OK. I vented. Writing “Indecision” so I could ask 2 questions.
With public beheadings of Americans at an all time high, Obama is about to increase air attacks on ISIS (he has no choice). There will also be an international coalition of ground forces (I hope).
My question is this: When ISIS militants hide in schools, churches, mosques, hospitals, and homes and use civilians as shields, what will be OUR explanation for unintended casualties? Remember, it was Ben Rhodes, Deputy National Security Advisor, who said to Israel, “You can always do more.” Hmmm, really? The last time we were attacked stateside, was 9/11. All we did was go to war with Iraq and Afghanistan. We counted civilian deaths in the 10s of thousands. The time before that was Dec 7th. All WE did was enter WW II and end it by dropping the A bomb killing 200 thousand civilians. I don’t remember any discussion about a disproportionate response. But, I suppose, we could have done more.
Second. Why do we ask of Israel what we will not do ourselves? No one suggests that we, or anyone, negotiate with ISIS. Yet we, and the rest of the world, insist, demand that Israel negotiate with Hamas. The similarities between the two are striking. Both: would like to establish a caliphate; gain power thru savagery and fear; indoctrinate their youth with values of terror; use civilian shields; will slaughter anyone, even their own, who get in their way; use Sharia to justify barbaric treatment of women, homosexuals, infidels, and apostates.
Why does the world call for Israeli restraint but US action? Please don’t misunderstand. As I have said before, I am just short of going over to the dark side, the just-nuke-em side. I would gladly close my eyes while someone dropped ebola on ISIS. No problem. But my question remains. It demands restraint from Israel and criticizes Obama for the same. Why? If the US is entitled to take out ISIS because they threaten to fly their flag over the White House, why isn’t Israel entitled to take out Hamas whose Charter calls for its “obliteration?” Why the double standard?
I have argued that Obama’s naïveté and meek, misguided “no strategy” strategy- his policy of restraint and containment only emboldens ISIS (Iran, N. Korea, and Russia are watching). While Obama is assessing, observing, changing his calculus, ISIS is getting richer, larger, stronger, and more organized. The time for waiting is over. They must be destroyed….now!
“…their conflict is nothing more than a quarrel in a faraway country between people of whom we know nothing.”
Who do you think said that? Obama? Biden? Hagel? Nope. Neville Chamberlain. The American Consulate in Libya and the growth of ISIS are as much shrines to Obama’s indecision and weakness as the blitzkrieg and that railway car was to Chamberlain. Hitler would have been easier to defeat in ’35 than ’39. ISIS will be easier to defeat over there than over here. The day of ISIS’s destruction must be soon. FDR and Churchill knew that the job of a great power is to bring that day closer.
I’m venting again….sorry. Back to my dilemma.
Some have told me that Obama can’t act because of public opinion. After the 12 years of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, Americans are tired of war. Well, you know what, after 66 years of wars with Arabs, Israelis are tired too. I’ve had enough of this double standard. It’s one set of rules for Israel and another set for everyone else.
There are only two possibilities. This is either moral idiocy or thinly veiled anti-Semitism. It treats self-respect as arrogance and self-defense as aggression. It makes demands of Israel that would be dismissed out-of-hand anywhere else. The answers to my questions are obvious. I wonder what newspeak the world will spin this time to justify this latest round of Israel-bashing.
“The truth is incontrovertible. Malice may attack it. Ignorance may deride it. But, in the end, there it is.” -Winston Churchill
