- Let’s Give War A Chance -

[abu afak]

Let’s Give War A Chance
April 21, 2002
by Tom Barrett


It’s time for a history lesson. This is not the first time civilized nations have suffered at the hands of savages dispatching suicide bombers. By the summer of 1945, the Allies had already beaten Hitler’s Germany. But World War Two was not over. Japan was proving to be a difficult foe to vanquish because of its Kamikaze pilots.

During the waning months of World War Two, 2,198 Japanese Kamikaze pilots intentionally died while sinking 34 American ships and damaging 288 others. Each plane contained a full load of explosives and a fanatical pilot bent on suicide. The planes took off with fuel tanks only half full. There was no turning back.

Yasser Arafat doesn’t have airplanes, but like the generals and admirals who controlled Japan during World War Two, he has no shortage of young fanatics willing to die for their religion. However, the idea of using Japanese Kamikaze pilots, mostly teenagers, was conceived out of desperation in October of 1944 as a last-ditch effort to win a war. Arafat plans ahead. He begins training his suicide bombers in kindergarten by extolling the virtues of martyrdom to four- and five-year-old children.

There are distinct differences between the Arab and Japanese suicide murderers, in both the targets of their murderous acts and in their motives. The Japanese dive-bombed military targets. The Arabs are too cowardly to face trained soldiers, so they mostly target civilians. A graduate of the Kamikaze school relates that the teenage pilots hoped their acts would save their homeland from invasion by stopping the Allied military. The Islamic fundamentalists practice pure terrorism.

One major difference between the leaders is that when Emperor Hirohito realized that suicide bombers, although they had inflicted numerous casualties, were no match for the US technological and moral advantages, he persuaded the military to end the war. Hirohito loved his people and realized it had to stop. Israel also has technological and moral advantages, but Arafat would rather see his cities destroyed and his people killed, than give up. Arafat loves only himself.

There are also many similarities between the Kamikaze pilots and the treacherous Palestinian bombers, fanaticism being the most notable. In “Echoes of Another War,” BBC’s Chris Summers relates the story of a young Japanese man who was turned away from the Kamikaze program because he had a wife and children. “A few days later his wife drowned herself and her children, leaving him free to complete his mission.” Today we see women starting to follow their men on the same mad path to suicide among Arafat’s disciples.

In both religious traditions, martyrdom is glorified. The Japanese were promised that their souls would reside in the sacred Yasukuni Shrine in the center of Tokyo. Islamic boys are told that they will wake up in paradise with 72 virgins anxious to serve their every whim. An interesting contrast between these false religions and Christianity: They promise eternal rewards for murder, while God promises His children eternal rewards for obeying His Word, which forbids murder.

There are also similarities between the cowards who send their young people to their deaths. The military leaders of Japan sent Kamikaze pilots against Allied forces in order to secure their own safety. But when atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and they realized that Tokyo would be next, they quickly surrendered.

Arafat, who cheerfully sends young boys and girls to die for him, often publicly declares his desire to be a martyr for Allah. But whenever it appears that Allah might take him up on his offer, this spineless murderer cowers behind mosques or women, begging the international community to save him. I wonder what would happen if the United States stayed out of Israel’s affairs long enough for Israel to give Arafat the same kind of attitude adjustment we gave the Taliban?

Herein lies the hypocrisy of the United States of America. We did exactly the right thing following 9/11. We gave the Taliban the chance to turn over bin Laden. When they refused, we went in and did everything possible to root out the terrorists and their breeding grounds. We said we would find the terrorists wherever they might hide and destroy them, and we did so.

Now we have the temerity to tell Israel that, faced with exactly the same situation, they should not do exactly the same thing we did. Based on population, in the last twelve months Israel has suffered eight times as many civilian murders by terrorists as has the U.S. Imagine our reaction if 24,000 Americans had been killed on 9/11. That is proportionally what Israel has suffered.

If any authority, the United Nations for instance, were to tell America that we did not have the right to defend ourselves against terrorism, the outcry from our citizens would be deafening. Why, then, do we passively stand by and allow our Secretary of State to make such pronouncements as, “Israel should heed the President’s injunction to remove their forces from Palestinian areas.” Since when did the United States have the authority to issue injunctions to a sovereign nation?

