'Israel can only lose once'and there it is...
Posted on 08/18/2006 8:06:41 PM PDT by Blogger
'Israel can only lose once' Posted: August 18, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern
© 2006
During one of Israel's many wars, Golda Meir offered this famous – and tragic – observation: "The Arabs can fight, and lose, and return to fight another day. Israel can only lose once." Golda's assessment became a truism of the Middle East up until now. And the jury is still out as to whether her assessment remains true to this day.
In the strange and surreal world that is the Middle East, Israel lost its war with Hezbollah. And while it remains intact at the moment, her enemies no longer view the Jewish state as invincible. History tells us that means the current cease-fire is a temporary condition at best, and that next time, Israel will be facing a lot more than an outlaw terrorist organization like Hezbollah.
On second thought, strike that. Hezbollah is only an outlaw terrorist organization in the eyes of the United States. Europe sees Hezbollah as a radical but legitimate political party that constitutes part of Lebanon's legally elected government. The United Nations has yet, in its long history, to come up with a definition of "terrorist," let alone outlaw one.
So let's rephrase it to say that Israel will likely face a lot more formidable enemy than just Hezbollah next time. And make no mistake – there will be a "next time." Israel, for the first time in its history, failed to meet a single one of its war objectives. It meekly accepted a substandard, U.N.-imposed cease-fire, leaving Hezbollah largely intact, Hassan Nasrallah unscathed; it failed to eliminate Hezbollah's arsenal of rockets; and, worst of all, it came home without the two hostages kidnapped by Hezbollah that prompted the war in the first place.
Until now, it had been an unshakeable article of faith that Israel was capable of imposing whatever outcome it deemed necessary against any Arab force. And, until now, Israel continued to press its military advantage until it had attained its stated goals.
That is no longer the case. After a month-long war, Israeli forces limped home as Hezbollah, Syria and Iran all claimed victory against the Jewish state. It was defeated by a newly invented international "law of proportionality" that dictates Israel cannot achieve a greater victory against its enemies than its enemies are capable of inflicting upon them.
Of course, such a ridiculous law could only be imposed against Israel. The United States did not use "proportional" force against the Taliban and al-Qaida in Afghanistan in 2002. Osama bin Laden used three commercial airplanes against the United States. The United States used every weapon in its formidable arsenal, with the exception of nuclear weapons, to bomb Afghanistan further into the Stone Age than it had already been.
Were the United States to subject itself to the law of proportionality, we would have sent 19 guys with armed with box knives to exact revenge for Sept. 11. Of course, it's stupid. But it evidently didn't sound as stupid when Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice signed on to the idea and joined the U.N. in demanding a cease-fire that left Hezbollah armed, in place and able to re-arm, regroup and try again. Oh, Secretary Rice spoke great, swelling words about not maintaining the status quo, but when it got down to it, she folded up like a cheap lawn chair.
The "status quo" before Israel attacked Hezbollah had the armed terror group ensconced along Israel's borders, raiding Israeli territory at will, and killing and kidnapping any Israeli soldier within reach of its infiltrating forces, without fear of interference from the incompetent and unsympathetic UNIFIL forces ostensibly stationed there to ensure Israel's border security.
Following Israel's month-long war, Hezbollah remains intact, armed with long-range rockets, capable of attacking Israel at will without fear of interference from the UNIFIL forces still stationed there. The only difference is that Lebanon is dispatching a military force that it openly admits has no intention of either disarming Hezbollah or engaging it militarily if it decides to resume its previous infiltration or kidnapping tactics.
The U.N. has yet to put together a credible military deterrent, and so far, the only nations willing to contribute troops are overwhelmingly sympathetic to Hezbollah and Lebanon. The biggest contributor so far is France. Lebanon is a former French colony. And it is hard to imagine Paris engaging its ally to defend the Jews. France is among the most openly anti-Semitic nations in Europe.
Hezbollah acquired anti-tank weapons from Syria and Iran that decimated Israeli armor. Syria and Iran have both since claimed joint victory against Israel, along with Hezbollah, and have pledged to continue the conflict until Israel has been wiped from the map.
