Saturday, November 18, 2006

Two Perplexing Things

Victor Davis Hanson hits on two things that have puzzled me. The first:

Back home, the Left/Right split on Israel has also been turned upside down. If you wish to read sick hatred about the Jewish state go to the leftist blogs or the campuses, not the Montana badlands. Somehow the Palestinians have reinvented themselves as liberal victims of Western, white male imperialists. Thus, in the manner of Blacks, Chicanos, Gays, and Women they are deserving of the usually accorded sympathy for their oppressed status—never mind the Islamists’ gender apartheid, religious intolerance, homophobia, and fundamentalism that should be so repugnant to the liberal mind.


Whenever I feel bad about how our Left goes berserk over a pair of panties on a prisoner's head while "understanding" the Islamist rage that leads to beheadings and suicide bombings in Iraq, I recall that Israel has it far worse. At least we are too powerful to lead too many people to wonder if it wouldn't be better in the long run to just let our enemies destroy us so we can have a peaceful life. That's what Israel faces.

Is Israel perfect? Certainly not. Is Israel far better than any of its enemies? Certainly. Does that matter to the Globalized Left? Certainly not.

I seriously think that the isolation of Israel could lead Israel to conclude that there is no level of surrender or retreat that could appease the Globalized Left and lead them to hate Israel any less. If Israel concludes that it can never get a sympathetic story out of Le Monde, The New York Times, or the BBC, Israel might decide that they might as well defend themselves with every means available. So don't be surprised if Israel nukes Iran one day. If Israel is going to be condemned for whatever they do, why wouldn't they conclude they might as well get it over with?

But really, how can so-called Progressives hate Israel while lionizing their death-cult enemies?

The second point that Hanson makes is about a charge of the anti-Iraq War people that honestly just makes no sense to me:

Democrats alleged that “We took our eye off Afghanistan by going into Iraq”. My Lord!—this is a country that fought Italy, Japan, and Germany all at once, and was in an inferno on Okinawa while racing eastward past the Rhine, while bombing Berlin, while slogging up through Italy, while igniting the Japanese mainland. Our ancestors apparently had quite a lot more eyeballs than did their lesser sons and daughters.


The idea that we are distracted from Afghanistan by fighting in Iraq is so rock-poundingly stupid that I have trouble even looking anyone who makes the charge in the eye. Unless those making the charge assume we'd send 140,000 troops into Pakistan to ferret out Osama if it wasn't for Iraq.

But we live in a free country and there is no requirement to actually have a clue before expressing an opinion and earnestly believing it is right. See the United States Senate in action if you doubt me.

To be clear, we can do more than one thing at a time. We can fight in Iraq while fighting in Afghanistan. And if North Korea invades South Korea, we will right there with our allies to smash up Pyongyang's military.

Would I be rude to say that the people making the "distraction" charge couldn't walk and chew gum at the same time?

Too many things about the anti-war side puzzle me. Lord, I lack nuance. Clearly.