Aug 272006
 
Authors: By Jason Hoskin Daily Trojan USC

(U-WIRE) LOS ANGELES – It is difficult to imagine how anyone could fail to support Israel’s actions in the recent conflict in the Middle East.

Hezbollah has invaded Israeli territory to kidnap Israeli soldiers whom they still hold hostage.

It has initiated an unprovoked attack by launching 4,000 Iranian-built rockets on Israel that specifically targeted civilians — attacks that resulted in the deaths of 55 Israeli civilians, as well as more than 2,000 wounded, 300,000 displaced and nearly 1 million living in bomb shelters.

At the root, Hezbollah does not even have the semblance of a grievance against Israel. Israel had withdrawn from southern Lebanon in 2000, which it occupied in response to Arab aggression. Imagine the world reaction if any people other than the Jews were so violated without provocation. Imagine the clamor for Bush to respond if missiles were launched on American cities from, say, Cuba.

It’s clear that Hezbollah’s actions are motivated by blatant anti-Semitism. The current leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, refers to the Jews as “a cancer which is liable to spread again at any moment.” Hezbollah cites the elimination of the “Zionist entity” as its founding objective. Consistent with this, Nasrallah is on record as saying that he is “against any reconciliation with Israel” and that the current conflict “… is an open war until the elimination of Israel and until the death of the last Jew on Earth.”

A common criticism of Israel is that even though it has a right to defend itself against aggression, it responded “disproportionately” to the attacks.

But wars are not won by “proportionate” responses. If proportionality were the guiding rule of combat, then by definition every war would be a never-ending stalemate.

The day-and-night bombing of Germany during World War II, the atomic bombing of Japan, were not “proportionate,” but they did save Europe, Asia and the United States from fascism.

The utter destruction of the South by Gen. William Tecumseh Sherman during the Civil War similarly was disproportionate, but it ended slavery and preserved the Union.

Rather, a defensive war such as the Israeli action in southern Lebanon should have one goal — in this case, the removal of the Hezbollah threat as quickly as possible. Indeed, the fact that Hezbollah is not completely destroyed and still possesses some 8,000 missiles like the ones already launched toward its neighbor is an indication that Israel did not complete its attack with sufficient ferocity.

It has also been argued that Israel had no right to invade the territory of a sovereign nation. But the government of Lebanon has refused to abide by United Nations Security Council Resolution 1559, passed nearly two years ago requiring that Lebanon deploy its military for the purpose of disarming Hezbollah.

Recently, Lebanon’s U.N. ambassador announced that 15,000 Lebanese soldiers together with a similar-sized international U.N. force will be dispatched to south Lebanon, but with the caveat that the troops “are not going to use force” to disarm the Hezbollah militia that has been battling Israel.

If this isn’t enough, let us not forget that Hezbollah is represented in the Lebanese parliament. Given the refusal by the Lebanese government to take control of its own territory and stop these terrorists, the Lebanese government has made itself complicit in these attacks. Israel has every right to invade Lebanon for the purpose of destroying Hezbollah and preserve its own existence.

The enemies of Israel, emasculated by cultural relativism, are desperate to portray some aspect of Hezbollah in a positive light, despite its aggression; I’ve even heard the argument that mercy and restraint should be shown toward Hezbollah since it has been a beneficent force in Lebanon, building infrastructure including hospitals and schools.

By this argument, one could say that the Nazis, although they initiated monstrous violence against the rest of the world, were at least concerned with the welfare of the German people, since their economic policies (allegedly) resulted in an end to hyperinflation and unemployment.

These economic results did solidify popular support for the party. But those who are willing to violate the rights of their own citizens should not be expected to be concerned about their own.

Adolf Hitler had no compunction about sacrificing millions of his own citizens. In the days following the Normandy landings, for example, young children and aging men — this demographic group comprising some of the few Germans still alive to fight — were drafted and ordered to fight to the last man in order to stave off the Allied forces despite the fact that defeat was inevitable.

In fact, according to eminent journalist William Shirer, Hitler believed that the German people deserved destruction if they could not fulfill his lust for conquest.

As with the fascists in Europe, the Islamofascists in Lebanon showed their true colors by the strategies they employed in their invasion of Israel.

Hezbollah chose to launch their rocket attacks from heavily populated areas, using Lebanese civilians as human shields to discourage counter attack.

In the event of inevitable civilian casualties that resulted from these counter attacks, Hezbollah can then vilify the Israelis by drawing attention to the carnage Hezbollah is itself responsible for. Hezbollah benefits no one, not even its own people.

Israel should be permitted and encouraged to wipe them from the face of the Earth.

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.