The Libya Ruse

Libya and its allies in the Middle East would like you to believe Muammar Ghadafy has had a change of heart and has simply decided unilaterally to abandon the development of nuclear warheads and other weapons of mass destruction.

Libya has found a good place to hide its weapons of mass destruction and feels comfortable they can never be found by international arms inspectors;

Libya is fearful it may be next on the hit list of terror-supporting countries in the Middle East.

Whatever the motivations for the announcement, and no matter how much validity there is to what Ghadafy says, one thing is certain: The move will be used as leverage to launch a new propaganda assault against Israel's nuclear arsenal.

There is little doubt in anyone's mind that Israel possesses sufficient nuclear warheads and delivery systems to destroy every capital in the Arab world.

Of course, Israel has never been considered a threat by anyone to launch a nuclear attack against any of its neighbors unless its very existence was threatened. Israel has an excellent track record in this respect. It has fought several major conventional wars where it was outnumbered and outgunned by its enemies, but it never resorted to using non-conventional weapons.

But mark my words. You are about to see the international pressure raised on Israel to abandon nuclear weapons. You are about to see the Arab powers try to shift focus from their weapons programs to Israel's existing nuclear arsenal. You are about to see this become another issue used by the "international community" to batter the beleaguered Jewish state.

There is a difference, of course, between a nuclear weapons program by Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia or Syria and one by Israel.

No one in his right mind would trust Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia or Syria with nuclear arms or other weapons of mass destruction. And Israel has proven it can be trusted.

There's also a good reason for wanting Israel to remain armed with nuclear weapons. They ensure that no foreign enemy will ever be able to destroy Israel in war – and that is a good thing. It is one of the reasons we have seen no major Arab-Israeli war in 30 years.

We need to be able to make moral distinctions between Israel and its Arab neighbors. We cannot begin to treat them as if they are moral equivalents. They are not. Israel is a pro-Western, self-governing, free nation – the only one in the region. Israel's Arab neighbors are largely anti-American, anti-Jewish, anti-Christian dictatorships.

To make it even simpler, one side in this conflict is basically good and the other is basically evil.

I say this with no racial or ethnic animosity whatsoever – but as an Arab-American.

Israel's enemies – and they include many other nations throughout the world besides the Arabs – will do anything, say anything, try anything to defeat the Jewish state. They tried conventional arms in four major wars. They tried to build non-conventional weapons. They tried propaganda. They tried the unconventional approach of guerrilla war and terrorism.

Campaigning like a group of Greenpeace activists will almost certainly be the next ploy.

Muammar Ghadafy has been nominated to star in this latest production on the international stage.

Don't be confused. Just as it is perfectly logical, perfectly moral and perfectly necessary for American to employ the world's largest nuclear arsenal, it is also logical, moral and necessary for Israel to maintain the largest nuclear arsenal in the Middle East.

Excellent article.

I guess giving the bully on the block a bloody nose works.

But it works better when you do it with a left jab while holding a Louisville Slugger, menacingly in your right hand.

Israel will not give up their nukes. It's that simple. They'd be incredibly stupid to do so.........and the Israelis are not incredibly stupid.

No, I'd say ol' Mo has been feeling his mortality of late. He started settling down when cruise missiles landed in his tent and has been quaking ever since. Combine that with the devastation of his country's economy, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the capture of Saddam, the dismantling of the Taliban, the vice grip ever-tightening around Al Quaeda, etc., etc.........then I say he's out to save his skin. He has seen hard proof of what we do to regimes that cross us and wants no part of it.

IOW, it's FAR more to his benefit to play nice with the U.S. than to side with regimes that have brought nothing but death and misery upon themselves and their allies.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.