(Memo to President Bush: You have repeatedly stated that any government or leader that even gives aid to terrorists should be removed. Yet you send Secretary of State Powell to meet with Arafat, an act that bolstered the prestige of a man who had lost the respect of everyone, including other Arabs. The doctrine of the United States has always been that we do not negotiate with terrorists. Yet you are negotiating with the master of the terrorists, who has never renounced terrorism. Is an alien occupying your body? Lately you don’t sound like the George W. Bush we know and love.)

Dr. Henry M. Rubinstein, who wrote to our “Comments” email address recently said it better than I could. “The U.S. needs to butt out. Jews will have no love lost with the rest of the world if they take care of the Arab garbage problem that the U.N. created in 1948. If that means America blackmails Israel by withholding aid to Israel, so be it. America did not take the Jews out of Egypt, fight the Arabs in 1948, or pay for any of it. Keep pushing Israel to the wall and you will be buying your oil from Israel.”

When Japan attacked Pearl Harbor, we didn’t start a “Peace Process.” When bin Laden killed thousands of Americans last September, we didn’t send the Secretary of State to find out what his grievances were. There can be no fruitful negotiations with people who have stated over and over their intention to annihilate the other party to the negotiations. Even “moderate” Arab nations (there’s an oxymoron for you) like our “friends” Saudi Arabia and Egypt have expressed support for murdering Jews.

The Arabs see negotiations and cease-fires as nothing more than time to rest up and reload for their next murderous assault. The Israelis have never lost a war with Arabs. The Palestinians are depending on the U.S. to keep Israel from winning this war. (And make no mistake about it - it is a war.) The purpose of many wars has been to restore social order where chaos has destroyed society. If there is any place in the world where chaos reigns today, it is certainly Israel.

The Arabs don’t want to experience the humiliation of facing Israel’s well-trained, disciplined and motivated troops again. If we stop meddling, faced with Israel’s superior forces, the children of Ishmael will back down very quickly. Israel once beat back the Arab world in six days; this time they might do it even more quickly. We’ve given “The Peace Process” a chance for decades, and we have thousands of dead Israelis and Palestinians to show for it. I say it’s time to give war a chance."

http://www.conservativetruth.org/article.php?id=561

[Disraeli]

In the words of another British Prime Minister and believe me as an Irish man, I'm not prone to quoting British Prime Ministers.

"Jaw jaw, is better then war war".

--Winston Churchill.

[Formula]

Originally posted by Disraeli
In the words of another British Prime Minister and believe me as an Irish man, I'm not prone to quoting British Prime Ministers.

"Jaw jaw, is better then war war".

--Winston Churchill.

I think that the potential benefits of conciliation or negotiation have already been exhausted.

[Disraeli]

So seriously what do you suggest?

Complete extermination of an entire people, in the Palestinians?

Israel would never be allowed to do that, in reality and mass deportation similarly, would never be permitted in this day and age.

Really all the occupation is doing is drawing the conflict out.

I find no logic to suggest that the occupation 'protects' Israeli citizens, quite the opposite in fact and blasely stating that "War is the only alternative" rings hollow for me when you are speaking of what effectively amounts to a third world country in Palestine.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by Disraeli
So seriously what do you suggest?

Complete extermination of an entire people, in the Palestinians?

Israel would never be allowed to do that, in reality and mass deportation similarly, would never be permitted in this day and age.

Really all the occupation is doing is drawing the conflict out.

I find no logic to suggest that the occupation 'protects' Israeli citizens, quite the opposite in fact and blasely stating that "War is the only alternative" rings hollow for me when you are speaking of what effectively amounts to a third world country in Palestine.

Strawman.

Here is the basic problem. A 'free' Palestine represents one of the three legs of Arafat's publically stated plan. The other two being complete control over all of Jerusalem and unlimited acceptance of all Palestinians into Israel.

Other than that the logistics are thus:

Say what you want, a free Palestine is an ethnically cleansed Palestine wiped clean of all Jews. Not all that remarkable in and of itself but let's be clear that's what you're cheering on.

Second a free Palestine has a 700 something mile border with Israel - no one can manage that now so what makes you think it magically changes tomorrow?

