Friday, July 14, 2006

A few "phrases" to make your EARS ring.

I've written about a few terms you are likely to read and hear, over the next few days, months, and most unfortunately, years......

Let's start with:


1) "Cycle of Violence" -- there is no cycle, its been coming from ONE side, Arab. Israel was attacked on 2 fronts in 2 weeks...by terror organizations on its borders. The only CYCLE, is the one that the perpetrators inflicted on Israel. When you hear this term on CNN, from diplomats, or from anybody -- realize what they are really saying. They want Israel to halt its measures of HITTING back, and creating a reality of a "price to be paid for terror to the Arabs." The cycle of violence is HERE, and to the person uttering these words, on TV, in the press, or in your life -- anywhere, I say the following.. the following is directed to the speaker of the term, "cycle of violence."

"Where were you when rockets were raining down over Israel for the past 6 months from Gaza? Please show me your words, regarding "cycle of violence?" Where were you, when Gilad was kidnapped 3 weeks ago? Do you have quotes on the very day he was kidnapped -- on the "cycle of violence?" Or, is it only after Israel RESPONDS?

I know the answer, and so do you. They said ZERO. It was only after Israel hit Gaza and Lebanon with force that this term was used.

2) "Disproportionate use of force" - this term is typically reserved for the UN/Arab, and EU diplomats targeting Israel, and chastising the country for using ANY military means to defend the country. This is a good phrase, and quite catchy. You see, it implies a kind of "even" playing field - and it smacks of equality in the Mid-East. Culturally, Economically, and Militarily -- there is NO EVEN PLAYING FIELD....Israel is the country that has a higher GDP (economics), better education system (culturally), and stronger technology (military). The Arabs do not possess, (nor should they) -- anything that is fair, OR EVEN HANDED - when it comes to defending Israel. Israel is a tiny country of democracy, and Judeo-Christian values. It has sought to live peacefully amongst a religion that is moving FULL STEAM towards their stated goal -- THE DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL.
Israel needs to display the disproportionate use of force to, REGAIN their posture of deterrence. Unfortunately, for many of us (moderates) -- we were worried that deterrence was lost in the quest for the "peace process." Land concession, and false agreements with TERRORIST have emboldened and made courageous enemies of Israel. It is time for the Disproportionate USE OF MILITARY FORCE to be used by Israel on people, property, and infrastructure on its neighbors. This is most unfortunate, but it will set a precedent of "what will happen" if a country like Lebanon allows a terror group,to run free inside it's borders. Deterrence is a strong concept, it is what keeps balance and stability amongst adversaries. Iran, is about to feel the wrath of deterrence.
Russians invading Chechnya -- was the use of force, disproportionate?
You bet it was - and thats how you, WIN A WAR.

From Meryl Yourish --
"We should probably start numbering Kofi’s statements. “Concerned,” “Alarmed,” “Deeply Alarmed,” and “Downright Unhappy.”"



Uhhhh, sorry Kofi.

3) "Peace Process" -- This is a joke, and NEVER EXISTED....(it did for Israel, and the left wing of the country) -- but giving back land to the Arabs, in the hopes that they would not NEVER attack again, and create harmony with Israel? No. Peace is made with enemies, I understand this concept -- but NOT with terrorists who are liars, and most of all, HONOR NO AGREEMENTS, OR TREATIES WITH NON-MUSLIMS. They will sign any document, make any promise, in order, TO FURTHER THEIR JIHAD AGAINST NON-BELIEVERS...(non-Muslims).

The Peace Process has made Israel's enemies stronger, brought more violence to the doorstep (both north and south border) -- and has done ZERO to make Arabs allow Israel to live quietly. Infact, it has had the opposite effect for bloodthirsty terrorists, bent on murdering Jews, and destroying Israel.


4) "Exercise Restraint" -- 110% of the time, this terms is reserved for Israel, or the IDF (Israel Defense Forces). LET ME BE CLEAR ABOUT THIS PROPOSTEROUS STATEMENT TO ALL PEACE LOVING, HEAD IN THE GROUND, DREAMERS.

"Restraint, is precisely what got Israel into this WAR.

Over the last few years, Israel has NOT struck back at terror bases in Lebanon. (although Israel knew full well, that missles were being imported from Iran directly over to it's northern border)....Israel, has not struck militarily - with tremendous force --- at the expense of the Palestinians, (even though they had every right to) -- and, hammered their entire people, and decimated their infrastructures. Did you know, that in 24 hours Israel could destroy every building, in all of GAZA?

They do not, and have not. They have exercised RESTRAINT. You know why? -- BECAUSE THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL ARE A CIVIL, MORAL PEOPLE. (too much so in my opinion) Israel has YET to display even 1% of its might and power, against terrorists groups. Now is the time.

Restraint has been deadly -- and restraint on Israel's part has caused the terror groups and Iran to be emboldened in the pursuit of war with Israel.

