|
The horrific scenes of missile strikes on residential areas and hospitals in Israel should make us shudder twice: Once for the death and destruction we see in the videos, and again for ourselves, as we catch a glimpse of our own future.
Developments in drone and missile technology have changed the face of warfare and terrorism, and blurred the line between the two. You don’t need a trillion-dollar military budget to afford these weapons. Any Tom, Dick, or Ahmed can acquire and stockpile them. When they are launched in huge quantities, there appears to be no airtight defense. The Arab states and the various terrorist gangs of the Middle East have always enjoyed a number of advantages over Israel that stem from the asymmetrical nature of the conflict. The first is that the Arabs (and the current Iranian regime) make no distinction between military and civilian targets/combatants. They can therefore use drones and missiles as instruments of terror, as they did from Gaza (Hamas) and Lebanon (Hizbollah). And they never have to fear that Israel will turn around and do the same to them. It has never happened, despite the phony mise en scène by the Arabs and their sympathizers in the West. Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has assured the Iranian people that the war is being fought against the regime, not against them. Could you imagine an Iranian leader making such a statement? They can’t even bring themselves to acknowledge the Israelis as citizens of a country, or even as human beings. It’s always the “Zionist entity,” populated by the evil Jew infidels. Another key advantage derived from the asymmetrical nature of the conflict is that the Israelis, since 1948, are fighting to survive; the Arabs are fighting to destroy. The Jewish state has always been one defeat away from annihilation, whereas nobody seriously fears that Egypt or Jordan or Iran will be wiped off the face of the earth, their inhabitants massacred. This asymmetry, combined with the overwhelming advantage in land mass and population, means that the Arabs and Iran can expend their resources on terror, without having to worry too much about military effectiveness, strictly speaking. No matter what happens, no matter how irrational and tactically unsound their behavior, they will still be here tomorrow. The Israelis, obviously, do not have that luxury. Throughout the history of the Arab-Israel conflict, after the Israelis conquer a bit of territory, they almost always withdraw. Every instance, such as their relinquishing of the Sinai peninsula as part of the Camp David accords, has proven to be a monumental blunder. In 1982, Israel flushed the PLO out of southern Lebanon, held the territory for a number of years, and then pulled out. Hizbollah, backed by Iran, filled the void. We all know the result. Gaza, the site of numerous wars and operations to stamp out the terror apparatus, was also relinquished, as a key element of the Oslo “peace accords” fiasco. It took about a week to see where that was going. It is impossible to conclude sustainable treaties or “deals” in this environment. Americans, generally having no personal experience of the Middle East, can be excused for considering such folly. But what about the Israelis? Why do they repeatedly fall into the trap, only to get burned every time? I would say it is a combination of unrelenting international pressure; the machinations of their own Leftist Establishment; high sensitivity to casualties; and sheer exhaustion, compounded over decades of confrontation with their violent, fanatical antagonists. Israelis pretend that peace is possible, or else hope to buy a few years worth of quiet with each concession, knowing in the back of their minds that the Arabs will inevitably revert to form. North America and Western Europe are now facing an existential challenge with eerie similarities. On both continents, there is an alarming growth of extraterritoriality for ethnic enclaves within the boundaries of the host countries. In Europe, the Muslim takeover is accelerating. In America, we are inundated with hostile foreign populations; the current flash point is an irredentist movement, La Raza, with its stronghold in southern California. We are rapidly approaching a regime of de facto autonomy. In Los Angeles, an enormous district of illegal aliens has formed, becoming a city-within-a-city in which the nominal civil authority dare not flex its muscles. The inhabitants of this dominion (and their enablers) were shocked that the Trump Administration attempted to enforce American sovereignty on what the separatists consider to be their exclusive territory. In other words, we are seeing the emergence of our own Gaza. Following the playbook of the perpetually seething Palestinian Arabs, the Aztlanistas can transform themselves into a violent mob at the drop of a hat. Moreover, they do not distinguish between random, innocent civilians, and agents of the American government; are supported and funded by the Left and the mainstream propaganda organs; and have a conduit to the world via a nearby sympathetic nation that lies beyond the international border. It is not far-fetched to imagine a Hamas-style invasion of American neighborhoods, and this time around, not just looting of businesses and blocking of highways—disruptive and intolerable as this is—but rather wholesale slaughter of anyone caught in the human wave. It is also not a stretch to imagine drones and light missiles being launched from within the La Raza enclave, or from just across the border in Mexico. The same could easily happen in Europe, where autonomous zones for the savages are even more deeply entrenched. When the escalation arrives, will we negotiate with the terrorists, try to make deals, perhaps formalize some aspect of autonomy, desperately hoping, like the Israelis, to buy a few years of peace and quiet? However the Iran situation plays out, when U.S. involvement winds down, Mr. Trump needs to reconvene his National Security Council in the “situation room,” but this time to supervise a military campaign to clean out southern California. And I don’t mean deployment of the National Guard to protect federal property; I’m talking air strikes and all the rest—a war, a real war, to expel the invaders. Lord, give our leaders strength. When you cede territory to implacable enemies who seek your destruction, the results are predictable. As in Israel, so it is in Europe and America. It can happen here.
