Public opinion, including world public opinion, has never won a war; but it has caused the loss of many wars. From the Korean ‘police action’ (which to the injured and dead soldiers seemed like a ‘war’), to the mislabeled ‘Vietnam War’ and the recent Israeli attempt to prevent further killing of its people, designated by many also as a ‘war’, public opinion won and the civilized world lost.
To sane, thinking people wars should be avoided as much as possible, not at all costs as some believe. Is it sensible to anti-war advocates that civilization as we know it, and civilized people, should accept destruction as a price of avoiding war? As incredible as it may seem it is likely many in the anti-war movement would probably make such a sacrifice ‘for the greater good’. This is insane and most of us do not accept this idea, but what is also unacceptable is that those we expect to know better also succumb to the ‘peace at any price’ mentality, which world history has clearly demonstrated to be a fatal illusion.
It looks like President Bush was willing to take the heat of that foe of reason; i.e. public opinion, in order to give Israelis a chance to solve the Hezbollah problem, but the Israeli government was not willing or able to make the hard survival choices. Had another government been in place at this critical time, it is likely that the opportunity given Israel by events would not have been lost. Now Israel can only look forward to further efforts to eliminate their country by those openly calling for its destruction without condemnation by ‘public opinion’, not that the Islamo-fascists would be thwarted by criticism in any case. But, the next time matters come to a head Israel will be faced with a more difficult battle of survival in this high-tech weapon world and the prospect of nuclear arms and armies of suicidal Muslims arraigned against Israel.
This latest struggle by a numerically small combatant fighting for survival against a tyrannical force is reminiscent of the nationalists struggle against the Nazi-supported foes of democracy in the 1930’s. The Spanish civil war is thought by many to have been a Nazi rehearsal for a future broader war and an opportunity to test ‘modern’ weaponry and tactics of that time. Islamic fascist fanatics around the world have learned a lot by the war in Lebanon and are now emboldened to believe that a modern country with superior weaponry can be defeated by a determined suicidal population and, this is crucial, properly manipulated ‘world public opinion’. What these fanatic people now know is that whereas they are free to kill as many people as they can in any way they can, the ‘civilized’ world will not do that because they will be condemned by ‘public opinion’. How little has been learned from earlier world war successes by civilized people against brutal enemies!
So here we are at a time the United States is in World War III. Our country has a political two-party system. The Republican Party is currently represented by President Bush who has shown from time-to-time some understanding of what is at stake in this war. But the Party is divided and there is a minority of Republicans in public office that join with Democrats in either failing to, or unwilling to, accept the obvious threat we face as a country from Islamic terror and fanatics. Unfortunately, even President Bush and many Republican office holders are affected by world opinion and seem unable to act together with sufficient resolve to strive to win this third world war. Nonetheless, they are our best hope.
Opposing attempts by President Bush and most Republicans to protect Americans are liberals, the liberal news media and the Democrat Party, all of whom personify world public opinion in the criticism of the United States at every opportunity. All efforts by our government to detect and observe possible terrorists to prevent attacks on our citizens are rebuffed, criticized and in many case prevented by Democrats in government, not only in Congress but also in other departments such as the CIA, the State Department and elsewhere. Our legal system is also abused, deliberately or unintentionally, by many courts and so-called ‘public interest’ groups such as the ACLU as they undermine our safety and prevent those that would protect us from being able do so.
There is a possibility that the next government in the United States, beginning with the coming presidential and congressional elections, will be led by people like those in the present Israeli government that failed to take all necessary action to assure its survival; people that do not recognize the seriousness of the Islamic fascist threat we face as a civilization and as a country. If that happens we will have only ourselves to blame for our destruction; we have to ignore world public opinion and think about what we must do to win and survive World War III, just as Israel must do.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I enjoyed Mr Gioia's public comment recently when he said: "I am a Conservative, not a Republican". Whereas a Conservative abides by a broadly governed personal philosophy, a Republican - or Democrat - abides by the current agenda of the political party. There are more than a few Conservatives such as myself that seriously doubt the military soundness of continuing a huge policing force in Iraq as the most efficacious way to fight WWIII. To pull all troops out of Iraq (my position) is not a defeat or a retreat IF action plans are on the generals' table to strike elsewhere in the war against Islam. Where most Liberals would be pleased simply to "end the war" by pulling our troops out of Iraq and retreating back to within our own borders, many Conservatives would rather see a military deployment directed at more obvious and worthwhile targets, such as giving a serious enema to the badlands of northern Pakistan. This would hardly constitute genuflecting to public opinion, and would undoubtedly address head-on the iris of WWIII. Pulling our troops out of Iraq also confronts the fallacious assumption of building a stable democracy for a united Iraq within the foreseeable future.The current Republican agenda does not suit all Conservatives.
Post a Comment