Give War a Chance
That's the title of
Michael Goodwin's column in this morning's NY Daily News.
The message sent is that terrorists could essentially call 'Time Out' everytime they were getting bloodied. The message sent would be that terrorists would be endless opportunities to cry "Cease-fire" whenever they needed to regroup. As must as I hate seeing the pictures of innocent civilians dying, I'd hate giving Hezbollah the opportunity to regroup and re-arm even more.
President Bush is exactly right in essentially saying "Give war a chance." Weren't we told ages ago that the so-called 'Arab Street' respected winners? Doesn't caving into Hezbollah's demands make them the de facto winners? Why give them that victory?
It's also time to call out the international press on their blaming Israel for the loss of civilian lives. Hezbollah has a history of setting up shop where they've got an abundant supply of human shields, shield they use: (a) to protect themselves with and (b) as propaganda tools to the West. Therefore, it's only logical that they be blamed for starting wars, retreating behind human shields, thereby endangering innocent civilians.
When you think about it, isn't that a valid argument that they shouldn't be accorded Geneva Convention protections? It seems to me that they don't deserve those protections.
At the end of the day, Hezbollah needs to be destroyed and Iran and Syria must pay a price for their complicity in supplying terrorists with Katyushas and other rockets.
At the end of the day, the only that happens is if we give war a chance.
Posted Sunday, July 23, 2006 5:28 PM
June 2006 Posts
No comments.
Like a schoolyard bully who deserves a thorough butt-kicking, Hezbollah needs to be taught a lesson. It can either learn to live in peace, or it can die. But it cannot win by playing the terror card and it cannot be allowed to think it's going to.Goodwin is right on the money with that analysis. In light of Goodwin's analysis, President Bush's resistance to calls for working diplomatically towards a cease-fire that, at best, would be uneven, looks brilliant. A ceasefire would be disastrous for Israel. Pressuring Israel into a ceasefire would be inhumane to Israel's population.
The message sent is that terrorists could essentially call 'Time Out' everytime they were getting bloodied. The message sent would be that terrorists would be endless opportunities to cry "Cease-fire" whenever they needed to regroup. As must as I hate seeing the pictures of innocent civilians dying, I'd hate giving Hezbollah the opportunity to regroup and re-arm even more.
President Bush is exactly right in essentially saying "Give war a chance." Weren't we told ages ago that the so-called 'Arab Street' respected winners? Doesn't caving into Hezbollah's demands make them the de facto winners? Why give them that victory?
It's also time to call out the international press on their blaming Israel for the loss of civilian lives. Hezbollah has a history of setting up shop where they've got an abundant supply of human shields, shield they use: (a) to protect themselves with and (b) as propaganda tools to the West. Therefore, it's only logical that they be blamed for starting wars, retreating behind human shields, thereby endangering innocent civilians.
When you think about it, isn't that a valid argument that they shouldn't be accorded Geneva Convention protections? It seems to me that they don't deserve those protections.
At the end of the day, Hezbollah needs to be destroyed and Iran and Syria must pay a price for their complicity in supplying terrorists with Katyushas and other rockets.
At the end of the day, the only that happens is if we give war a chance.
Posted Sunday, July 23, 2006 5:28 PM
June 2006 Posts
No comments.
