The Big Yellow Book

Seeing the World from Both Oculars-- a Bananaslug's Journal


Previous Entry Share Next Entry
On the politics of war...
bigbananaslug
bigbananaslug
I don't usually use this blog for politics. Be warned. If you don't like political rants, move on.

Recently, I have read several posts on lists I read from people outside of the USA (Germany and Australia to be honest) who clearly have been practicing anuloskepsis with regard to the War on Terror, and the current battle in that war, between Israel and the Iranian terrorists infesting southern Lebannon.

So, here's the truth. Simple and unvarnished. As long as Israel exists as a state, and as long as the rest of the world permits the predominantly Islamic states to act as though Israel's existence is not legitimate, we will continue to have war in the Middle East.

So, unless we want to solve the problem by admitting what might in fact be true: that Israel ab initio did not have the right to exist and help the Arabs and Iran to murder all the Israelis, as they have been proclaiming for a half century that they want to, we'll have to look elsewhere for a solution.

If Israel is illegitimate as a state, then so is the United States, so is Eire, so are most of the South American states, and any other state that has issued a declaration of independence, and backed it up by force of arms.

I think it is clear that Israel is a legitimate state. If you don't agree with me on that, at least that far, go away now. You aren't going to like the rest of this.

Since Israel is a legitimate state, it has the right to defend itself, by whatever measures it sees fit.

Now, this may be modified by "international law" or "international agreements" somewhat, but this is more honored in the breach by other countries, including all of the ones complaining.

The real issue is the state sponsorship of terrorism. Hezbollah is a creation of the state of Iran. It takes orders from Iran, is funded by Iran, staffed by Iranian mullahs and leaders and managers. Hezbollah exists to create a Greater Palestine that is operated as a Shiite Islamic State, one that includes Lebannon, Israel, the Gaza, Jordan, southern Iraq and southern Syria. It chooses to do that using terrorism as its primary vehicle.

There is only one way to stop terrorism. It is the way the British stopped the Jacobites, and the IRA. It is the way the US stopped the Mormon terrorists. It is the way the British stopped the Malay war, and the way the US stopped the terrorists in the Phillippines after World War II.

You make it too expensive to be a terrorist, and people will stop being terrorists.

The easiest way to make it too expensive is to kill all the terrorists, as soon as they pop their heads up.

We can't do that in the United States...so in a move of sheer brilliance, the US used its military to set up a terrorist killing ground in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Iran responded by stepping up its nuclear missile program.

The pacific countries of Europe finally woke up at that point earlier this year, when they realized that Iran, while the mullahs couldn't hit the USA yet, could certainly hit London, Rome, Paris, Madrid and Berlin. Suddenly, the Iranians were getting pressure from their former suppliers.

Enter, on cue, the Iranian puppet terrorists in Lebannon. Hezbollah started provocations against the Israelis just about a month ago...right as it was beginning to look like international opinion was coalescing around forcing Iran to give up its nuclear arsenal.

As is always the case, the issue now is jews versus downtrodden arabs.

Nonsense.

The issue is still the state sponsored terrorists.

Kill all the terrorists, and more will spring up! That's what the appeasers say.

The fact is that if you kill enough of them, for long enough, they will stop.

What I don't know is whether anybody in the West has the stomach and the sheer bloodymindedness that it will take to do it.

The Islamists have said, on tape, and in print, that one of their main strategic tenets is that the West does NOT have the stomach to destroy the terrorists, and therefore the terrorists must win.

I am not even sure if Israel has the bloodymindedness to keep on, in the face of increasingly bad press and public opinion that appears to think it is fine for the "arabs" to kill the occasional jew, but let Israel shoot into Lebannon, and all hell breaks loose in the media.

I do know this. There is only one way to stop the terrorists.

Assuming we all want to.

  • 1
>It is the way the US stopped the Mormon terrorists.

By Mormon Terrorists, I presume you are referring to the Mormon War of 1838 and the Mountain Meadows Massacre of 1857. These were a dreadful sequence of events, with atrocities committed on both sides.

I just hate to think that someone might read your blog and falsely infer that modern Mormons advocate terrorism because, well, we don't.

of course I meant the 19th century Danites

...not the ones supposed to be chasing outspoken ex-Mormons around today. There's no evidence of their existence, like there _is_ evidence for a similar group among Scientologists, at least in the 1970s and 1980s. I don't have to be a conspiracy theorist. There are enough people after the USA for real.

Bananaslug.

You might be right, but I can't see the US ever implementing that solution. It might get started, but there'd be an uproar and it'd be struck down, and doing it half-assed would be worse than not doing it at all.

The other thing is that terrorists need money to buy guns and explosives and fake passports, and they need bases of operations in places where they are relatively safe from which to work. If all of a sudden there are no tin-pot countries sending them money and allowing them relatively safe harbor, life as a terrorist becomes a whole lot less possible. So if any country who allows terrorists in or allows money out to terrorists gets a regime change, the terrorists will be severely hampered. I think the US would be more willing to do a series of regime changes than the draconian measures you suggest.

Bonus points for the fact that the US generally tries to make the standard of living go up when we do a regime change, going all the way back to the Marshall Plan. While it is certainly true that people often act in ways that are contrary to their own self-interest, it is also true that countries are far less likely to attack/support attacks on countries with whom they trade, and middle class people tend not to support the kind of upheaval that terrorists both create and use to justify their existence--it's bad for business. Let's hear it for 2.5 kids, a dog, and a mortgage on a house in the suburbs with a pickett fence.

  • 1
?

Log in

No account? Create an account