Posted on 08/26/2003 3:08:27 PM PDT by Davis
There's no point in grieving about the demise of the "road map" the State Department concocted and Condi Rice announced fourteen months ago. It's clear, isn't it, that the Arabs resident in Palestine and elsewhere had and have no desire for an Arab state living in peace with Israel. Their desire is the extinction of Israel and the death of Jews. They say this all the time, they teach it in school, they preach it in their mosques. There's no reason to disbelieve them since they've suited their actions to their words with perfect consistency. Why else would they dance for joy at blowing up Jews on a bus in Jerusalem?
Based as it is on a faulty premise, the road map is caput. Whatever the intentions of its patrons, it has no chance for success. It should be stacked in a corner of some storage facility along with the Kellogg-Briand peace pact, the League and United Nations charters, and other miscellaneous flummery.
The Rice road map, like the Oslo accords, was a delusion. Israel faces the same choices it has always faced. It can acquiesce in its own destruction or it can fight.
It can fight as it has been doing, selecting its targets, seeking to kill the chiefs of those who under Allah's battle banner wrap the faithful in Semtex and send them off to martyrdom aboard buses, in grocery stores and restaurants. But Israel's selective and restrained response is not likely to suffice for long. The sheiks, imams, mullahs, and ayatollahs are not likely to be discouraged. They must be persuaded by force of arms.
Israel must change the way she fights. I surely hope she does. Try this alternate road map on for size. See if it fits.
It's no secret that Israel has nuclear weapons, has had them for about forty years. It is my guess that Israel has already stashed a few of them in a number of European capitals, for safety's sake. (Putteth not all thine eggs in the one basket.) There are surely a few in Israel itself that can be made operational in say, forty-five minutes.
Of course, these are purely defensive nuclear weapons. So are the aircraft Israel will use to deliver them to their targets: Riyadh, Damascus, and Teheran. Yes, that's where their defensive capacity will have the greatest impact.
No doubt there will be an outcry. Nuking Riyadh, Damascus, and Teheran on a single day, reducing them to cinders, some will call disproportionate, excessive, maybe even uncivilized–-all that destruction merely to save "that shitty little country" as the French ambassador famously called it. So? There was a great outcry when in 1980 Israel demolished Iraq's Osirik nuclear facility. But the benefits were soon acknowledged. Outcries tend to die down pretty swiftly, and after a while, people will realize what a favor the Jews of Israel have done for the civilized world.
It is likely, too, that Israelis and other Jews will be condemned for killing the moderates of Islam along with their true enemies, militant Islam, the civilians along with the military. But you know, it can't be helped. It may be true, as Daniel Pipes says, that militant Islam is the problem and moderate Islam is the answer. He's a fine scholar and he may be right when he estimates militant Islam at between 10% and 15% of Muslim. That's a large number anyway, about 150,000,000, or thereabouts, and they're very dangerous. Why, can you imagine some of them had the chutzpah to load a truck with explosives in Syria, drive it to Baghdad, park next to UN headquarters and detonate those explosives?
It's impossible, as you know, for an embattled tiny nation fighting for its life to ascertain the status of each of its enemies. Just too hard to sort out the moderates from militants and immoderates, the innocent from the guilty. Let Allah sort them out.
Clinton sent Carville to defeat Netanyahu, and install Barak who would betray Israel to Arafat--who again pretended to eschew violence and accept the state of Israel, stop teaching hate, that sort of thing.
Arafat launched his intifada, translated as open season on Israeli Jews.
The clouds parted and the Road Map descended upon a beam of light into the open hands of Condoleezza Rice:
It was simplicity itself:
Arafat had only to eschew violence and accept the state of Israel, stop teaching hate, that sort of thing.
Further, the Arafat dopleganger would serve instead of Arafat as head of the PA (Pogroms Are-us).
Terror is exhausting work, so a hudna or "ersatz truce" was declared in June, followed by 300 terror attacks which were allowed under Reuters Rules of Engagement.
Then the big bus explosion followed by the mean-spirited Israeli response which torpedoed the cease-fire!.
Now comes the modest proposal of Trentino to detonate explosive devices in other capitals besides Jerusalem killing innocents other than Jews (IOTJ).
Is it satire?
Does it not question the very foundation of New York Times reality?
That all Palestinian attacks are good attacks, that all Israeli attacks are bad attacks?
Will Sharon ask for directions again from the helpful National Security Advisor for the United States Condoleezza Rice?
Or will he rather crumple the road map into a ball, jam it into the glove box of the IDF armored personnel carrier, and plan the next Hamas assassination?
Aha! There he goes in that APC, with its bumper sticker:
HAMAS NO MAS
SPLAT ARAFAT.
It was simplicity itself:
Arafat had only to eschew violence and accept the state of Israel, stop teaching hate, that sort of thing. I love your use of the language.
LOL. ;)
I love it!
Postscript to what I wrote earlier (not directed at you):
The purpose of having nuclear weapons is deterrence, which means ideally they are never used.
Ideally. But if and when their use is inevitable they can and will be used.
If. And when.
You forgot Mecca and Medina!
During the Haj would be best.
As much as I would like to see those places disappear in a thermonuclear flash, there is a good reason why it should never be done: it would leave Al Aqsa on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem as the number-one surviving muslim holy place.
Not after the Israelis tear it down to rebuild Solomon's Temple.
The third most important historical site, this place? It's importance is a recent phenom.
Ideally. But if and when their use is inevitable they can and will be used.
But, if their use is inevitable, and they are not used, then their purpose(deterrence) is lost....and their holder as well.
I probably expressed myself badly because I agree 100% with your point. But, to talk about nuking Riyadh, Damascus etc. now, I find that irresponsible and crazy.
There is a lot of killing of terrorists to do before we near that point (I'd like to see 400 Hamas dead by next week, and that's just for starters) and other things to be tried.
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.