The similarities between what's going on in Iraq and Lebanon are rather striking. Israel will stay the course until it is no longer threatened with extinction. Do we Americans have the guts to stay the course?Iraqis are very interested in what's going on in Lebanon right now. Why? Because it's the same thing that's happening in their country. Of course there are differences between the histories of how both countries got to this point, but both conflicts digest down to one concept. Israel and America support increased liberty around the globe, while Islamic fundamentalists
Iraq the Model explains the similarities between the conflicts and why they are so interesting:
- A weak government is having a hard time standing up to a lawless 'militia'.
- The everday citizens are the ones that suffer, this is the fault of the insurgency, and they couldn't care less.
- The predominant powers in both countries (US and Israel) are having a difficult time restoring order.
- Iran is involved up to its neck in both conflicts. It may have overstreched itself this time...
- The terrorists will stop at no provocation to continue to stoke the fires of conflagration in the Middle East--until they come to power.
Every important party in the region and in the world, except the radical Islamists in Tehran and their clients in Damascus, wants Hezbollah disarmed and removed from south Lebanon so that it is no longer able to destabilize the peace of both Lebanon and the broader Middle East.FreeIraqi, from Baghdad, sees the conflict against Iran, Syria, and their terrorist minions as the only way to lasting peace and liberty for the people of Iraq and Lebanon, and even for the oppressed people of Iran and Syria.
Caroline Glick makes the following very clear statement about Iran's intentions:
Iran's proxy war against Israel follows the same strategy as its proxy war against the US in Iraq. In both cases its goal is to defeat its enemies through a prolonged war of attrition that will defeat the will of the Israeli and American people to fight to victory.Regarding Israel, Thomas Sowell writes (and it is just as germaine to Iraq):
There is no concession that will bring lasting peace to the Middle East because the terrorists and their supporters are not going to be satisfied by concessions. The only thing that will satisfy them is the destruction of Israel.
IraqTheModel sees the solution as equally clear cut:
The hesitation of the international community can be so dangerous and the intentions of the axis of terror are so clear. That's why firm and resolute measures have to be undertaken against Syria and Iran who are directly responsible for the mess in Iraq, Lebanon and Palestine.I agree.
9 comments:
I'm not sure that I completely understand the agendas or the strategy of Syria and Iran, but to say that Israel supports democracy around the globe isn't correct. First of all they are destroying the democracy in Palestine; they are trying to bomb Lebanon back to the Stone Age, and during the 1980s, while the rest of the world was boycotting the apartheid government of South Africa in order to help dismantle apartheid, Israel was perfectly willing to be best buddies with South Africa. In Israel, Arab citizens, who comprise about 20 percent of the population, don't have equal rights. Where do you see Israel trying to promote democracy around the world?
Regarding my last point, I posted something about it on my blog:
http://thoughtsopinionsrants.blogspot.com/2006/04/life-in-so-called-only-democracy-in.html
Frank,
I agree with you. How strange I find that so many feel Israel should allow the very people swearing them to extinction to kidnap and murder their soldiers. That there should be no consequences to their terror acts. No. Strange is the wrong word. More like appalled! I can only shake my head and wonder at the environment these people grew up in to form that kind of pacifism.
Kim,
Good point.
An excellent explanation of this phenomenon was written recently by Thomas Sowell.
He talks about the all-to-familiar misnomers of "cycle of violence" (as though Israel is contributing to something that would never had happened if Hizballah had not attacked first) and that what Israel does in retaliation is morally equivalent to their being attacked initially.
Maybe you and I and Mr. Sowell are missing something here, but it seems pretty clear cut.
Frank, if I send you some books, would you read them?
Elizabeth, If they are some of the books that you have referred to before, such as from Juan Cole, I would. That would be interesting.
I would need your address. Send it to me in a comment to my blog and I won't post it. All the comments go directly to me since I enabled comment moderation.
Elizabeth, it's posted on your "My Solution..." article on your blog. By the way, what is your opinion of Thomas Friedman? (I forgot to mention him in previous comments.) I have read several of his books and have found them very insightful. They have helped me to (at least attempt to) polish my personal dogmatism and try to see 'the other point of view'. I find him one of a few bright spots at the NY Times.
About Thomas L. Friedman: He has a lot of knowledge about the Middle East. Unfortunately, he also has an agenda. He is a neoliberal zionist. I don't care about that; everyone has an ideology. But in addition to being a neoliberal zionist, he is also a racist. He has that old-time, colonialist type of racism; he sees the Arabs as primitives who are idiotically violent and immature. I have my own problems with Arab culture but the reality is that the Palestinians have plenty to be angry about. Of course Friedman knows this, but he doesn't go into it in his columns much because, as I said before, he has an agenda, which is to promote a particular mindset in his readers--to make them think Israelis are culturally and racially superior.
Post a Comment