Third what are the issues behind the logistics of creating this Jew free Paradise apart from the mechanics of completing this task. And when/if this is done we're still left with a country (Palestine) that is little better off with no preparation or infrastructure designed to actually run a state in lieu of simply committing terrorist acts. Everyone seems to think that the lion will lie down with the lamb, magically. Where does that come from?

[Disraeli]

Originally posted by Mediocrates
A 'free' Palestine represents one of the three legs of Arafat's publically stated plan.

Just because 'one single man' happens to state it as his wish, does not give sufficient justification to thwart the wishes of millions of people. Next.

The other two being complete control over all of Jerusalem

Palestine should have control over Palestinian (read Muslim) areas and Israel should have control over Israeli (read Jewish) areas.

unlimited acceptance of all Palestinians into Israel.

Therein lies the problem. Why should one be barred from returning to one's homeland (that happens to be inside Israel) based on one's religion? Why should it be the case that only Jewish people have this supposed right of return (when you don't have to have lived in Israel to 'return'), in effect why should the Palestinians be held in lesser esteem then Jewish people?

"If you tickle us do we not laugh"

Say what you want, a free Palestine is an ethnically cleansed Palestine wiped clean of all Jews. Not all that remarkable in and of itself but let's be clear that's what you're cheering on.

Is it really though? How do I know that? All I can see is the Israeli army, standing on the Palestinians, without respite, I accept that there are fundamentalists on the Palestinian side as on the Israeli side, but the fundamentalists are just that, fundementalist, it is the moderates who makes peace in the end after the wars have been fought and the treaties signed, it is the moderates who find the common ground to move forward.

Second a free Palestine has a 700 something mile border with Israel - no one can manage that now so what makes you think it magically changes tomorrow?

Life is imperfect, the supposed security crisis that fruition of a Palestinian State would create, supposes the burdon lies with Israel to police Palestine, when in fact enforcing Israeli 'security' onto all of Palestine because of the transgressions of 'terrorists' is in fact brutal and inhumane.

Third what are the issues behind the logistics of creating this Jew free Paradise apart from the mechanics of completing this task. And when/if this is done we're still left with a country (Palestine) that is little better off with no preparation or infrastructure designed to actually run a state in lieu of simply committing terrorist acts. Everyone seems to think that the lion will lie down with the lamb, magically. Where does that come from?

I simply don't accept that the Palestinians are not fit to govern themselves and 'somehow' need the occupation, that is a defunct argument as far as I can tell. The Palestinian people deserve access to a mechanism of self determination (via plebiscite) and self governance derived from the same, not life under the rule of an Israeli army boot, to an allegory.

[rhodescholar]

Originally posted by Disraeli
So seriously what do you suggest?

Complete extermination of an entire people, in the Palestinians?

Israel would never be allowed to do that, in reality and mass deportation similarly, would never be permitted in this day and age.

Really all the occupation is doing is drawing the conflict out.

I find no logic to suggest that the occupation 'protects' Israeli citizens, quite the opposite in fact and blasely stating that "War is the only alternative" rings hollow for me when you are speaking of what effectively amounts to a third world country in Palestine.

U r clearly suffering from the propaganda of western europe, also called things like the BBC, etc.

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN OCCUPAITON IN THE WEST BANK.

For 8 years, the PA ruled over the lives of 96% of the WB arabs. There was still terrorism.

In 2000 israel sat down and made an offer of peace , or at least a starting point of peace, and was met with a severe, violent uprising. When people say that sharon fans the flames to keep the conflict going, rember how many pronouncements made by arafat and his aides that the uprising was pre-planned to obtain more concessions from barak.

And lastly, if you ever read any news beside the BBC, you would realize that THERE ARE MANY MASS DEPORTATIONS TODAY.

In the congo, armenia, indonesia, etc. Armenia deported all of its muslims, and IS A BETTER, MORE PEACEFUL COUNTRY FOR IT. It suffered some absurd sanctions for a while, and is doing better than ever, now that the dime-a-dozen "ANGRY MUSLIM INSURGENCY," typical to all nations with a sizable muslim population must endure, have ceased.

Given the insane violence that the West Bank arabs (noone on this earth can EVER convince me that there is such a thing as a "palestinian") have perpatrated on israelis, any other nation would have expelled them LONG AGO.

