| ||||||
| Militaries and War Debate and discuss global militaries, past and present wars including the war on terror. |
![]() |
| | LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| | #1 (permalink) | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Banned Join Date: May 2006 Location: Wild Wild West Gender: ![]() Posts: 7,659
| Talk of Talk is Damaging. There have probably been more articles and interviews in recent days advocating negotiations with Syria than Hizbullah has gunmen. Yet each of these statements does about as much damage as a terrorist. They make the West less able to respond to the current crisis while inspiring the radicals to be more intransigent. Talks may be good in principle but in this context they are harmful. The problem is not that Syrian President Bashar Assad or the leaders of Hizbullah and Iran are bad guys or fanatics. The problem, in fact, is the exact opposite: they are acting rationally in pursuit of their interests. To paraphrase Bashar's cinematic equivalent, Michael Corleone in The Godfather, "It's not personal it's politics." There are five basic reasons why the belief that negotiations with the Fabulously Extremist Four (Hamas, Hizbullah, Syria, and Iran) are going to solve anything is the opium of the opinion-makers. 1. They have far-reaching goals. They want a Middle East without Israel; a world without America; and a chador in every closet. These are not agrarian reformers: they are consistent totalitarians on a level with fascism and Communism. 2. They think they are winning. Even defeats are interpreted as victories, with some help from large portions of the Western media and intelligentsia. Especially now, they believe that the tide of history is running in their direction. Why should they be willing to make deals with those thought soon to be their victims? 3. They believe their enemies are weak and cowardly. Can you blame them? The calls for concessions, the demands for d tente, the nattering for negotiations are all taken by them as signs of weakness. Compromise is not a concept, at least right now, in their vocabulary. 4. All the assumptions made by the negotiate-now crowd (part of which is an appeasement-now crowd) are wrong. THIS IS the point upon which I want to focus. The interests of Hizbullah, Hamas, Iran and Syria are in line with extremism and aggression, not moderation. These people are not deluded or merely aggrieved - they have a pretty good strategy going. Why shouldn't they sing, "The future belongs to me!" If the appeasers win out, it will.....................follow the link for more of this story. http://tinyurl.com/gsz3z | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Sponsored Links |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
« Previous Thread
|
Next Thread »
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 10:02 PM.









Linear Mode