Posted on 08/12/2006 11:10:55 AM PDT by Kaslin
The war now raging in Lebanon should not surprise anyone. For many years, Hezbollah, which is funded, equipped and ideologically supported by Iran and Syria, has made it crystal clear that its goal is to conquer Israel, expel its Jewish inhabitants, and place the entire land under Islamic rule.
Hezbollah engages in terrorism – the deliberate targeting of Jewish civilians and others – to achieve its goals. For the past month, Hezbollah has rained down thousands of rockets on Israel, deliberately maiming and killing innocent Israeli civilians. Hezbollah uses Lebanese civilians as human shields when it places its rockets in civilian areas, and is therefore responsible for many Lebanese casualties. Nonetheless, the European Union refuses to describe Hezbollah as a terrorist organization.
The Islamic terrorism represented by Hezbollah and others will one day threaten the entire world. Islamic fanatics have already engaged in terrorist acts in the U.S., England, Spain, India, Kenya, Tanzania, Argentina, Indonesia, Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Afghanistan and other countries.
Israel should be applauded for fighting international terrorism and using its military forces in Lebanon to confront the terrorist infrastructure after Hezbollah launched a military attack across the Lebanese-Israeli border on July 12. Instead, Israel has been criticized by a number of countries in the European Union that seek to make it difficult for the Israeli army to degrade or eliminate Hezbollah.
You can count on the French government to try to deliver Israel into the hands of its enemies. British Prime Minister Tony Blair deserves enormous credit for standing with the U.S. against those in and out of his government who have opposed his willingness to fight international terrorism and his support for the right of Israel to defend itself against Hezbollah.
I have no doubt, however, that if it were not for the support of the United States, led by President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, many European states would be even more active in trying to snatch victory from the hands of the Israel Defense Forces.
The position of the United States has been clear from the start of hostilities: a sustainable cease-fire. An August 7 New York Times editorial stated what The Times believes is required: "For Israel, [the U.N. Resolution] must include some assurance that Hezbollah will no longer be able to cross into Israeli territory and kidnap Israeli soldiers or launch its rockets against Israeli towns and cities."
For Lebanon, all agree that a "sustainable cease-fire" means a return of control of the entire country to the elected Lebanese government. The Lebanese army is not strong enough to exercise such control and disarm Hezbollah. It will need the military forces of NATO or other friendly countries to assist it.
It was disingenuous for Russian President Vladimir Putin, the butcher of Grozny and the Chechen Republic, and others to talk of a "disproportionate response" on the part of Israel. Even with the onslaught of Israeli troops sent into southern Lebanon, Israel's response to date has been clearly inadequate to the danger it faces. Although it is making progress, it has been unable to destroy all of Hezbollah's bases and rockets so as to remove them as future threats.
Israel's decision not to use major combat infantry in addition to its air force early on was, in hindsight, a serious error, even if its intent was to minimize casualties to both Israeli military forces and Lebanese civilians. It appears that Hezbollah will emerge from this exchange of hostilities degraded militarily in its ability to wage terrorist attacks against Israel, but not destroyed.
Politically, it will be strengthened, simply by having withstood Israeli efforts to totally obliterate it. Arab leadership will seek to convince the "Arab street" that Israel's army was defeated by Hezbollah. Rational people, however, will look at the damage inflicted by Israel in southern Lebanon and Beirut and know that Lebanon paid a heavy price for Hezbollah's military misadventure.
In an effort to limit Israel's victory, the Arab League is seeking to have the proposed Security Council resolution order Israel to vacate southern Lebanon before Hezbollah is disarmed and the Lebanese army and a multinational force is placed there as required by U.N. Resolution 1559. Israel cannot protect its population from a renewal of Hezbollah's rocket attacks on Israeli cities and towns if it were to quit Lebanon before both Lebanon's army and a U.N.-mandated military force are in place to keep the peace and disarm Hezbollah.
According to The New York Times, President Bush made the U.S. position clear: "Speaking to reporters from his ranch in Crawford, Texas, President Bush called for the resolution's speedy adoption, but made clear that the main sticking point – Lebanese insistence that the draft be altered to require Israel to withdraw troops immediately – was nonnegotiable."
In my judgment, when history evaluates George W. Bush's position in the pantheon of presidents, he will be compared with Harry S Truman. Bush's fortitude in recognizing the danger of Islamic fundamentalism to the U.S. and, indeed, the Western world, and his awareness of the need to win this war of civilizations is remarkable. He deserves the applause of all Americans and in time he will receive it.
Edward I. Koch, author, lawyer and talk radio host, was a member of the U.S. Congress and, for 12 years, the 105th mayor of New York City.
Bush also deserves praise for calling terrorist "islamofacists".
Our president make some progress since 9/11 when he call islam "Religion Of Peace".
One of a few sensible and good Democrats!
I am glad he realized what they really are
"Recognizing the danger" and having "awareness of the need to win this war" is not the same as mobilizing the country/military to actually go fight to win it. It's high time to stop talking about an "Axis of Evil" and start doing something about it.
Now Will I Arise
Isaiah 33 describes a time when God rises up to defend Israel, in response to a failed peace plan.
"Look, their brave men cry aloud in the streets; the envoys of peace weep bitterly. The highways are deserted, no travelers are on the roads. The treaty is broken, its witnesses are despised, no one is respected." (Isaiah 33:7-8 NIV)
"Now will I arise," says the LORD. "Now will I be exalted; now will I be lifted up." (Isaiah 33:10 NIV)
"You conceive chaff, you give birth to straw; your breath is a fire that consumes you. The peoples will be burned as if to lime; like cut thornbushes they will be set ablaze." (Isaiah 33:11-12 NIV)
"You who are far away, hear what I have done; you who are near, acknowledge my power!" (Isaiah 33:13 NIV)
MA
If Bush was the C&C of the Israeli forces, instead of the sissy-boy Olmert, Isreal would be in a much better position right now.