Stop listening ot the nonsensical propaganda; its utter bullsh-t that a mythical "occupation" has anything to do with the conflict. IT DOESNT.

[Mediocrates]

No one says they are unable to govern themselves merely that the tyrants who are in charge now are unfit for either the security of the Palestinians or Israel.

As far as repatriation is concerned the key problems are thus:

One
under the original UN controls there were virtually no records of who was and who was not 'Palestinian at the time of the foundation of Israel. They, the UN left it open for self description. That is, they created a unique definition which said that anyone who wanted to make a claim that they had lived there in the prior two years, w/o documentation could claim that right.

Two
at the foundation of Israel there was a mixture of people leaving on their own and others being pushed out. So it's impossible to tell what from what even by their own strange definition.

Three
No one can make a convincing case that legally, refugee status can be inherited ad infinitum. We don't have any standard and every distinct case on earth in modern history is unique. I for example had ancestors who were packed on boats in Belfast and sent to the new world against their will (or at gunpoint, take your pick) Should I petition the UN to force Tony Blair to give me a condo today?

[Raphy]

God bless you, wish to God many more like you will enter these forums and open up the eyes to all the blinded people i the world.
That's what exactly puzzled the Arabs and the Europeans. There are over 1 Billion Muslims in the world ( they keep bragging that they are the fastest growing religion, big deal!!!), they have Terrorist groups of every type, they have made Trillions in oil revenues, they have Europe scared, and oddly enough, only Little Israel is keeping them at bay. They have tried boycotts, blacklisting, wars, terrorism and the new Shahids, and nothing helps them. They are simply barcking at the wrong tree. Their problems emanate from their defunct governments and societies,
where most are still being kept in situations similar to the middle ages. They do bragg about having invented Algebra, but that's where they are still stuck, while the rest of the modern world, Israel included are in another sphere in theoretical math and sciences. They have not had a single Innovation the last few hunderds of years, and certainely no Noble Prizes.
In Hebrew we say:" YOU JUDGE THE POWER OF A COUNTRY BY IT'S MATHEMATICAL QUOTIENT ", and theirs is not that impressive.
Fully concurring with you, if the USA just let's Sharon take care of the Palestinians, it will be over in a very short period. A small fraction of the real Israeli power has ben used up to now, imagine what can be done if the real 3500 strong Israeli tank Corp is unleashed on them!!!!!
Yes Europe is catering to the Arabs because of their oil, but the European Economies can be brought to a halt if Israel is put in a bad situation. Just looking at the Middle East map, any person with some brains can easily see how Israel is sitting smack in the epicenter of all that oil, meaning they could easily be lit by a salvo of Jericho Missiles. Let's not forget the Assouan Dam. And let's not forget also about the Jerichos aimed at Germany and Austria, just a pay up for the Holocaust.
It's not a problem between the Israelis and the Arabs, but a much bigger one between the Muslim World and the West where they are sure they can forcefully convert us all to Islam.
Can you see someone like Mullah Omar the one eyed Taliban ruling our lives?

[peacelover]

Originally posted by Disraeli

Palestine should have control over Palestinian (read Muslim) areas and Israel should have control over Israeli (read Jewish) areas.

Is it really that easy though? There are many disputed areas, and many ares that Israel claims for security reasons it cannot allow into the Palestinians' hands - I do not have a big enough grasp of geography to assess the validity of such a claim.

Therein lies the problem. Why should one be barred from returning to one's homeland (that happens to be inside Israel) based on one's religion? Why should it be the case that only Jewish people have this supposed right of return (when you don't have to have lived in Israel to 'return'), in effect why should the Palestinians be held in lesser esteem then Jewish people?

This comes down to whether or not you want Israel to exist. The bare facts are that if you allow right of return, then Israel cannot exist as a Jewish state. Personally, I think after all they have been through the Jewish people deserve to have their own land. My Grandmother was a Palestinian refugee forced from her home in 48, so I am sensitive to the fact that Israel did not come into existence without injustice to the Palestinians, but there is a direct conflict of interests, and that means compromise. And compromise, as we all know, means no one gets it entirely their way.

Also, will Jewish people forced from Arab countries at that time get right of return?

