Small Bits: On Israel

I’ve been writing about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for a number of years now. I’ve been going back and reading what I wrote back in the 90’s. Everything I’ve ever said about this is still true today. I just never thought I’d ever see an American president stick a fork and knife into Israel and hand her over to her tormentors.

Some say we'd have gotten along just fine without Israel. As one who writes, I know that we are a product of the Judea-Christian tradition. Virtually every one of our literary references and metaphors can be traced back to the Bible. It is so engrained in us – so much a part of us – most of us are quite unaware of it (it’s like the eye not being able to see itself). Knock all that foundation out from under us – and we become nothing.

What we hold now to be so terribly important would simply blow away, like topsoil blowing away with the wind. Don’t say Israel is unimportant – when, in fact, Israel is us. Why would you think this tiny sliver of a country is so hard fought?

Many of us take the family to a movie on Sunday afternoons. Try being compelled by law to attend public hangings in the market square on Saturdays instead. That seems to be the idea of civic duty in some quarters. (Though, these days, it seems to work out to virtually the same thing.)

“It’s not one world,” the late, great Paul Harvey used to say.
-----------------------------------------------
President Obama attempting to dismantle the very basis of our legitimacy as essential actors on the world stage. This has very little to do with the terms we use to describe things. Terms are often interchangeable. It has become clear to me that two distinct narratives have emerged within our nation that are not necessarily compatible. In effect, we are at war with ourselves.

The things discussed in the Bible are often dismissed as no longer relevant because it was written at a different time and spoke to those people in terms that only they could fully understand. We no longer use the same terms or concepts to describe things. (Even today, we run into endless problems when attempting simple translation.)

Today, we often use metaphors we learned in 9th grade science class. Throughout the long and arduous evolution of language, reality has remained essentially the same. Even, despite knowing that the world is round, our maps remain flat. It matters not how we express it. What I’m trying to say is that language is but a thin veneer, and time-sensitive to boot. The cultural heritage of any given people runs much deeper.

Unfortunately, Muslim aggression - and Western aggression (or influence) - is and has been a historical fact. The bone of contention right now is Israel. If there were no Israel, we would have to invent it. We must deal with the aggression, not curse the bone.

As for throwing everything into the pot, to see which one will sink or swim, quite apart from what may or may not be in our own self interest - this too will not work. There is no such thing as peace at ground level or above. Peace is only possible six feet under.

As long as we live, we must always be prepared to fight. If we succeed in keeping the fallout confined to foreign shores, so much the better for us. Nations know instinctively that they must protect themselves. Some make the strategic decision to ride on the coattails of others who might possess the means to protect them. In doing so, they give up a bit of their sovereignty. Others build great armies. It still is not clear to me which of these Israel aspires to.

Time is roughly divided into two-thirds peace and one-third war. Peace is merely the absence of war. War can sometimes be held at bay by fear. Either way, the illusion of power plays a role. This is why great nations build great armies that stand idle two-thirds of the time. It is hardly a waste.

http://pkoelliker.blogspot.com/

Clash of Civilizations

Paul Harvey used to preface some of his stories by saying, “It’s not one world.” It isn’t. Howard Dean has not suddenly become Republican or conservative. He is and will (most likely always) be a socialist. Hillary Clinton is a socialist. Obama, at the very least, is a socialist. ‘Big government’ is fundamental to socialist thinking.

At the same time, socialists are not suicidal. They do not check their common sense at the door. They know that in order to survive as a viable alternative, they cannot totally ignore certain political realities. For Muslims to build a 13-story mosque in close proximity to Ground Zero is simply a bad idea, unless we fail to understand that Muslims have declared war on us; that they cannot be appeased or bargained with; that any altruistic gesture we might intend will not make them like us, and will be proclaimed a victory for their side, allowing them to propagandize and recruit in continuance of their war against us.

In a recent exchange with a friend about ultimate causes, it came to me that the fundamental difference between man and animal is ego. I had it right, but I did not go far enough.

We’d been putting bones out on the driveway after supper with the expectation of seeing them gone by morning. We’d often wondered just who our nocturnal visitor might be. We imagined any number of the ‘friendly’ animals we’d become familiar with over the years of living here. After an overnight blanketing of fresh winter snow, their various tracks cross the lawn in every conceivable direction. Most of these we can readily identify.