My friend R, who is Israeli - and has served in the IDF, sent me email, and here is a quote from him..

"I believe Israel will pay a high price to get its DETERRENT power back. Israel has no other choice in my opinion."


The concept of restraint, is what has led Israel to the current situation.
Restraint is NOT part of war. Restraint against terrorists WHO BLEND IN AMONGST CIVILIANS, WEAR NO UNIFORM, AND VIOLATE ALL RULES OF WARFARE --- put entire populations at risk.


This is what Israel is faced with.

Iran is a the LEADER OF SPREADING ISLAM. It is now the leader of the AXIS powers. (read:enemy) Iran is taking the lead of Arab nations to start World War 3.

Israel knows what this means.

It means that DETERRENCE has many faces. Here is one, that no Judeo-Christian person should ignore.

"The State of Israel is now the FRONT LINE in this WAR. The objective of this war for Islam and Iran, is to destroy Israel - and then focus on other targets - the US and Europe. Israel, knows it can not let IRAN acquire nuclear weaponry.....because if they do, Iran will surely use them in a future situation like this. If you believe in peace, DO NOT TURN YOUR HEAD AWAY FROM EVIL. Do NOT pretend it does not exist. Do not look the other way in your quest for harmony. Iranian interpretation of Islam has led the world to the brink of war -- and to be clear, its not Arabs vs. Jews.

It's Militant, TERROR Islam and Muslims, vs the Rest of the world. (Judeo-Christian, Buddhist,Hundu)

Where do you stand?

Realism, which is -- the side of ending the conflict through, force and deterrence?

Dreams of a false Peace -- which bring more, and invite more violence from terrorist? Do you stand with the UN, regarding - Cycle of Violence? (against Israel) -- Restraint? (against Israel) -- Disproportionate use of force? (against Israel) -- all in a effort to put off for another day/week/month/year -- when the enemies of Israel, have better weapons to destroy Israel?

I stand on the side of peace. Making peace with Terrorism comes one way. Through their destruction, their suffering, and their punishment.....

Forceful, continued -- and EXCESSIVE. Resulting in -- CLEAR DETERRENCE FOR THE STATE OF ISREL TO SEND THE CLEAR MESSAGE OF PAIN, DEATH, AND SCARS, FROM EVEN THINKING ABOUT HURTING CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL.


G-D Bless the IDF.

6 Comments:

Anonymous Brian said...

On the "Cycle of Violence" section, I was reading an old CNN article that stated that Hezbollah was formed in 1982 when Israel invaded Lebanon as a movement of retaliation. I certainly realize that this whole thing didn't bud in 1982 and since I was 3 years old at the time I don't really know what caused Israel to invade Lebanon but was hoping you could give some background there.

12:20 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

States of Terror
Syria, Iran and their proxies wage war on Israel.


Israel's military invasion and naval blockade of Lebanon is being denounced in European capitals and at the United Nations as a "disproportionate" response to the kidnapping this week of two of its soldiers by Hezbollah. Israel's decision late last month to invade Gaza in retaliation for the kidnapping of another soldier by Hamas was also condemned as lacking in proportion. So here's a question for our global solons: Since hostage-taking is universally regarded as an act of war, what "proportionate" action do they propose for Israel?

In the case of Hamas, perhaps Israel could rain indiscriminate artillery fire on Gaza City, surely a proportionate response to the 800 rockets Hamas has fired at Israeli towns in the last year alone. In the case of Hezbollah, it might mean carpet bombing a section of south Beirut, another equally proportionate response to Hezbollah's attacks on civilian Jewish and Israeli targets in Buenos Aires in the early 1990s.



We aren't being serious, but neither is a feckless international community that refuses to proportionately denounce the outrages to which Israel is being subjected. That goes also for Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who says "all sides must act with restraint." But Israel's current problems result in part from an excess of restraint in responding to previous Hamas and Hezbollah provocations.

Now Israel is confronted with a war on two fronts with proxy terrorists armed and financed by Syria and Iran. Yesterday, medium-range Hezbollah rockets hit civilian targets across northern Israel. Any of those rockets might easily hit the port city of Haifa's oil refineries and chemical plants, causing horrific damage that would give Israel cause, and perhaps the self-preservation necessity, to strike Damascus and Tehran.

So far, Israel is limiting its military activities to Lebanon alone, out of the same abundance of restraint that has governed its behavior throughout the crisis. The democratic Lebanese government of Fouad Siniora bears its share of the blame, since it has failed to police its side of the border with Israel and failed to disarm Hezbollah, as required by Security Council Resolution 1559 and the 1989 Taif Accords that ended the Lebanese civil war. Senior Israeli military sources also claim that Lebanon tolerates the presence of hundreds of Iranian military personnel in Lebanon, again in violation of U.N. resolutions.

