Posted on 08/06/2002 1:43:27 PM PDT by knighthawk
The attack on the Frank Sinatra International Student Center of Hebrew University at Jerusalem was an attack on America. The center is named after a quintessential American singer. American students studying abroad were sure to be found there eating lunch in the crowded cafeteria. The first president of Hebrew University itself was, from 1935 to 1948, a leader of the New York Jewish community named Judah Magnes, who was born in San Francisco and who had previously served as a rabbi in Brooklyn and at Temple Emanu-El and Congregation B'nai Jeshurun in Manhattan. Countless American pilgrims and tourists begin their visits to Jerusalem with a trip to Hebrew University's campus on Mount Scopus to look out over the Old City. And sure enough, five of the seven who were killed in the sickening attack were American citizens.
The proper response by U.S. President George W. Bush in this situation is the same as it was when the World Trade Center was attacked, or if the American Embassy in Israel had itself been targeted. It is the same response that president Ronald Reagan undertook against Libya in 1986 when that country set off a terrorist bomb in the La Belle nightclub in Berlin and killed one American serviceman, Sgt. Kenneth Ford. Mr. Reagan said then, "When our citizens are abused or attacked anywhere in the world, on the direct orders of a hostile regime, we will respond, so long as I'm in this Oval Office." Mr. Reagan responded in that case by ordering the bombing of Colonel Gadhafi's home and offices in Tripoli on April 14, 1986. The Libyan residential neighbourhood of Bin Ashur was struck in an attack that killed 37 people and wounded 93, many of them civilians. Among the casualties at the Libyan dictator's home were his 15-month old daughter Hana, who was killed, and two of his sons, ages 3 and 4, who were wounded.
As the president of the Zionist Organization of America, Morton Klein, has been recalling lately, for three days in a row back in 1986, the lead editorial in The New York Times defended the bombing of Libya. In one, the newspaper argued: "For the United States to have failed to act would have said to the world: 'Go ahead. Shoot. Bomb. Kill. This tiger never bites.' There have been times in the shadow war of terror when the tiger could do no more than snarl and twitch his tail -- and there will be others. On Monday, America sent a justifiably different message. The tiger bites."
Israel has tried to bite over the past weeks. When it struck against Hamas terrorist leader Salah Shehade on July 22, Mr. Bush sent his spokesman out to issue a presidential denunciation of the Israeli act of self-defence as "heavy-handed." The comfort that Israel would be restrained from serious retaliation by American pressure no doubt emboldened the Sinatra Center bomber.
While there is scarcely a horror from the Palestinian Arab terrorists left that could shock any observer of Israel's struggle, the latest choice of targets was a new low. Hebrew University has been a wellspring of Israeli liberal thought. There are about 5,000 Arab students out of 23,000 total there, as well as 1,500 students from abroad. It is being said by Hamas's "spiritual leader," Sheikh Ahmed Yassin, that this attack is in retaliation for Israel's assassination of Hamas's military leader -- apparently last Tuesday's bombing, which failed to kill any Israelis, was insufficient. But, of course, none of these attacks is about retaliation. They are calculated political acts aimed at wringing territorial concessions from the Jewish state, and ultimately at destroying it.
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan urges Israel "to end the cycle of violence, revenge and retaliation." But the idea that Israel is in any way equivalent to the Palestinian Arabs in this conflict is incorrect and offensive. One side wishes for peace, and the other for the destruction of their enemy. Israel is up against the very axis of evil that Mr. Bush has spoken so eloquently about with respect to its attacks on America. An American retaliation for the attack on the Sinatra Center would be an act of self-defence necessary to ensure the safety of American students everywhere.
One could argue that the Reagan bombing of Tripoli did not deter the Libyans from their later bombing of Pan Am 103. And one could argue that the American attack on the Taliban after September 11 did not deter the Islamist terrorists from the Sinatra Center attack. But the fault in both cases lies not with the principle of retaliation but with its execution: with America's failure to finish off its foes.
There is no shortage of targets. There is the Iraqi regime that is rewarding the families of suicide bombers. There is the Saudi regime that is paying the terrorists' salaries. There is the Iranian regime that is funding them and inspiring them. There is the Syrian regime that is giving them safe haven and allowing the transshipments of their arms. There is Yasser Arafat, who is their titular leader. There is the Egyptian regime, which is arming and training for its own attack on Israel and which recently was disclosed to be harbouring a figure in the September 11 plot. The correct American attacks would be calibrated to the individual countries. The Iranian regime, for instance, is poised to topple, so America might be able to defeat it without bombing anything but perhaps the nuclear reactor at Bushehr and a few command and control centres. Seizing the Saudi oil fields would require a more sustained effort. But how many more Americans must die before Mr. Bush and all Americans join this war with the rapid, sustained and all-consuming effort required to attain the sweeping and decisive victory that is necessary?
The war will cost the lives of American soldiers. Not as many as the pessimists warn. But each one is precious. The troops, though, are at least armed and trained and enlisted to fight for freedom. Which is more than can be said for the traders and secretaries and firefighters and, now, university students who are being slaughtered afresh each day that the offensive is delayed.
It is the same response that president Ronald Reagan undertook
Bush ain’t Reagan, that much has become obvious.
There would be 5000 fewer students tomorrow, if I had any authority there (possibly more, depending on the composition of the foreign students). If I had a child who was a student there, he/she wouldn't be there if that attitude wasn't taken immediately by those in authority.
Universities being the utopian places they are, I have little hope that the appropriate action will be taken.
It is somewhat reassuring to see that there are a few people in the big media that get this, and a little odd to see it published in a Canadian venue (then again there's always Mark Steyn!).
If one wanted to, one could make a case for attacking the Israelis for failing to protect our children who were their guests.
Rightly or wrongly, Sharon may be coordinating something with the President and as a patriotic American I don't want to be too specific in my speculation.
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.