1 Comment
“Long after this agreement [1993 Oslo Accords], which is the first step and not more than that, believe me, there is a lot to be done. The jihad will continue. Jerusalem is not for the Palestinian people. It is for all the Muslim nation, all the Muslim nation. You are responsible for Palestine and for Jerusalem before me.”
—Yasir Arafat, 10 May 1994, speech to Muslim leaders in Johannesburg, South Africa Something that has irked me of late, while reading or listening to certain elements within the “conservative” (non-Leftist) alternative media, is the assertion that it is somehow courageous to come out of hiding, as it were, and dare to criticize Israel. The Left engages in this exercise all the time, but in recent years the phenomenon has spread to unlikely precincts.
To grasp the full depth of this charade, let us take a step back in time. I spent most of the 1980s and 90s working in the realm of international relations, much of it focused on Middle East affairs. During that era, I began my day by perusing the New York Times, glancing at the headlines, reading full articles as needed. (And yes, I became an expert in the “subway fold.”) This is what everyone did, because the Times really was the newspaper of record. Many collegial conversations began with “did you see the article in the Times….?” What struck me most about that esteemed publication was the constant badgering of Israel, in every way, shape, and form imaginable. Every single day, one could see an article, usually on the front page, decrying some grave transgression committed by the evil Israelis. Because of my work and travels, I knew that the allegations ranged from manipulated half-truth to outright fabrication. This treatment also was the rule for almost the entirety of the American and European media. From John Chancellor and NBC’s scandalous coverage of the 1982 Lebanon war, to the whitewashing of Yasir Arafat’s jihadist rhetoric just after signing the Oslo “peace” accords, to the Muhammed al-Dura affair (2000), and beyond, mainstream media outlets in the West have functioned as the propaganda arm of the Arab world. Then there is the United Nations. With their Israel obsession, one would think that there are no other conflicts anywhere, and no region of any interest other than the Middle East. Israel-bashing developed into a cottage industry, involving many of the infamous NGOs that sponsor mischief and mayhem worldwide. UNRWA is only one of a multitude of corrupt and nefarious actors. Then there is academia. I noticed, back in the day, a pattern emerging in the organization of university panel discussions on the Arab-Israel conflict. Typically, there would be a four-person panel: Someone to take the Israeli side; another for the Arab side; a representative of the clergy or some touchy-feely NGO; and a policy wonk, usually from a think tank, sometimes from the media or State Department. Inevitably, the pro-Israel representative would be alone in arguing his case, as the Arab and the two “non-partisan” speakers united in their condemnations of Israel. It never failed. The universities became incubators for every flavor of anti-Israel agitation, egged on by the neo-Marxist professoriate. Small wonder that recently, “elite” college students took a break from jeremiads about climate change and the Trumphitler to become mouthpieces for the most bloodthirsty organization on the face of the earth. Much of this can be explained by the dominance of the Left. They took their cue from the USSR, which beginning in the 1960s lent its prestige and resources to the Arab campaign. Israel is considered by the Left to be the oppressor par excellence because the state was founded as a European-style parliamentary democracy, with the leadership looking rather “white,” facing off against “people of color” who are particularly degenerate and violent. It would be strange indeed if the latter did not become the darlings of the Left; a poster-child of “oppression.” Despite this massive international campaign lasting decades, we now hear assertions that it is taboo to criticize Israel. It is easy to recognize the classic Leftist playbook. The Palestinian Arabs, in their portrayal as the eternal victim, are analogous to the George Floyd story. They all behave as depraved criminals; when the authorities finally put their foot down, well, it is racism, fascism, Nazis, and all the rest. Parroting the “poor oppressed Palestinians” narrative is tantamount to endorsing the core principles of the Left. In fact, when I hear “our” people doing this, I begin to question their conservative bona fides. Sometimes, you scratch a little, and find a Leftist trapped in a conservative body. The Arab-Israel conflict offers the perfect opportunity to satisfy one’s inner Leftist, to weep for the supposed downtrodden, at little or no cost to one’s overall political image. Even in Israel, it is daunting to be pro-Israel. People in the U.S. are not aware of how influential and nasty the Leftist Establishment is over there. I laugh when I hear that Prime Minister Netanyahu exercises control over various aspects of U.S. foreign policy—he doesn’t even control Israeli foreign policy! The veto power of the American Deep State over the actions of President Trump, acquired through the judiciary and other mechanisms, is child’s play compared to the equivalent game in Israel. Sometimes we hear that “Tel Aviv” (or the “Israel lobby”) controls U.S. foreign policy, or at least Mideast policy. According to this line of thinking, all U.S. wars in the region are fought for the benefit of Israel. Any serious student of U.S. Mideast policy knows that the heavy hitters in this arena are (in no particular order): American defense contractors; the Pentagon; the State Department; Saudi