Is it really though? How do I know that? All I can see is the Israeli army, standing on the Palestinians, without respite, I accept that there are fundamentalists on the Palestinian side as on the Israeli side, but the fundamentalists are just that, fundementalist, it is the moderates who makes peace in the end after the wars have been fought and the treaties signed, it is the moderates who find the common ground to move forward.

Amen to your point about the moderates, but can you point me to the moderate Palestinian voice coming from the West Bank?

I simply don't accept that the Palestinians are not fit to govern themselves and 'somehow' need the occupation, that is a defunct argument as far as I can tell. The Palestinian people deserve access to a mechanism of self determination (via plebiscite) and self governance derived from the same, not life under the rule of an Israeli army boot, to an allegory.

True, but Israel is unlikely to give it to them when it fears it will be met with more violence and terror. I guess this depends on whether you believe that the occupation alone is the source of terror, and that once it stops, the Palestinians will lie down and live happily in peace as Israel's neighbours. If you don't believe this though, and I don't, then you can understand why Israel doesn't really want them to rule themselves - it could well be suicide.

[Jako]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by rhodescholar

"THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS AN OCCUPAITON IN THE WEST BANK."


Wow, I don't even know how to touch that one. I suppose all the tanks and checkpoints are for aesthetic value? I suppose all the barbed wire fences and Armored Personnel Carriers are just for the tourists? You're technically correct, since it's not an "Occupation" it's an "Illegal Occupation" (hey, ask the U.N.).


"Armenia deported all of its muslims, and IS A BETTER, MORE PEACEFUL COUNTRY FOR IT. It suffered some absurd sanctions for a while, and is doing better than ever, now that the dime-a-dozen "ANGRY MUSLIM INSURGENCY," typical to all nations with a sizable muslim population must endure, have ceased."

Pure vitriolic racism here. An "angry muslim insurgency" is "typical to all nations with a sizable muslim population". The KKK would be proud of you.

"Given the insane violence that the West Bank arabs (noone on this earth can EVER convince me that there is such a thing as a "palestinian") have perpatrated on israelis, any other nation would have expelled them LONG AGO."

We may have different versions of insane violence. While I agree that strapping explosives to yourself and murdering potential innocents is insane, here's a few more examples (IDF) I can think of:

1) Firing rifles into crowds of unarmed civilians.
2) Firing mortar shells at groups of CHILDREN throwing ROCKS at TANKS.
3) Preventing ambulances from reaching wounded people.
4) Jenin.


"Stop listening ot the nonsensical propaganda; its utter bullsh-t that a mythical "occupation" has anything to do with the conflict. IT DOESNT."

Is it propaganda if it is true?

And before I get the first salvo of "Anti-Semite", let me say that I like and respect many Jews, but I am opposed to Zionist propaganda and the continuing Human Rights abuses that happen every single day in the Occupied Territories.

[Mediocrates]

But clearly one sided nonetheless. Human rights are AOK for people you actually believe to be human I suppose which may or may not include people on the other side of the Green Line. I don't know, I'm not sure. At any rate I'm always fascinated by human rights advocates who, as human beings themselves are biased and flawed, but instead of just admitting they have a preference they cloak it in grand language and pseudo legal claptrappery. It's not bad to have a preference, just be honest about it.

We all talk about 'understanding' the sound and the fury of people who push their own kids into a riot into the paths of tanks and into crowded builds while bombs are strapped to them.

Really? I don't know whether that's the 'soft bigotry of low expectations' or simply a romantic notion founded on their own love of the underdog. Either way it is not useful. The last time I checked blowing up some Russian teenagers could not be confused in the fog of war with some kind of military action. The last time I checked a three man sniper squad killing 6 reservists at a checkpoint was not some spontaneous upwelling of people yearning to be free.

No it's called a dirty war. And a dirty war it shall be. So while you gnash and moan about human rights let's be clear that it's a code word for some peoples' human rights and some peoples' justification for mayhem. Just so we're clear.

Thanks.

[Jako]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mediocrates
" Human rights are AOK for people you actually believe to be human I suppose which may or may not include people on the other side of the Green Line. I don't know, I'm not sure. At any rate I'm always fascinated by human rights advocates who, as human beings themselves are biased and flawed, but instead of just admitting they have a preference they cloak it in grand language and pseudo legal claptrappery."

