- Schaffer vs. Udall
- View From A Height
- Thinking Right
- Mt. Virtus
- Rocky Mountain Right
- Slapstick Politics
- Daily Blogster
- Hugh Hewitt
- Hot Air
- Fox News
- Real Clear Politics
- Rocky Mountain News
- Denver Post
- Debka Files
- Talking Points Memo
The Senate Race
Rocky Mountain Alliance of Blogs, 2.0
My personal musings about anything that gets on my radar screen--heavily dominated by politics.
|Once More Unto the Breach, Dear Friends|
Israel is going to war.
I was thinking a couple days ago about which countries are most likely to survive the impending clash of civilizations. And, though the obvious answer was "America", I could not help but think the only logical response was actually "Israel", and for just one simple reason:
Israel sees the world as it is, cares little for world opinion when it is engaged in an existential struggle, and has, as a state, a long memory.
Whereas the U.S. might feel compelled to go the the U.N. for "action" before engaging the enemy in the face of an act of war, Israel takes swift, decisive--and final--action.
Pray. There is little hope now that either side will step back from the precipice at this juncture; I also doubt that there is much chance that this conflict will confine itself to Israel and Lebanon. Once Damascus gets involved, how long until Tehran?
Again I say, pray. Pray for a swift conclusion, a decisive conclusion, the souls of the innocent who will, inevitably, get caught up in this, and the safe return of the Israelis whose abduction started this.
ADDENDUM: Sadly, I heard some idiot on the radio assert tonight that, given a different circumstance, he would take up arms against Israel. His logic? That the Islamic world hates the U.S. because of our support of our ally.
Setting aside the obvious superiority issues, let me just address the fallacy in the premise of that logic. If Arab aggression against the U.S. is based on our support of Israel, then should it not follow that a flagging of our support would lead to a more peaceful coexistence?
Explain, then, why the administration MOST critical of Israel, MOST supportive of Palestinian goals, MOST engaged in solution-building in the Middle East--the Clinton Administration--was the victim of Somalia, Khobar, the African Embassies, and the U.S.S. Cole attacks? Why, when our support of Israel was at its most Palestinian-centric point, did the Islamic terror network begin its planning phase for the attacks of 9/11?
Those who would blame Israel for the sorry state of the Islamic psyche betray an almost laughable willingness to ignore history. I think that ignorance needs to be challenged.