Arabia; the oil industry; and the ideologues of the far Left, embedded everywhere. What Israel or its supporters in the U.S. want or need is an afterthought. It should be mentioned that the pro-Israel movement, especially within the American Jewish community, is famously inept at getting its message across, in part because of the time and money spent fighting off the influence of the woke zeitgeist by which it is surrounded. While the anti-Israel side goes for the jugular with no compunction, the supporters of Israel hem and haw, producing “talking points” that will not “alienate the moderates.” My objection is not to criticism of Israel. Have at it, I say; make your case and present your facts. Love the country, hate it, or be indifferent to its fate. The sticking point is the nauseating spectacle of moral preening, wearing the mantle of “courage” in breaching the alleged wall of censorship. The preening includes bouts of hand-wringing and exaggerated sighs, together with insistence that they have nothing against Jews or Israelis, but “we can no longer be silent.” Well, if the past fifty years have been silent, what does noise look like? If these brave souls were to parade through London, the campus of Harvard University, or Boulder, Colorado, would they feel safer flying the Israeli flag or the Hamas flag? Which takes more guts? And if you worked for the Associated Press, or the BBC, or at the Quai d’Orsay, how long would your employment last if you defended an Israeli military action in Gaza or Lebanon? When it comes to “conservatives,” perhaps all the hand-wringing is the result of their conscience rebelling at the adoption of a stance fundamentally at odds with the core principles of conservatism, and indeed of common sense. Or maybe there is some residual embarrassment over aligning themselves with the most villainous ideological forces of the modern era. In reading and listening to commentary on possible cuts to the Federal budget, I have noticed that the Department of Defense usually is treated as sacrosanct. It is lumped in with Social Security and Medicare as a permanent, untouchable feature of the District of Columbia.
I believe that the restoration of fiscal sanity requires massive cuts to the defense budget. This can be accomplished while actually boosting national security. There is no reason, other than protecting sinecures and pork, to desist from wielding the scalpel. Bloat and waste are off the charts. The nominal defense budget is approaching the trillion dollar mark. It goes well beyond that point when you factor in dark ops, foreign military aid, and the numerous defense-related functions that are domiciled in other parts of the government. A prime example is the Department of Energy, which has responsibility for the nuclear arsenal as well as the national “laboratories.” We all know about the obscenely expensive weapons systems that don’t work, and have heard the legendary stories of hundred-dollar hammers and such. Is there no way to fix this? Should be a top priority for the incoming Secretary of Defense. He might also be interested in the battalions of consultants who do nothing but consult, and in the research institutes that research how to make PowerPoint slides. The trough that feeds these hogs is virtually bottomless. One beneficial move would be to restore the name of the DoD to the Department of War, as it was called prior to 1947. Let’s be frank about the purpose of this organization: killing people and blowing things up. Everything else is extraneous. If some project or personnel are not directly involved in this mission, they can be cut. This is one area that I believe will be at least partially addressed by the new administration, as DEI, gender madness, and other such pursuits are dismantled, saving money while improving the military’s warfighting capability. Of all the 800-pound gorillas wandering around the room, the hardest to tackle may very well be the role and presence of the U.S. military in the international arena. Does the defense of the United States really necessitate hundreds of bases and installations in scores of countries? Even if it did, the Federal government is bankrupt; an orderly drawdown is certainly preferable to the sudden impact of foreclosure. Putting an end to harebrained interventions such as the wars in Afghanistan and Ukraine will of course save substantial sums of money. Why expand NATO onto Russia’s doorstep? Come to think of it, NATO itself can be terminated; it has far outlived its original purpose. And on the other side of the world, do we need to constantly antagonize China by “patrolling” their backyard? And then stop the meddling in the Middle East. There is no longer any need to maintain the fiction of the Petrodollar system—it’s dead as a doornail. Let Saudi Arabia and Israel handle regional security. We can sell them weapons, and give them a free hand to manage the lunatics in their midst. Instead of "peace in the Middle East," try to forge arrangements that are sustainable. Here’s a novel idea: use the military to defend the homeland. Bring our boys home, as the Left used to say before they became warmongers. If you want to beef up America’s strategic position beyond its borders, concentrate on the Western hemisphere. While we thump our chests over Taiwan, China is quietly expanding its influence in Latin America. Yes, take back the Panama Canal, as Mr. Trump has promised. It’s time to revive the Monroe Doctrine. That would be the kind of imperialism I could get behind. Forge alliances with Milei in Argentina, and other like-minded governments. Meanwhile, I hear the cha-ching of the cash register in the background, as the savings pile up to the ceiling. [To my American readers: I wish you a Happy Thanksgiving!]