But Mr. Siniora's failings owe to weakness, not malfeasance, particularly in the face of Syria's continued meddling in Lebanese affairs following the departure of its army last year. A larger problem has been the failure of the Bush Administration to press Damascus harder when it had the opportunity to do so in the wake of last year's Cedar Revolution. The U.N. investigation into the murder of Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri, in which all evidence points to the involvement of senior associates and relatives of Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, seems to have disappeared in a black hole. Nor has the U.S. exacted any price for Syria's ongoing support for the insurgents in Iraq.

Critics of the Bush Administration will surely find a way to blame it for the current crisis, on the theory that this is what happens when you push for change in the Middle East. But the real problem is the growing perception among Arab regimes and terrorist frontmen that the U.S. is so bogged down in Iraq, and so suddenly deferential to the wishes of the "international community," that it has lost its appetite for serious reform. This has created openings for the kind of terror assaults on American allies we are now witnessing.

Israel can and will handle the immediate military threats on its two borders. But ultimately there will be no resolution in Lebanon and Gaza until the regimes in Syria and Iran believe they will pay a price for the wars they are waging through their proxies. The referral this week of Iran's nuclear file to the U.N. Security Council is a start, although we have little confidence it will lead anywhere. The White House has cited Syria and Iran as the culprits behind this week's events, but more forceful words and action are called for. The Middle East stands on the cusp of its worst crisis in a generation, and this is no time for formulaic statements calling for "restraint from both sides."

WSJ

12:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If, in the face of repeated threats and provocation by an aggressive dictatorship, you refuse to go to war, the war will eventually come to you.

1:30 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

In countering Hamas and Hezbollah, Israel has little choice but to strike at those who authorize the attacks: the heads of those organizations. Both Ismail Haniyeh in Gaza and Hasan Nasrallah in Lebanon appear indifferent to their own people’s safety. For propaganda purposes, they order rocket crews to operate in densely populated areas so that Israeli retaliation will inflict the maximum number of civilian casualties. But these leaders remain extremely reluctant to pay for terror with their own lives, a fact that Israel discovered when its policy of targeted assassinations compelled Hamas to agree to a cease-fire.

[…] Efforts by the United States, the United Nations and the European Union to dissuade Iran and Syria from activating their terrorist agents have consistently proved ineffective. Therefore Israel has no realistic option but to convince these states that the price of promoting aggression is prohibitive. If Israeli soldiers and civilians are the targets of Iranian- and Syrian-backed terror, then the Iranian and Syrian militaries must become targets for Israel.

1:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Growing up, at the dinner table...my kid sister would make silent faces at me, goading me into flying off the handle at her. My parents would only take action against me...condemning my behavior (rightfully so). I used a disproportional response, and my sister usually escaped discipline.

Hamas and their armed wing Hezbollah won an election and had international aid cut off to their government after they refused to renounce violence and accept Israels right to exist. Internally, many Palestinians have gone months without any pay (thanks to Hamas refusals to renounce violence etc), and pressure was mounting...causing a fracture internally between Fatah and Hamas. With no money to pay its workers, and a growing internal conflict with its main rival, Hamas' "leadership" deflected their inability to govern a mounting internal conflict with Fatah, and a monumental financial crisis with one action. Attack, kill 2 soldiers and capture another. No more Fatah/Hamas gunbattles. No more protests. No more money problems. War will unite the Palestinians (if only temporarily), will end the economicly motivated protests, and open the coffers of the donor states/organizations that fund the Palestinian causes. Sympathy will ensue, because of the 'disproportional response'. Add to the mix that the US is busy watching the children (Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, N. Korea) and you have a perfectly shrewd political/socioeconomic kidnapping.

Tom Kessler

3:52 PM  
Anonymous The Gator said...

Couldn't agree more. In fact, substitute a few names (Al-Quaida, US, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, etc.) and you'll find truths in your words that ring very close to home. The bottom line is that civilized conventions of restraint and proportionality can exist only among civilzed peoples. And even then they cheat. In hindsight, I think the cold war was as good an example of civilized conflict as history could produce. But probably only because of the very real threat of mutually assured destruction. And therein lies the key - unless your enemy fears ruthless reprisal, they have no incentive whatsoever to adhere to "civilized" conventions of warfare. We need to start fighting wars the way they have been fought for millenia, not the way they have been fought for the last 50 years or so. And we need not fear these islamo wacko's like the Russians. Most of them live in huts and shit in their back yards. We need to remember why we adopted "civilized" warefare in the first place - fear of repraisal. I think a few months of no holds barred warfare would end the Mid-East cycle of violence, and probably in the long run save alot of civilian and military lives. More to the point, I have often thought that Isreal should have expelled all of the Palestinians in 1967 from the West Bank, Gaza and Sinai. Expel (or kill) the Israelis is exactly what the Arabs would have done had they been successful at the time (you'll recall from history that they were massing on Israel's borders for an attack to "push it into the sea"). Israeli "restraint" is a big part of the muslim fundamentalist problem today. American "restraint" is an even bigger part.

4:44 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home