Um, I'm unsure as to what you mean, is that an assertion that Palestinians are not human? ?


"No it's called a dirty war. And a dirty war it shall be. So while you gnash and moan about human rights let's be clear that it's a code word for some peoples' human rights and some peoples' justification for mayhem. Just so we're clear."

How about I lay it out simply for you. Murder is murder. Whether it's Palestinian killing Israeli or the other way around. Each life is just as important as the other. Whether it's a "retaliatory incursion" into a heavily populated area where people are randomly sniped and their homes bulldozed over, or a single suicide bomber.

If you think for ONE SECOND that you can justify the kind of disproportionate killing that goes on in the Occupied Territories in the name of all Israelis (which is sad, because many are opposed to it), all I can say is dress warm for the afterlife.

It's mostly politicized, and due to the Israeli government, not your average Israeli citizen. Much due to Ariel Sharon I would imagine, too (Hi Ariel, remember Sabra and Chatila, they are warming up a chair in the Hague for you as I write this).

This kind of blindness saddens me. This kind of stupid hatred annoys me. It's a huge amount of paranoia to an extent. Everyone wants the same thing, to be able to live, love, and prosper in peace and freedom. Jews, Arabs, Christians, probably even Raelians (;

[Mediocrates]

If you think for one second that terrorism, statehood, murder, national identity and freedom fighting are interchangeable synonyms you are fatally wrong. And the longer that people fail to make distinctions about right and wrong and insist instead on some kind of perverted potlatch where the biggest loser must be right and just then those people are just more rocks in the gears of making any progress at all.

It's all well and good to do good works for people in need. That's not at all the same things as ascribing a moral dimension to suffering. And that my friend is not blindness it's practical reality. You're right, everyone wants to live in peace, prosperity etc etc. Except of course for the people who don't and would prefer to keep terrorism running so as to preserve their own power and importance. How many years has the PA been duplicitous and fast and loose with the truth? How long have Palestinians lived in bad neighborhoods aka camps surrounded by other Palestinians and UN workers? How long have Palestinians lived in bad neighborhoods aka camps inside of Jordan, Lebanon, Syria ostensibly free of the yoke of 'Zionist Oppression?'

As long as you cry about the results but look elsewhere for a fix you are the problem. It's really that simple.

[Jako]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Mediocrates
[B]"If you think for one second that terrorism, statehood, murder, national identity and freedom fighting are interchangeable synonyms you are fatally wrong."

Terrorism and freedom fighting are in fact interchangeable. Against the Soviets, the mujaheddin were "freedom fighters". Against the U.S. force occupying Afghanistan they are "terrorists".

Same goes for "Murder" and "Terrorism". Terrorism is murder with an agenda (and if someone dies in the terrorist attack).

Personally, I think the worst type of terrorism is State-Sponsored Terrorism. The U.S. is probably the best at this, training dictators and terrorists at the School of the Americas(mostly bound for South or Central America), but Israel is a close second. Firing missiles from a helicopter into an apartment building complex to kill one man is a perfect example.


" You're right, everyone wants to live in peace, prosperity etc etc. Except of course for the people who don't and would prefer to keep terrorism running so as to preserve their own power and importance."

Who are these "people"? Do you think your average Palestinian (or average human being for that matter) wants to keep living in fear? And think to yourself who would "prefer to keep terrorism running so as to preserve their own power and importance." Sounds like the Israeli government you're talking about. The Palestinians have no power, Arafat has no importance. So I guess I agree with you on that, that some people want to keep the killings going for political gain.

"As long as you cry about the results but look elsewhere for a fix you are the problem. It's really that simple."

There is no answer elsewhere. The answer lies in Israel and Palestine. The answers lie with all the people involved, not just the spokespeople and the figureheads. The answers lie with the families of all victims of the violence on both sides.

People are able to overcome so much, especially the Jewish people over the years. It's sad that this conflict brings out the worst in Israel, because it paints a bad picture of them to the rest of the world (sometimes very undeservedly).

And unfortunately, the singlemost dangerous place in the world right now for a Jew is in Israel, which is a tragedy.