Cry, 'Havoc!'

Among others, here are some of the enduring realities of the last 50 years:

• Terrorism has plagued the world, making it a slave to thugs and psychopaths.
• Terrorism has been made possible and is made possible by Saudi Arabia, Iran, Libya, North Korea, large numbers of individual Muslims living in the West, and maybe China.
• Terrorism costs the world billions of dollars and thousands of lives.
• Terrorists will be able to inflict huge numbers of casualties if we let them get their hands on nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons.
• Those who fund and serve in the armies of terror have suffered hardly at all.
• A world system in which civilized nations pour huge amounts of money into the hands of some of the most criminal and primitive people imaginable is a system that is utterly mad.

What other alternatives are left but to stop kidding ourselves that this is acceptable and to punish the Iranian government, the Syrian government, the Libyan government, the Saudi royal family, Hamas, Hezbollah, and any and all other Muslim terrorists?

Rabbi Hillel had an appropriate sense of urgency. We don't seem to. If we won't take action to rid ourselves of the scourge of Islamic terror, when exactly is that that we plan to get around to it?

Neo-neo-con's focus on the situation that England and Europe faced in the 1930s revives the issue then, fresh as the morning dew and clear as the winter sky:

The quote that struck me most forcibly was this, which bears repeating:

The punishment for taking on Hezbollah is war. The punishment for not taking on Hezbollah is war.

It immediately brought to mind a statement by Winston Churchill, he of the silver tongue, when speaking about a similar accommodation sought by the militarily weak British and French prior to WWII:

Britain and France had to choose between war and dishonor. They chose dishonor. They will have war.

And please, spare yourself the trouble of informing me that the situation isn't quite analogous. I know it's not. But the similarity is this: sometimes what seems like a choice is no choice at all. When dealing with certain enemies bent on destruction and conquest, how can one avoid battle? Sooner or later, the conflagration will erupt. And is it better in the end for it to erupt sooner rather than later, when the enemy is stronger and more deeply entrenched?

The punishment for taking on Hitler was war. The punishment for not taking on Hitler was war. World War.

"Disarming Hezbollah: either way, the punishment is war." By neo-neo-con, 7/27/06.