World War III and the Lessons Of History
"This is World War III. This idea that we have this one-sided war where the other team gets to plan how to kill us and we get to talk, is nuts." -- Newt Gingrich
While Newt tends to be a little "over the top", sometimes, he's got a point. If we would observe the lessons of history and stand up to bullies early on, instead of engaging in social masturbation (diplomacy) so much, decisive action could have gone a long way toward eliminating a lot of the problems with North Korea and the MIddle East. Iran is clearly behind the Hezbollah attacks from Southern Lebanon and Hezbollah, Iran's little puppet regime, has the same stated goal as does Hamas - the destruction of the State of Israel. It never ceases to amaze me how otherwise intelligent diplomats and leaders of democratic nations fail to understand that you cannot negotiate with somebody who wants to kill you as their primary objective:
Terrorists: We are going to kill you. Death to XXX!
Country: Look, let's negotiate.
Terrorists: You will die, infidel! And I will go to heaven and meet Allah!
Country: Come on, let's sit down and talk about some incentives.
Terrorists: BLAM! BOOM! (Smoke....)
This leaves pretty few options, doesn't it? Yet, we're still carrying on the conversation, as if it really has a chance of going somewhere. It doesn't.
I talked about this Iran thing six months ago in another post here. My opinion hasn't changed, in fact it has hardened considerably. I also warned about $4.00 gallon gas this summer back in April.
The way you stand up to a bully, once again, is that you cannot negotiate with or appease them. To put it in the vernacular, you cut their nuts off and neutralize them permanently so that they can no longer be a threat. The sooner you do it, the better - because this interminable waiting and delusional playing of the appeasement game simply gives them that much more time to consolidate power and become ever more dangerous.
It's not about the rules of engagement. It's not about the Geneva Conventions. It's not about what is morally right or who started it, or who is right and who is wrong, you idiots! What it is about is learning the lessons of history and having the guts to take care of business!
This is precisely what happened with Hitler prior to World War II. U.S. tried to stay out of it and finally had no choice but to declare war. Great Britain, our closest ally, was nearly obliterated because we took so long to "get the message". Had we jumped in earlier, we could have neutralized Hitler (and possibly the Japanese) and six million Jews, 20 million Russians, and countless hundreds of thousands of American and European lives could have been spared. And, it looks to me that we haven't yet learned the lesson.
Gingrich says the reluctance to put all the pieces together and see one global conflict is hurting America's interests. He says people, including some in the Bush Administration, who urge a restrained response from Israel are wrong "because they haven't crossed the bridge of realizing this is a war."
An historian, Gingrich said he has been studying recently how Abraham Lincoln talked to Americans about the Civil War, and what turned out to be a much longer and deadlier war than Lincoln expected. In other words, he thinks that the President isn't presenting the real conflict to the Congress and to Americans by "connecting all the dots".
This is an American issue, we are in the middle of it and it's up to us to have the balls to take care of business. Because if we don't it is going to hurt us a lot more later. Think about it: We are flying men into space to a space station, and meanwhile, back here on earth, people are killing each other over a bunch of land. America has the ability to put a stop to it, but it appears that it doesn't have the guts it takes to do so.
While Newt tends to be a little "over the top", sometimes, he's got a point. If we would observe the lessons of history and stand up to bullies early on, instead of engaging in social masturbation (diplomacy) so much, decisive action could have gone a long way toward eliminating a lot of the problems with North Korea and the MIddle East. Iran is clearly behind the Hezbollah attacks from Southern Lebanon and Hezbollah, Iran's little puppet regime, has the same stated goal as does Hamas - the destruction of the State of Israel. It never ceases to amaze me how otherwise intelligent diplomats and leaders of democratic nations fail to understand that you cannot negotiate with somebody who wants to kill you as their primary objective:
Terrorists: We are going to kill you. Death to XXX!
Country: Look, let's negotiate.
Terrorists: You will die, infidel! And I will go to heaven and meet Allah!