Support for Israel? Yeah, right.
BTTT :)
Each war produces innocent victims, tears of children and tons of pain. Unfortunately the choice is one: us or them. I choose us to survive, and you?
Bush is one hail of a President.
Nobody will think Bush is great this November when the Democrats retake the House. Impeachment proceedings will begin immediately in January and he probably will be impeached, but not convicted.
I hope I'm wrong, but I give it about a 50/50 chance of this happening.
I think he gave them a good solid 3 1/2 weeks of support. I guess now he can sell them out with this UN resolution given that he has given so much support to them. But, what else can he do, Olmert is a wimp. I guess they can fight it again in a year or two. Meanwhile the UN furnishes cover for Hezbollah's rebuilding efforts in So. Lebanon. We voted for this?????????? Scary.
Kotch can say whatever he wants, but I think the man is out of his mind on this issue.
We can rip ElMort all we want for not executing the war differently. I actually think he deserves it, although that is not a universally accepted view. Here's my problem with that.
We have been at war in Iraq for over three years now. Three years! I've supported this war from before day one. Most of us here have. Now, even three years later, Baghdad the capital city is ravaged by terrorism. Even so, I support carrying this war out to it's conclusion.
Here we sit in judgement over Israel. We have joined with the French, perhaps the loudest voice in Europe, suggesting a ceasefire is the only way to go. This, in part, is supported by Israel's supposed mismanagement of the war. Whew...
How far does one have to go to find another situation similar to Israel's, that could be used as an object lesson. Let me see... hmmm... where oh where?
Look folks, I've very seldom voiced any objection to the administrative tactics regarding Iraq. I have accepted that desired goals are seldom achieved in straight lines. It would be nice to start at point a and go directly to point b, but it just doesn't work that way. I have supported Bush because the outcome of the war was the most important thing.
Here is an administration that has asked for us to patient. They have said that no matter how long it takes, they will execute the war until Iraq is stable and safe. That's a policy I can agree with. Take it to the mother fu--ers until the job is done. Can't agree more with that.
Identifying with Bush's thoughts on this as I do, it baffles me his inability to see this same policy should apply to how Israel's leaders should act, with determination, with resolve, with the best interests of Israel's long term safety in mind.
Bush has asked for support on Iraq and I have given it to him. Israel asks for his support seeking the same objectives as we are, and Bush caves.
Is Bush a good support of Israel? Overall, perhaps so. In the matter of Israel trying to destroy it's sworn inhialators, hell no. You do not interrupt your ally in the middle of their effort to utterly destroy their enemy so completely that a repeat is not only out of the question, it would be impossible.
Mr. President, don't you think it's time we give up in Iraq? After all, we've been at this for three years. The international community is not with us. They think we made a mistake and are over-reacting.
Do you not see any corelation with what is taking place with regard to Israel at this moment? Evidently not.
Sir, as a president, you are a disaster.
Well this is a good beginning for Koch to be giving Bush some well-deserved kudos.
He already has mine.
D1, Bush and this country walks a tightrope here. Israel actually got support from countries such as Saudi Arabia, who blamed Hiz for the conflict.
But the Islamist propaganda organs went into overdrive, which forced the same folks to start calling for a cease-fire.
And until such time that the Middle East doesn't supply such a massive amount of the world's energy supply, we cannot act unilaterally. It sucks, but that is reality.
There was progress this time around. I would have like more, but that's life. We work for more next time. FR and conservative blogs have already put major damage upon the Hiz propaganda machine. We're getting there.
I praise the Prez and hope that all the GOP candidates who have lefty Dem opposition now , finally, also call them supporters of Islamofascism and yes, question their patriotism unashamedly. Put it to the voter that Dems will get us all killed, even lefty wussies.
Okay, now you tell us who actually won here. Israel's soldiers are still in enemy hands and Israel is being coerced to agree to a peace pact.
Years ago, a buffer zone was set up to end hostilities. That is precisely what Israel is being coerced to agree to again.
You know who has been sold out in this "Rush to peace!" It sure wasn't Hezbollah. Hezbollah didn't beg for peace and it is still capable of raining missiles down on Israel at a moments notice.
If we learned nothing else from Vietam, we should remember that ceasefires are the enemies best friend. "Here, here's a breather, now regroup, resupply and restart hostilities when you're ready." Just damn...
---
I know where you're coming from. I'm sure there are many who will agree with your comments. I don't think they are without merit. In the overall sceheme of things, I just think they are wrong.
I appreciate your contribution of the alternate view.
This was just one chess move in a hundred-year war that we are only slightly more than two decades into. I would say at the end of the day that the good guys gained a very slight advantage with the events of the last month. Israel degraded Hizbollah capabilities. And the right-wing blogsphere basically destroyed the Hiz/MSM propaganda capabilities in the West. And not to pat our own backs, but in a way, that was as significant as Israel's military triumphs. Recall that the Qana spin had Israel on its heels until it was shown to be bogus. Now the Hiz spin is just car wheels on a gravel road. And it will NEVER be effective again in the West.
This is a very long war and far more complex than any previous war because of the interdependency of the world economies that was not a factor in the past. With all due respect, realize that victory and defeat will not be as clear as they were in the past.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.