We didn't ask for a cease-fire during the Battle of the Bulge, or at Gettysberg or at Iwo Jima. We didn't offer one to the Nazis, or to the confederate rebels. We fought both until they surrendered.
We backed down in 1991 and let Saddam stay in power. We backed down in 1952 and let Kim Il Sung stay in power. We backed down in 1962 and let Fidel stay in power. The problems caused by these tyranny's terror and repression trouble us to this day.
The Democrat doves in Congress pulled the plug on our allies in South Vietnam in 1975 (two years after the last USA ground troop had left), allowing the North Vietnamese to overrun the south, leading to four decades of totalitarian rule and poverty for 65 million Vietnamese - and 500,000 in camps and 1.5 million refugees, the Boat People, who fled ita Marxist/Castro-style tyranny.
You'd think that we'd've learned our lesson: appeasement amd half-assery doesn't work; appeasement amd half-assery delays the inevitable and makes it worse - because it allows the enemy to strengthen.
Bush and Olmert appear to be appeasing the enemy - and just as the enemy is on the verge of defeat. But maybe not. And maybe we need to be in a "reset" mode between now and 8/22?
In principle, I'm for victory. And, I'd prefer it if we vanquished the enemy in one nell swoop (defanged Hizaballah, deposed Assad and preemptively neutralized Iran's nuke program, and deposed Kim Jong Il, and deposed Castro, and Chavez - ASAP). But maybe we need to do this in stages. Maybe a ceasepfire allows an important stage to occur. Maybe this cease-fire puts the "international community" on Israel's side, and maybe that will make it less costly for Israel to attain peace with Lebanon? We shall see - very soon; we shall see...
No comments:
Post a Comment