The Meaning of War

Since 1948, sixty years this year, the State of Israel has been under attack almost constantly, or very nearly so.  Within twenty-four hours of its very founding, the baby state was attacked from without by its Arab neighbours who would see it destroyed.  Upset that the United Nations — itself no friend to Israel as the years would attest — would DARE to invade their space and carve out a country from their lands, lands they’d long held as their own for approximately 1,878 years (since the final conquer of Jerusalem by the Romans in the year 70 C.E.), the Arab neighbours, faced with an unwanted new kid on the block, decided to do something about it, not unlike the bullies not liking the new kid in school.  In the sixty years since, there has been precious little long-term peace anywhere in that region.  Except between Israel and its neighbour, the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.  Maybe.

 The only problem is that this “new kid” has proven over the decades to be the eight-hundred-kilogramme gorilla of the area and in spectacular fashion.  That they have failed to have any position except ambiguity with regards to nuclear weaponry has only strengthened their position.  Yet being the 800-kg gorilla has a drawback too.  When someone attacks them — such as Hamas, Hezbollah and other terrorist-backed groups — and they retaliate, the International Community, including the nation’s largest trading partner and greatest ally over the decades, raps them on the knuckles rather than do something about what caused it.

The problem is not that Israel keeps retaliating when they are attacked.  That has little, if anything, to do with it.  The problem is that the West and the European Union increasingly has forgotten the meaning of a simple word.  That word is WAR.  After two World Wars and a history bathed in blood, most recently in the Balkans generally and directly in the ex-Yugoslavia, it is understandable that Europe would want a few years of peace.  However, the way in which they are going about it is something that would make one of history’s nastiest pieces of work smile and warm his black heart.  That the United States has done little more than scold Israel for defending its borders in ways that are effective shows that our government is hypocritical at best, but at least we still back them.  Recently, as the New York Post opinion page reported, Secretary of State Dr. Condoleeza Rice came down on the Israelis for not showing humanitarian care in their ground offencive against the Gaza Palestinians when the same fired rockets into Israeli territory.

It seems to me that politicians in the West need to re-learn the definition of WAR.  Especially today, it is not uncommon for a group of thugs like the hoods that run the Gaza Strip to use innocents for human shields.  In wartime, there are casualties.  They are regrettable.  However, in this case, they are being used in an offencive way.  The sports term would be “offencive defence”:  The thugs are using the human shields in hopes that Israel will launch a retaliatory strike against them, hitting the human shields and thus triggering an international outcry because of it.  Yet, when the international community rises up against Israel, they show their hypocritical nature by failing to censure those who use the human shields in the first place.  Israel knows well the meaning of war.  They have — to my knowledge — never attacked without provocation.  Yet for their retaliation they are given much grief by their supposed allies and are admonished to “obey the law” when their opponants are offered no such admonishment, not that it would do any good.

In war, humanitarianism as an international law is a joke.  There is collateral damage and it is unfortunate.  But what is sadder is when the international community disciplines a nation for simply defending its borders and refuses to see that it is the thugs who first attacked them who are in violation of any ‘humanitarian’ standards.

It is not much different from the gun debate in this country.  The laws are meant to keep people safe, but when stronger laws and tougher laws are put in place, assuming they are enforced, crime often goes up.  Why?  Because those who follow the law have no way to protect themselves from those who do not.  Why do we bother with tougher gun laws when those whom the law was meant to target do not abide by it anyway?

Same thing here.  Israel has abided by international law… yet those who offend international law are allowed to get away with bloody murder.  Literally.  What will be the response of the international community in the coming days when and if Israel decides on further retaliation for the carnage at Merkaz Harav Yeshiva in Jerusalem that left a total of nine dead (including the gunman) and nine wounded?  I can tell you immediately what it will be: The international community will again come down on Israel.

But then again, is that much different from Liberalism in this country?  I dare anyone to take a look at the way American Liberals behave and point out to me significant differences between them in 2008 and how the Bolsheviks behaved before and during the Russian Revolution in 1917.  I doubt you will find many.  I believe it was Hitler who remarked that Nazism and Bolshevism (or Communism if you prefer, though the term is obsolete today) had more in common than they had in opposition.

As more than one conservative writer puts forth, it is these people who lead us to defeat.  It is these people who make us the laughing stock of the military community.  We have the most powerful military in the world… yet when we are at the cusp of victory we are hamstrung by the Liberals in the media and in the halls of academia… or is that Macademia, because they are certifiable nuts!… and in the halls of Congress with kooks like Teddy Kennedy and Nancy Pelosi and even the two candidates for president, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.  Israel has the fourth most powerful and they use it to defend their borders.  We use our most powerful ranking to defeat terrorists and despots worldwide.

Unfortunately for us, the Liberals especially, would that we would play by ’safe and clean’ rules.  They wish that we and Israel especially would ‘play nice’ in the face of people who laugh at such conventions.  When did people like the Terrorist of Teheran and the Communist of Caracas and the Pipsqueak of Pyongyang ever play nice?!  Is that phrase even in their vocabulary?  Of course they laugh at us… because they have absolutely no intention of EVER playing by the same rules.  Using the liberals’ tactics and ideas to take on these lunatics is approximately like trying to take on a streetfighter using Marquess of Queensberry rules!

War is hell.  There are very few rules when it comes to war, but there is one thing that war has in common with baseball.  It is the objective.  Rule 1.02 of the official baseball rules states that ”(t)he objective of each team is to win by scoring more runs than the opponant.”  Maybe Rule 1.02 of the official war rules should state that “(t)he objective of each side in a war is to win by totally defeating the enemy.”  Point blank.  Israel knows this and has since long before 1948 was a twinkle in their eye.  Intelligent people the world over have always known this.  Sun Tzu knew this before the Common Era.  Carl von Clausewitz knew it in the 1800s.  Lenin and Mao knew it in the last century.  Even the Bedlam candidates we deal with on a daily basis the world over know it.  Any politician who denies that this is the case either doesn’t know what he’s talking about, hasn’t been doing his job, or is being deliberately obtuse.

Why our leaders kowtow to hypocritical niceties while our enemies hysterically laugh is beyond me.  But it seems we should be taking a page from their book and spend less time prating about niceties and more time finding a way to achieve total victory.  Once that is achieved, then and ONLY then, may we discuss the rules.  Like the old adage goes, shoot first, ask questions later and let GOD sort it all out.]

If our ally Israel and our enemies can figure it out… what’s our problem?!

 Until next time.

Conservative Firebrand