Country: Come on, let's sit down and talk about some incentives.
Terrorists: BLAM! BOOM! (Smoke....)
This leaves pretty few options, doesn't it? Yet, we're still carrying on the conversation, as if it really has a chance of going somewhere. It doesn't.
I talked about this Iran thing six months ago in another post here. My opinion hasn't changed, in fact it has hardened considerably. I also warned about $4.00 gallon gas this summer back in April.
The way you stand up to a bully, once again, is that you cannot negotiate with or appease them. To put it in the vernacular, you cut their nuts off and neutralize them permanently so that they can no longer be a threat. The sooner you do it, the better - because this interminable waiting and delusional playing of the appeasement game simply gives them that much more time to consolidate power and become ever more dangerous.
It's not about the rules of engagement. It's not about the Geneva Conventions. It's not about what is morally right or who started it, or who is right and who is wrong, you idiots! What it is about is learning the lessons of history and having the guts to take care of business!
This is precisely what happened with Hitler prior to World War II. U.S. tried to stay out of it and finally had no choice but to declare war. Great Britain, our closest ally, was nearly obliterated because we took so long to "get the message". Had we jumped in earlier, we could have neutralized Hitler (and possibly the Japanese) and six million Jews, 20 million Russians, and countless hundreds of thousands of American and European lives could have been spared. And, it looks to me that we haven't yet learned the lesson.
Gingrich says the reluctance to put all the pieces together and see one global conflict is hurting America's interests. He says people, including some in the Bush Administration, who urge a restrained response from Israel are wrong "because they haven't crossed the bridge of realizing this is a war."
An historian, Gingrich said he has been studying recently how Abraham Lincoln talked to Americans about the Civil War, and what turned out to be a much longer and deadlier war than Lincoln expected. In other words, he thinks that the President isn't presenting the real conflict to the Congress and to Americans by "connecting all the dots".
This is an American issue, we are in the middle of it and it's up to us to have the balls to take care of business. Because if we don't it is going to hurt us a lot more later. Think about it: We are flying men into space to a space station, and meanwhile, back here on earth, people are killing each other over a bunch of land. America has the ability to put a stop to it, but it appears that it doesn't have the guts it takes to do so.
Following your site I reached here.So when I see your opinion I am forced to leave some comments.I can very well assume the average american's opinion regarding this issue.First of all let me say that it's only US who catalyze the terrorist's action.Your country is indeed a super power.But doest it make all your people something extra.Nope. They are just ordinary people as like people from other parts of the world.So like every human being almost all the american's have strongly biased opinions about international issues.You are claiming that US has the ability to put an end to all the issues like Iran.There are many other countries like russia,china,france who has the ability.Why do we have a U.N. If US is going to attack a country even without UN approval ,why do we need it.
ReplyDeleteClearly this would make the terrorist's job easy.Israel is a country which is highly over reacting towards issues.Though I am not supproting Hezbollah,I can't also support Israel who are all going crazy in destruction even without caring whether it is a a lebeneze house or UN security post. It's easy for you to categorize some one as pro-terrorist,anti-semitic and anti-american.But if that's the case most of the world are like that .The hassle of middle east is inddeed very complicated .You can not simply dismiss any voice that comes against Israel suggesting it as the voice of terrorism. You can't digest the stands of other countries if they are not ready to back US and US would always wants the leadership post.Others should simply obey them.Does this help to build supporters for US in other countries.It's a big No.since you don't have the experience with the sufferings of civilians due to the atrocities commited by Israel and IDF you simply can't have a neutral opinion. I don't understand why American media ,despite of all the facts trying to give Israel a clean chit.Yeah..moreover it's the prople's mentalaty reflecting through the media.
Most of the nations including U.S are confirmed about the nuclear programmes of Israel. So Why can't Iran(I know you are laughing).Yeah,it would indeed be a threat to Israel.But it's enevitable as long as the super powers enjoy the baised views.More over there is a global tendancy to brand Muslims as terrorists and Isrel is a holy christian state which needs to be protected . How long Israel would continue this .It's the duty of the international community to formulate a solution .But if US and teams are opting for a war ,the result would not be nice.