Last night I had to go out for milk. When I returned, I happened to see the interloper in my headlights. I still can’t tell you what it was: larger than a cat; smaller than most dogs; large pointy ears; protruding snout; thin, spindly legs. There have been reports of fox and/or coyote in our neighborhood, but I’ve seen the fox in daylight and it wasn’t that.

I almost felt sorry for the intruder. He looked so frail and wobbly, and nervous to boot. We don’t put scraps out every day. I imagined him coming by on days when we don’t - and being hungry. It also occurred to me that he - as most any animal - had no arms and was obliged to eat directly off the ground. The difference between us, I reasoned, is that we at some point decided to get up on our hind legs and remained that way. This allowed our front legs to develop into arms, hands and fingers with which we could do things. We could now build something and say, “I did that. It’s mine.” - hence, ego.

Thought would develop similarly as well - based on differing assumptions - into different appendages. Ayaan Hirsi Ali in an opinion article in yesterday's WSJ entitled “How to Win the Clash of Civilizations” briefly summarizes the late Samuel Huntington’s assertion that “the essential building blocks of the post-Cold War world are seven or eight historical civilizations of which the Western, the Muslim and the Confucian are the most important.

The balance of power among these civilizations, Huntington argued, is shifting. The West is declining in relative power, Islam is exploding demographically, and Asian civilizations—especially China—are economically ascendant. Huntington also said that a civilization-based world order is emerging in which states that share cultural affinities will cooperate with each other and group themselves around the leading states of their civilization.

Ali concludes: “The West's universalist pretensions are increasingly bringing it into conflict with the other civilizations, most seriously with Islam and China. Thus the survival of the West depends on Americans, Europeans and other Westerners reaffirming their shared civilization as unique—and uniting to defend it against challenges from non-Western aggressors (sic)."

Infinite Buzz Saws

The first thing to note is that this was a political CYA (cover your ass) speech. Any war continues to be deeply unpopular with Obama's base. Hence, he needed to make the point that an escalation of the war effort in Afghanistan must be seen as an exit strategy. It's actually a tactical mistake (and I am not the first to say this) to tell the enemy when we’ll be leaving. That's much is obvious. The WH spin will be that it will force Karzai's hand into cooperating more fully with us. This should have been discussed with Karzai privately.

Now, all this is sure to signal the Taliban that they have already won; that our sole concern is that they hold off their murderous celebrations till after we've had our next presidential elections. It also ensures that, from now on, no one in Afghanistan will cooperate with us, knowing full well that after we're gone, they will be murdered if they’ve had anything to do with us.

Back in Pol Pot's day (in Cambodia), all those found wearing glasses and all those found with books in their houses were summarily shot. In our inner cities, all those with good school grades are bullied and ostracized by their peers. In the Palestinian Territories, everyone knows that anyone harboring ideas of peace with Israel and being vocal about it or having in any way participated in any U.S. or Israeli attempt to bring peace to the region will result in their families being threatened with extreme violence. In our Universities, anyone not viewing the world through a leftist prism automatically fails. The same principle applies to Afghanistan: all those who are found as having had anything at all to do with U.S. sponsored 'nation building' are guaranteed to meet their end.

Pervez Musharraf, former Pakistan strongman, actually wrote a good editorial in this morning’s WSJ. He said that for a nation to change, it must do so from within. This notion opened my eyes to some extent. Too often, we equate strategic advantage on the battlefield – winning, if you wish – with ancillary matters such as human or women’s rights. We abhor Sharia law; we abhor their proclivity to slaughter animals in the most brutal ways. We swoon at their beheading and disemboweling their enemies. Often we tend to define victory also in terms of their changing their ways to conform to our own sensibilities. Yet this is the precisely the part that they can’t stomach about us. It is why they will fight to the death against us.

The last war we fought for all the right reasons was for Kuwait. One country had invaded another in a blatant display of aggression. We drove the aggressor back and left the aggrieved parties to clean up the mess, each in its own way. Since then, we’ve become involved in nation-building and we’ve failed miserably on all counts. Unless we accept the concept that Paul Harvey repeated so often and so eloquently, that "it is not one world”, we will run into infinite buzz saws of never ending trouble. …the very same trouble, by the way, that Obama and his ilk are likely to face in trying to re-make America into something it is not.