The Nation's editors
published an opinion today that really got to me. This is the first time in my life I felt compelled to write in response to a published opinion. I felt that I had points worth sharing, so I'm posting it as my first entry.
Keep the flames to a minimum please.
To The Editors,
In regards to your essay `Too High A Price' I believe your stance in the current Israel vs. Hizbolla/Hamas conflict is completely neglecting the facts and recent history. While I completely agree with your idea that extreme UN intervention would probably be a better result than one left to the US and Israel, I think your stance in defense of these two terrorist groups, and their hosts (Lebanon and Palestinian Territories) is completely without merit.
We are talking about a conflict that involves two groups who have sworn to destroy every Jew in the area, deny the recognition of Israel as a sovereign state, and have acted accordingly with severe violence. The popularity of Hamas and Hizbolla only reflect the hate of the people into which they are embedded, otherwise they would be like the neo-nazi's in America and relatively insignificant.
It seems completely appropriate to single out Syria and Iran, because these are the countries who fund, train and fully support these terrorist groups. They harbor the terrorist leaders that personally call for the attacks and jihads against Israel. To say Syria and Iran are not fighting a war by proxy through these two groups is ignorant. It's time for the world to face this fact and bring the practice to an end in the name of peace.
It makes sense that Iran would start a significant a push for influence in the area. They've been waiting for this opportunity since our invasion of Iraq. The nobility (or lack thereof) of invading Iraq aside, the fact is the consequence put the regional power in the hands of the Shi'ites. While I'll never condone the US installment of Saddam or his regime, making Iraq a Sunni power did put a sectarian balance in place that kept Iran in check. With that barrier down, BushCo have invited this situation, but Hizbolla did not have to take advantage of it.
Since Lebanon cannot disarm Hizbolla, the world has left it up to Israel to do so. Otherwise the UN would have intervened a long time ago and put a stop to Hizbolla's terrorist activities. All Israel wants is to be left alone, and it is these organizations that will not let that occur. The UN could have long ago stopped Syria and Iran from transporting weapons and money to them as well. Lebanon was even ordered by the UN to disarm Hizbolla but instead they embraced it, and now you are seeing the consequence of that. Hizbolla is deeply interwoven into the Lebanese political situation and the attack they just performed on Israel's sovereign land has to be taken as an act of war. If it were just terrorism, then shouldn't there be an effort on the Lebanese government to correct the situation? Would the US stand by and let White Supremacist groups attack Mexico? The prior attack by `Palestinian' Arabs is exactly the same, and should the `Palestinians' want a sovereign state they should first recognize that such actions as last week's attack are acts of war against another country.
And you stated that Israel/US response to gain of political power by Hamas could have been done differently. Just what approach would you consider appropriate with Hamas? How can you deny the fact that this is an organization that whose stated goal since their inception is to remove all of Israel and every Jew? How do you negotiate with an enemy whose goal is your complete destruction? I give no credit to Hamas or Hizbolla for their community and social efforts. They are merely taking advantage of the opportunity to fill a void that they created in the first place. It is purely a PR campaign for enlistment. Lebanon and the Palestinian territories would be overflowing with charities already were it not for these violent groups and their refusal to let Israel be. It's speculation, but I would bet anything that Israel would be the largest contributor if it really would ensure peace. (Actually Israel tried that too, and the response was more attacks from the PLO)
Also I am curious as just to what your definition is for a moderate Arab when it comes to Israel. Is it one that truly accepts Israel's right to peace and existence? Or is one that just doesn't vocalize their Anti-Semitism/Anti-Zionism? You'll have to agree the former are few and far between in that region of the world. Such a person would be considered a traitor and persecuted in Lebanon, Jordan, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria or even Iraq. Where is one Arab leader calling for complete peace with Israel anywhere in the world? This is a position Abbas has only occasionally conceded, and only because he knows that stance keeps him and the PLO (PA) in good graces with the West.
To say the majority of Arabs in the region do not support this war is pure denial. These are countries where an extreme shift in the social conscious is necessary for peace to stay with any permanence. I'm opposed to a violent resolution to that issue as wackos like Ann Coulter suggest, but it isn't the Israelis lacking moderation. Israel's Jewish extremists are few and the government is already working to control them. I fail to see the same efforts from anyone else on the other side. In fact we see the opposite. Moderate Arab responses to the recent events (like Saudi Arabia's) have more to do with profit and political favor and less with peaceful intentions. To think otherwise is to deny a lot of past rhetoric from them.
And the rest of the Arab world is rife with the purest forms of Anti-Semitism. It's hard to fault the populations of these areas when the nazi-like propaganda fed to them is constant, strong and well controlled. At the same time there is no change even in the few regions where 'Democracy' is in somewhat in place. Israel has attempted peace with these people and the response has always been more violence and promises of complete destruction. Every time Israel concedes to some terrorist demand, the terrorists only become more emboldened. They concede Gaza, and the `Palestinian' response is raids and rockets. They release prisoners, and the freed only go back to re-arm and re-train. How many times do you need to get screwed over until you say 'enough is enough?' Yes, Israel's military response will fan a lot of flames in the Arab world, but another passive response from them isn't going to help either. I'm not denying the strong-arm tactics Israel has used in Gaza and the West Bank. Tearing down shanty houses and bombing infrastructure in response to suicide bombings is a bad idea and I can't morally justify it. However blowing a Hamas rocket factory to smithereens I loudly applaud.
I love the idea of places like Lebanon and Palestine (and if it were done correctly, Iraq...not holding my breath for BushCo to get it right) embracing Democracy. But for the Middle East the consequence so far has been a political elevation of organizations that profess the greatest hate of Israel and the Jews and the complete annihilation of both. These groups won't stop their original intentions are fulfilled. Turning over the `occupied territories' won't stop them and why should anyone assume otherwise? When a Muslim makes an oath to God to destroy Israel, I believe he means it. Despite what you may think, there's a lot of Muslims who've made that very oath, and many of them work for Hizbolla, Hamas and the regional governments.
Mutual peace and harmony is always the ideal way to live. Only Morons, Fundamentalists and the Machiavellian prefer otherwise. Unfortunately this conflict, which really has been waiting a long time to blow, is doubtfully going to end in anything ideal for anyone, considering one side has sworn life and death to eradicate the other, and the other has sworn life and death to exist. The fight is going to be severe whether it starts out that way or not. The Lebanese government and Hizbolla will work hard to emphasize the civilian casualties from Israel's attacks, but let's remember where Hizbolla works from, where their weapons are stored, and how they've perfected the practice of hiding behind children and within the population (techniques started by Arafat and the PLO.) And when Israel's casualty count seems comparatively low, let's also remember that Israel has had the unfortunate need to build up their country in preparation for these events. Out of necessity and fear, there isn't a building without a bomb shelter, no street without an air raid siren, no school without gas masks.
I think it's time for Hizbolla and Hamas to make a couple concessions in the name of peace first. They should want peace with Israel, and show it. Giving Israel back the hostages would be a good start. Accepting the existence of Israel would be a nice 2nd. Let's just see how civilized these terrorist organizations can be.