Apart from this I respect you as a professional.Have a good day.
Thanks for the comment, but the minute I got to "atrocities committed by Israel" it became quite clear. You could have put that as the first and only sentence and saved yourself some typing.
ReplyDeleteGreat Blog, Pete. I too have come to the conclusion that nothing is going to stop the war and the longer we wait the stronger the enemy will become. I thought that Iraq would turn out better. That given a chance at freedom the woudl jump on it. I was wrong. They are more concerned about killing each other then raising their children. On the bright side Iraq is a great strategic position for any conflict in the middle east.
ReplyDeleteIf the PAL were really concerned about thier own country they could of done Peaceful Protests and had a nation 20 years ago. But as noted many times their goal has never been a nation side-by-side with Israel but all of Israel
I absolutely agree. Israel would be delighted to have additional peaceful neighbors like they have with Jordan and Egypt. And, they've shown a willingness to give up quite a bit to achieve this.
ReplyDeleteBut, unfortunately, these particular neighbors don't have that as their goal. Until they - Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran have a change of heart (don't hold your breath, pal) not much is going to change.
"This is precisely what happened with Hitler prior to World War II. U.S. tried to stay out of it and finally had no choice but to declare war. "
ReplyDelete-- You'll notice the U.S. kept out of it because they were sellings tanks to the russians. Business as usual. Next stop, Iran.
But, on a lighter note, I follow your thoughts. Hezbollah and Iran are tightly connected. And why would Iran want Nuclear power? -- I bet the head-priest isn't an environmentalist, nor is he Vegan.
ReplyDelete-- If you haven't got nuclear weapons you get invaded. If you do, you don't! -- Madeleine Albright.
So, what's next then? Korea, Pakistan? -- no wait, they have nukes already.. And I seem to remember the terrorist-plannings in London where primarily done by Pakistanies? (heritage)
You see what I'm getting at? It seems a bit smelly to me that the U.S. is supporting and/or attacking anything that opposes U.S. interests in the region.
I'm a european, and when I meet the 'american' people they -often- tell me that they feel ashamed at what their country is doing but they are powerless to stop it.
It makes me sad to see that people are actually just sitting back watching CNN and not realizing what their country is doing.
But what really takes the cake is the fact that Syria is a member of the Security council. WTF?! The U.N. are supposed to help the world. Currently it's fucked up! It took the U.N. sooo long to pass a stinking resolution to stop Israel's attack on Lebanon.
Why aren't there Blue-helmetted folks all over the place to stop people from sucking so bad.
I know this is turning into a rant, but I simply can't help it.
I truely understand where you are coming from -- but I simply don't trust the U.S. to safe-guard international/western security with a flipping retard at the helm. I mean, shit, he saluted the norweigian people with the sign of satanism. He's a complete fucktard.
-- Reminds me of The Manchurian Candidate?
I'll stop now.
Bush, I'm SO happy you didn't have any sons. But then, there's always your idiot cousin Jeb isn't there?
RE: "The US kept out of it because they were selling tanks to the Russians"?
ReplyDeleteThe US has sold munitions to other countries for 200 years. Sometimes it works out, sometimes not.
You surely don't believe this is the reason US tried to stay out of WWII? We stayed out because we were following the cowardly pattern of trying to mind our own business and to appease dictators.
Get real, pal.
RE: On a lighter note:
ReplyDeleteYou people on the other side of the pond became the way you are primarily because of World War II.
If the UN is broken, we have 2 choices:
1) Fix it (the faster the better)
I say that's not likely to happen.
2) Take matters into your own hands, preferably with a coalition of the willing for support.
You don't need to be a rocket scientist to figure this out. You can sit around wringing your hands as many EU countries have been doing, or you can take action.
That's the risk - if you take action, it might not work out as planned. One certainly could make the case that the action of doing nothing poses even greater risks.