t, in the neocons’ countries. In leftist-dominated countries, terrorism is obviously skyrocketing.
There may be a lesson in there for you, but I’m sure you won’t learn it.
I would love to see the evidence for that.
I think if we gave people a police state, they would be satisfied with seeing terrorism being fought by police powers and law.
It just means having to give up being free Americans, but at least you won’t create more terroists and you won’t invade sovereign countries.
People don’t realize this, but all the criticisms are just talk. The Europeans criticized America for revolting, and claimed we would collapse right afterwards. Just prove them wrong, nothing need more be said.
P.S. they are trying to distract you, demoralize you, and when you fail, they’ll come in and say they told you so.
HLVS writes: “Unless, of course, you think of all Arabs and Muslims – or all Afghans, Iraqis, Lebanese, and Palestinians – as inherently terrorists,..”
Why, no, HLVS. LET ME ask:
UNLESS YOU, HLVS: think that All Americans, Europeans, Indians, Russians, Latins, Africans ARE INFIDELS.. all of whom Islamofasicsts have vowed to kill. Because they are NOT Muslim.
But you DON’T think that? Do you?
I am still waiting for someone to actually respond to my three points.
Here they are again.
(1) Relative to threats to our safety which we face daily, Al Qaeda-like terrorism is of little significance,
(2) The cost of fighting such terrorism with the US army is too high and counter-productive and,
(3) This type of terrorism is a law enforcement problem.
Don’t bother trolling like Senescent Wasp. I simply will not respond.
Oh and enjoy the headlines.
Unfortunately, many Europeans and Americans will arrive late to the realization that the solution will not be found so easily through diplomacy.
Why? Because they seem to have convinced themselves that they need only sacrifice Israel. After all, they reason, Israel isn’t really legitimate, and its existence isn’t worth all the violent attacks around the world. They don’t see Muslims as causing the problem, they see Israel as the original cause. Therefore, if Israel ceases to exist, everything will be much better.
Many Europeans and Americans have cast Israel as the villain, so they will never empathize with Israel, and they’ll never see Israel’s problems as their own.
Relative to threats to our safety which we face daily, Al Qaeda-like terrorism is of little significance.
It’s of “little significance” that al Qaeda murdered all those people on 9/11? Are you certain? The cost in lives ran into the thousands but it’s not “significant”? What about the economic cost: Stock prices diving, airlines loosing revenue, the cost of Homeland Security due to the attempts to terrorize the US?
(2) The cost of fighting such terrorism with the US army is too high and counter-productive
How is the cost too high? Is this war more expensive in some way than past wars? Or is it that you are a pacifist and disbelieve in war altogether?
(3) This type of terrorism is a law enforcement problem.
Why? Why is it a law enforcement problem? What are your reasons for thinking terrorism is a “law enforcement problem”?
Cool view talking about The Israeli left takes a hard right! I love this posts!
Hey!…I Googled for mount lebanon homes, but found your page about The Israeli left takes a hard right…and have to say thanks. nice read.