* * * A ceasefire has been announced in the war between Israel and Hezbollah. Everyone in the Middle East, from the beggar in Cairo to the citrus farmer on the kibbutz to the King of Saudi Arabia, knows that it will never hold, and that it constitutes a victory for Hezbollah. Of all the factors contributing to this disaster, one is missing from most analysis of the situation: Israel's Deep State. Yes, Israel is ruled by its very own Deep State. And that Deep State is firmly in the hands of the Left, and thus hostile to the interests of the majority of the population, who, for lack of a better term, are “conservative” (i.e., guided by common sense). The Deep State of Israel, its Leftist Establishment if you prefer, includes the security/intelligence apparatus, the high command of the military, the news media, academia, the cultural elite, and the judiciary. They run the country, plain and simple. The “government” led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has figurehead status only; it runs nothing of consequence. The Israeli Deep State routinely conducts spurious investigations and other forms of lawfare over alleged wrongdoing by patriotic officials, and arrests them at will. (For in-depth coverage of these shenanigans, I recommend Caroline Glick). They kneecap the army in its conduct of war. They also work hand-in-hand with woke American and European NGOs to demoralize the population. The Israeli judiciary, particularly the Supreme Court, issues outrageous edicts at its leisure, backing the Deep State while nullifying a wide range of government policy initiatives, notably in the area of national security. Ideologically speaking, the Israeli judiciary is slightly to the left of Mao. No one has been able to stop this robed dictatorship, until some brave souls in the Knesset (parliament) introduced judicial reform legislation to rein in the worst excesses. The Deep State rallied, organizing riots and other mischief—even in the midst of an existential war—as part of a campaign to “save democracy.” They wail and lament that the evil fascist Netanyahu and his henchmen want to extinguish human rights, heretofore safeguarded by the holy judiciary. Does all this sound familiar? It should; the situation is roughly analagous to the first Trump administration. In both cases, the Deep State continues to pilot the ship of state, despite the nominal transfer of power. Meanwhile, the entire world thinks that the country is now “right wing,” while the Left merrily continues its agenda of mayhem. It wasn’t always like this. Sure, Israel was always controlled by the Left, but in the old days, these elements were mostly patriots who loved the country and its people. Let’s give credit where credit is due: they built the state. The real shift in attitudes began around 1977, when Menachem Begin became prime minister. As a result of that election, the Knesset/cabinet slipped out of the Left’s control. This could not be tolerated. The nation had to be punished for rejecting the glories of socialism. It didn’t take long for the Deep State to counterattack, committing itself to sabotaging the government. The Left hounded the country during and after its victory over the PLO in the Lebanon War of 1982, turning a decisive military win into an unnecessary quagmire (and laying the groundwork for the current Lebanon mess). Over the next decade, the Left regained control of the Knesset, and the populist annoyance was eliminated. The table was set for the great betrayal: the Oslo Accords of 1993. This was the Left’s crowning achievement, unmatched in its treachery. The Left had set a trap from which Israel (and the Arabs, for that matter) has never been able to escape. This also marks the moment when, for the first time in the history of the state, free speech was suppressed; dissenters were persecuted as “obstacles to peace.” In the U.S. as in Israel, the central issue, towering above all others, is this: How can the Left be stopped and ultimately neutralized? The survival of both countries—not to mention the rest of the “Collective West”—depends on it. Thank God we still have a few true statesmen left in the world. One of my favorites these days is Viktor Orban. The Hungarian prime minister has refused to allow his country to be dragged into the mire of globalist and “progressive” mischief that has characterized the West for decades.
His latest poke in the eye of the Leftist cyclops: Ignoring the arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, issued last week by the International Criminal Court (ICC). Orban has invited his Israeli counterpart to visit Hungary, in defiance of the warrant. Orban can see right through the ICC charade. These midwit woke bureaucrats sit in The Hague and issue their pompous edicts, as if from Mount Olympus. I suppose that if they experience too much pushback from this latest escapade, they can always arrest some global-warming denier for “genocide.” Mr. Netanyahu is in good company. In March 2023, a similar ICC arrest warrant was directed at Russian President Vladimir Putin. I wonder if Russia’s list of potential targets for the Oreshnik missile includes a certain address in the Netherlands. |
Dystopian literatureWelcome to the blog! While you're here, check out the six dystopian novels by Gary Wolf. His latest is The Cubist Supremacy. 
Archives
June 2025
Categories
All
Interesting viewpointsAce of Spades |
RSS Feed