Flash. Boom.
In a split-second flash in the night, Ariel Sharon made it an order of magnitude harder for people like me to stand up for him and his state.
I hope it was worth it.
|
Dean's World Defending the liberal tradition in history, science, and philosophy. |
I have long wondered if PM Sharon lives by the dictum of the ends justifying the means. Certainly the elimination of the leader of the military wing of Hamas is vital to Israel's security, but Jesus Christ--a one-ton bomb?!
At the risk of using an inexcusable pun, it was overkill.
I hate to say this, Dean, but I'm on the opposite side of this.
No, it's not a good thing that some 14 Palestinians civilians were killed.
On the other hand these same people encourage their young men to commit suicide just so they can kill more Jews. They dress up 2 year olds as suicide bombers. They dance & cheer in the streets as several thousand people in the United States are crushed or incinerated (or jumped in an insanely desperate attempt to avoid burning to death).
How much international outrage would have been generated if Yet One More Suicide Bomber had managed to kill 14 people in Israel? As opposed to comments that the Facist-Zionist despots must have done something to deserve Palestinian hatred?
Understand that these men deliberately put themselves in the middle of a civilian population, on a regular basis, in a cynical utilization of the West's well-known aversion to civilian casualties.
It's all well & nice to be oh, so moral & say that "good men" just don't do certain things. But there is a tremendous difference between accidentally killing 14 people in a dangerous military operation and just shooting folks for the hell of it. Hell, the US military has beat that score all to hell in Afghanistan! (for those who don't know me, I fully support the Afghan operation. But it is true that in some cases the US forces have been manipulated by deceitful local warlords with a grudge against a neighbor. Call Special Forces, tell 'em Abdul in the next valley over is Al Qaeda, and Bob's yer uncle. But SF has caught wise to this, and is more careful now)
To repeat: there is a tremendous difference between a small number of unintended collateral deaths, and deliberate pogroms. In Jenin the IDF took casualties to avoid hurting civilians. Compare this to (say) ANYwhere in the region. Like Iraq, where Hussein used chemical weapons on the Kurds. Or Syria, where Assad, Senior slaughtered 20,000 people in one city. Well, there used to be a city, anwyay...
You cannot use military force on an enemy without unintended casualties. Period. End of story. There is no "perfect plan", there is no "perfect system", nor "perfect" anything else to save you. Flawed men develop imperfect plans that are inaccurately executed. See also: FUBAR & SNAFU. One of the most basic axioms of modern war is: No battle plan survives contact with the enemy. So how is one to avoid inflicting unwanted casualties? Short of not fighting at all? And for those who find that attractive, I refer to the Joad Resolution of 1933. I'm sure Hitler & Mussolini appreciated their concern very much.
A country refusing to take any military action if it might result in unwanted casualties is making the same mistake as Americans who refused to travel, or live life normall after 9/11. Either way you defeat yourself and abdicate any and all responsibility for upholding civilization.
To close I'd like to recall an incident in World War 2:
In June of 1940 France surrendered to Germany, and the Wehrmacht marched through Paris. The British Cabinet decided that allowing the French Fleet to pass unhindered into German hands would be unacceptable. Indeed that would have helped Germany tremendously, as they had wasted most of their naval assets in capturing Norway. So, on July 3, 1940, Force H out of Gibraltar was ordered to take the the French Fleet at Oran, either by surrender or destruction. The order was fought bitterly by Vice-Admiral Somerville (Force H commander), but the Cabinet was adamant. This action essentially wiped out the French Fleet in Oran. The action was severely criticized internationally.
From Churchill's "Memoirs Of The Second World War": "The genius of France enabled her people to comprehend the whole significanse of Oran, and in her agony to draw new hope, and strength from this additional bitter pang." ... "In a village near Toulon dwelt two peasant families, each of whom had lost their sailor son by British fire at Oran. A funeral service was arranged to which all their neighbors sought to go. Both families requested that the Union Jack should lie upon the coffins side by side with the Tri-colour, and their wishes were respectfully observed. In this we may see how the comprehending spirit of simple folks touches the sublime."
Sorry if this ran long, Dean, but I feel it needed to be said. Feel free to post it as a separate submission, if you like.
Indepundit, as is so often the case, has the right attitude.
Dean,
I know how you feel. I felt appalled when I heard that innocent children died in that building with the terrorists. And apparently the Israeli high command is going to investigate how this happened. Did it happen on purpose? By accident? Did they know children were in there? Did they know it was a one-ton bomb? And so on. I'd be interested in hearing the answers to those questions.
But after thinking about it, I found I needed to respectfully make a few counterpoints:
1) A terrorist who hides among innocent bystanders, using them as shields, that terrorist is responsible for the deaths of the bystanders, not the Israeli military.
2) A single terrorist who intentionally targets civilians is at least one order of magnitude more monstrous in his culpability than PM Sharon.
3) Europe's reflexive anti-Semitism is laughable because they don't have the will or the might to do anything with it anymore, thank God. For them, Jewish lives are just as worthless now as they were during the Holocaust.
4) However, President Bush should not allow himself to go wobbly at this time. Stop pandering to corrupt Arab dictators and socialist EU-niks.
This is the war on terror, not some ancient blood feud between Sharon and Arafat.
This isn't about diplomacy and political correctness.
Israel is on the front lines of this war, fighting for its life.
5) Speaking of which, this is a war of attrition; it may take decades before the other side finally cries, "Uncle." But that is apparently the only way to work this thing out.
Stop talking about "the endless cycle of violence" and "no light at the end of the tunnel" yadda yadda yadda.
Our side must be remorseless in hunting down and killing the authors of this terrible scourge. And I'll say it again: When they hide among civilians, they are the ones responsible for the death of innocents.
Sooner or later the civilians will turn against the terrorist dictators. It happened in Afghanistan.
As Ralph Peters wrote in the Wall Street Journal:
"Every apology is a surrender."
Testing indicated a 500lb bomb would not be enough: http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=190550&contrassID=2&subContrassID=1&sbSubContrassID=0
'Cycle of Violence' is a Middle East lie: http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0502/halevi012402.asp
tremendous site