Hezbollah has demonstrated that total Arab defeat is not inevitable – and with this demonstration, Israel has lost its tremendous psychological advantage. If Hezbollah could hold the mighty Israeli juggernaut at bay, then the possibility that Israel could finally and decisively be wiped from the map of the Middle East by another pan-Arab army is once again feasible.
Hezbollah has emerged as a massive political force. Syria, marginalized in recent years, has re-emerged as a regional player as Hezbollah's patron. Hezbollah's victory represents a victory for Iran and the Shia. Hezbollah, a Shiite force, has done what others could not do.
This will certainly result in both Jordan and Egypt rethinking their own assumptions about the viability of another war of annihilation against Israel. In a sense, the Arabs have little to lose by taking the risk. If they win, they will have succeeded in reclaiming their lost honor in previous conflicts, with the added bonus of having rid the world of the Jewish cancer in its midst. And if they lose, they can once again count on the U.N. imposing a cease-fire in time for them to remain intact and viable.
One doesn't need a crystal ball to know that Syria and Iran will move quickly to exploit the advantage Israel's defeat at the hands of Hezbollah has given them.
This is exactly the outcome that both Damascus and Tehran had been hoping for, although they certainly didn't expect it. But now that it is a reality, Golda's words echo with haunting clarity. "The Arabs can fight, and lose, and return to fight another day. Israel can only lose once."
Biblically, I believe that Syria will be defeated before Iran. Both will be defeated however. The resounding defeat of Syria may in fact lead to the attack by Iran that leads to its own demise.
How strange! A Hal Lindsey article that makes no reference to prophecy or even religion? Has he gone secular? Maybe he's grown into a more hisorical based world view vs. his earlier writings?
For the article, and not for your comment, the same goes for the United States; one sort-of loss in Vietnam, and now other countries figure that they can outlast the Americans, and the Americans are not too confident in themselves, or openly protest the war. France behaved in a way that could be construed as cowardly in World War 2, and now is considered to be cowardly. One military defeat can have a big impact.
Ditto that.
I predict Israel will be overrun within 50 to 100 years. The one thing Israel has going for it is the United States of America. I believe within a 50 year period, probably less, the United States will no longer support Israel financially or politically. This change in US policy will happen because of the multicultural changes caused by immigration (both legal and illegal) that will render US foreign policy weak and impotent. Essentially, Israel will be left alone to fight its enemies. Either the Israelis will be massacred or have to unload with nuclear weapons because the enemy numbers will be to great to fight conventionally.
I too believe that within 50 years, Jerusalem will be overrun. But trust me, Israel has more fighting for her than her army. She will not ultimately be defeated - regardless of what happens in the US.
I'll ditto that!
Ironically, even this slogan is a misstatement. It should be "Israel cannot lose even once."
Amen to that. At church a Christian guest speaker from Israel said he has a Palestinian friend who told him how he came to the realization one day that the Palestinians were losing because they were not just fighting Israelis, they were fighting Israel's God.
'Israel can only lose once'and there it is...
This is a very good commentary by Lindsey. I do believe that Israel has bought herself a whole peck of problems with her (actually Olmert's) unwillingness to wage all-out war. The Muslim world senses blood in the water and it won't take the vultures long to begin circling. We all know that ultimately Israel will survive, but the fire is going to get much hotter.
Yes. And Yes. Damascus is mentioned specifically, and Iran is the Farsi name for Persia.
Prophetically speaking, it will happen. If not with Ahm a Nut Job and Assad, then with someone else.
I believe your overview is fully correct. Damascus being quickly transformed into a pile of rubble is not far off.
Biblically, I believe that Syria will be defeated before Iran. Both will be defeated however. ==
It is difficultier to do then to say. Iran is big 70 mlns men state armed with long range missiles. Syria is smaller but bought lot of the latest moderns from Russia. Accually Iran too. They bought lots of anti-aircraft toys with ranges up to 10 km.
If they managed to discount american air power with them then it is impossible to get them if you don't want to lose 100000+ men.
SO to defeat them it will be very difficult.
Maybe it is better to impose some kind of MAD doctrine but only for Middle East?
The Bible 'predicts' that you are 100% wrong.
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.