Asymmetry is Sort of the Point >>

I always hear liberals gripe about dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and they often cite that as an example of US terrorism against other nations. Sufficed to say, this argument is naïve and overlooks that Harry S. Truman, a Democrat, unleashed this weaponry. He was correct in doing so, by the way.

After hearing a well-meaning progressive grieve about the apparent grotesquery of Israel’s retaliation, and I was a little miffed that he overlooked why it was they were retaliating. Since 2001, Hamas has fired 3,000 rockets into Israel, maliciously targeting civilians and arrogating veto power on any peace process underway.

The margins of war should never be close; they should ideally be lopsided. That means a quicker surrender and a quicker cessation of violence. Sun Tzu would agree about protracting war and “balancing” response. Balance is what you share with the vanquished after they surrender, not when you are busy shooting at each other.  If America is at war, they should operate assuming that it is better to see 100 Wehrmacht die to each 1 US soldier. Rather, 1,000 Fedayeen should die instead of our 1 GI. Or 100,000 Taliban should die instead of our 1 GI Joe.  And so forth. In short, a leader should be 100% devoted to his own people, his own taxpaying citizens, and his own fighters… and he should not give hoot in hell about casualties in the opposing army if it costs him lives in his.

“General Patton Sir, we received word that we have routed Rommel!”

“Alright. I see. Tell the commanding officers on the ground to drop their guns and charge.”

“I beg your pardon, General?”

“Don’t argue with me son, I want this to be a balanced fight! We have to play fair with those lousy Hun bastards! Now I want you to produce 1000 US casualties…make sure the battle’s a close one.”

This is how a modern liberal would fight a war. FDR asked for unconditional surrender for a reason, and Truman prevented a protracted land invasion against Kamikaze fanatics and a population that fixedly adhered to the ancient battle code of the Samurai. In fact, he tore the Hirohito band-aid off of Japan in one swipe! Good work.

But is it really asymmetrical in favor of Israel? Let’s look at the facts:

 1.       Region: Syrian, Jordan, Egypt, Iran, Former Iraq under Saddam Hussein, and Saudi Arabia. All of these nations are overtly hostile to Israel’s existence. Seems asymmetrical to me. Furthermore, the UN and other international bodies promised a cessation of violence if Israel ended the occupation of Gaza and the West Bank, yet this failed abysmally with the recent rocket attacks that we have seen (liberals think that conditions alone cause violence, rarely personal choice. They apply this to criminal justice as well with scant results).

 2.       Muslim on Muslim rejection: 77% of all Muslims would rather live in Israel than any other country in the world. They have equal rights, and a chunk of the Israeli Parliament in is Arab. In 1999, Rana Raslan, a Muslim Israeli, won the Miss Israel contest. Thousands of Arabs live their lives in safety and protection in Israel, un-hated for their religion. Now ask: how many Jews live safely in Gaza?

http://content.ksg.harvard.edu/leadership/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=511&Itemid=115

Ironically, adjacent Muslim nations shut out the Palestinians. They don’t want them! They either don’t want to take care of them, or they feel that such an exodus would defuse their Holy War on Israel. At the end of it all, Muslims in Israel are not treated like “dhimmis” are treated in the Muslim world. In Israel, Arabs get elected. In the surrounding regions, Arabs bow to princes and theocrats.

 3.       Rockets: In the past 8 years, Israel has sustained 3,000 Qassam Rocket attacks and 2,500 mortar attacks, according to AP and Fox News. This does not count suicide bombings NOR does it account for the fact that Hamas’ rockets have grown more and more sophisticated and fat reaching. Israel was asked by the world community to forbear, which it did during the majority of that time. That smells like asymmetry to me.

 4.       Prisoner exchange: In July of 2008, Israel gave up 5 terrorists and the bodies of 199 dead Hezbollah combatants. In return, Israel received 2 bodies. Hezbollah gave no indication as to the state of their captured before the exchange. Hassan Nasrallah’s henchmen often ask for such lopsided exchanges, threatening to take the head off an IDF soldier if hundreds of terrorist prisoners are not released. Often times, Israel concedes. Yep, that does seem disproportionate.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/17/world/middleeast/17mideast.html?fta=y

 5.       Hamas PR Strategy: Hamas will deliberately hunker down near its own civilians, in hopes of taking the fight to civilian areas. They shoot from behind women and children, and then when fire is returned, they use the ensuing civilian casualties to announce to the UN, the EU, Al Jazeera, and the BBC, that Israel owns the violence. The juvenility of this PR strategy is so breathlessly obvious that it baffles me as to the blinking morons who buy into it. The only thing more valuable to Hamas than a dead Jew is a dead Palestinian.

 6.       People who buy into it: Europe, The BBC, American Liberals, and everyone who watches Al Jazeera. About 1 billion Muslims. Half the US stands by Israel. That’s it, for all intents and purposes. And for those of you who think that anti-Jewish sentiment died in Europe with the Holocaust, think again. The flagging Ottoman Empire supported the Axis powers in WWI while the Jews were an ally in WWII against the Nazis, who collaborated with local officials in Africa and the Middle East. Nazis left behind all sorts of inspiration for fascist groups like the PLO. European styled anti-Semitism is still alive on the streets of much of Europe as well as the Gaza Strip. Just spend a weekend in Madrid and see how many swastikas you see in the graffiti. The disparity is glaring.

 7.       Acceptance: Israel wants a viable Palistinian state. Hamas will not acknowledge Israel’s existence. Not lopsided at all!

Former Ambassador John Bolton had it right. This is lopsided. The response, the buildup, and the conclusions will be too, once the world press croons to the Palestinians once more.