SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sully- who wrote (80093)6/3/2010 11:31:34 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
History Returns to Europe

By: Victor Davis Hanson
National Review Online

Vienna -- Walk the beautiful streets in Munich, Strasbourg, and Vienna, and you can see why Europeans thought in the last decades that they had reached the end of history. There is not a soldier to be seen. Sidewalk cafes are jammed midweek with two-hour lunch-goers. Fashion, vacations, and sex dominate the ads and billboards.

Bikers, electric commuter trains, and tiny fuel-efficient cars zoom by in a green contrast to our gas-guzzling Tahoes and Yukons.

Naturally, there is a general sense of satisfied accomplishment among European social democrats. They believe that finally a quiet sameness across their continent has replaced two millennia of constant European warring and revolution. Now, everybody seems to get an apartment, a small car, a state job, a good pension and peace -- and in exchange, all voice comfortable, center-left consensus politics.

But beneath the genteel European Union veneer, few remember that human nature remains constant and does not give even nice Europeans a pass from its harsh laws.

Suddenly, the Greek financial meltdown and the staggering debts that must be repaid alternately enraged and terrified northern-European creditors. Even the most vocal Europhiles are quietly rethinking the entire premise of a European Union that offers lavish benefits but has no sound method of paying for them.

After all, it is one thing to redistribute income by taking money from richer Germans and Austrians to give to poorer Germans and Austrians. But it is something else for all Germans and Austrians to extend their socialist charity to siesta-taking Greeks, Italians, and Spaniards. For all the lofty rhetoric of the collective European Union, age-old culture, language, and nationalism still trump the ideal of continental unity.

But bickering over a trillion dollars in bad southern European debt is not the EU’s only problem. Why, for example, do Europe’s cradle-to-grave entitlements so often end up encouraging declining populations, atheism, and the lower worker productivity that is readily apparent to the casual visitor?


Perhaps if everybody ends up about the same, regardless of effort or achievement, then life must be enjoyed mostly in the here and now. Why sacrifice for children, or put something aside for heirs, or worry over a judgment in the afterlife? The more the European Union talks about its global caring, the less likely its own citizens are to have children.

Europeans flock to their ancient, majestic cathedrals, splendid museums, and grandiose castles to satisfy an innate human desire to enjoy artistic, architectural, and religious achievement, even as it is becoming less likely that they will ever again build a (now politically incorrect) cathedral at Rouen, a Schönbrunn Palace, or a castle on the Rhine.

Much is made of European multiculturalism, the continent’s willingness to allow Muslims from the Middle East, Pakistan, and Turkey to live separate lives without assimilating fully into European society.

But such “tolerance” reflects in part a fear of radical Islam and terrorism. For all of Europe’s talk of progressive attitudes about free speech, feminism, and gay rights, such principles fade quickly when radical Muslims demand sharia law, demonize homosexuals, or threaten European cartoonists and novelists. It is almost as if the more Europe takes pride in its own multiculturalism, the larger its ethnic ghettoes expand -- and the more its native populations grow bitter against the foreign-born.

Europe is a vocal member of the United Nations and other transnational organizations. But this utopian internationalism depends on the protection guaranteed by the United States and its huge military. Otherwise, there would either be costly European militaries -- or the occasional threat of attack. Europeans forgot that, just because they are not looking for war, it doesn’t mean that war might not look for them.

In short, as a reaction to the self-destruction of Europe in World War II and the twin monsters of fascism and Communism, Europeans thought they could change human nature through the creation of an all-caring, all-wise European Union über-citizen. Instead of dealing with human sins, European wise men of the last half-century have simply declared them passé.

But human-driven history is now roaring back with a fury in Europe -- from Mediterranean insolvency to the threat of radical Islam, to demographic decline, to new international dangers on the horizon.

Only one question remains: At a time when Europe is discovering that its democratic socialism does not work, why in the world is the United States doing its best to copy it?

-- Victor Davis Hanson is a classicist and historian at the Hoover Institution, Stanford University, and editor, most recently, of Makers of Ancient Strategy: From the Persian Wars to the Fall of Rome. ©2010 Tribune Media Services, Inc.

.



To: Sully- who wrote (80093)6/4/2010 1:52:32 AM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 90947
 
The Convenient Enemy

By: Jonah Goldberg
National Review Online

On May 29, two days before Israel’s botched raid of six “humanitarian” ships bound for Gaza, Robert Naiman, the policy director of something called “Just Foreign Policy,” had an item in the Huffington Post headlined “Gaza Freedom Flotilla Shows Awesome Power of Nonviolent Resistance.”

Naiman waxed lyrical about how the moral authority of nonviolence had compelled Turkish-controlled Cyprus to help the flotilla while Greek-controlled Cyprus had allegedly caved to Israeli pressure and refused to help the heirs of Gandhi (it couldn’t have been because the Turks were up to no good).

“All this,” Naiman gushed, “and the main confrontation between the Israeli occupation authorities and the Gaza Freedom Flotilla has not yet begun.”

Roughly 48 hours later, the “main confrontation” unfolded.
In fairness, the majority of the “peace activists” on the ships were nonviolent, offering passive resistance. But on the last boat Israelis boarded, the supposed disciples of peace attacked the Israeli commandos. These new Gandhians beat the Israelis with metal bars and even threw one Israeli overboard.

Funny, I’m no expert, but that’s not how Gandhi behaved in the movie. Maybe there was a sequel with Chuck Norris as the Mahatma? “Gandhi’s back, and this time it’s personal!”

The commandos had been equipped with paintball guns, out of deference to the professed pacifism of the activists. But when the goons attacked, out came the real sidearms. Nine “humanitarians” were killed.

Now, one wouldn’t expect Naiman to take Israel’s side. He’d lose his social-justice decoder ring for that. But one might expect him to at least lament the failure of his comrades to stick to their principled nonviolence.

One might also expect kosher pigs to fly.

After the incident, Naiman returned to the Huffington Post not to lament the outbreak of violence but to salute the resolve of the “humanitarians.”


He opened with a question: “How do you know when someone is serious about pursuing a strategy of nonviolent resistance until victory for justice is achieved?” And then he answered it: “When they refuse to turn back in the face of state violence. Damn the commandos. Full speed ahead.” He then went on to celebrate another propaganda ship heading toward Gaza.

How do you know when a proselytizer of nonviolence is full of it? When he doesn’t object to the use of violence.

Among Israel’s friends, there’s a deep and wide consensus that the “flotilla fiasco” was a public-relations disaster, proof that Israel doesn’t know how to work with the global media to shape world opinion.

The first part is almost indisputable at this point. The raid was a disaster. As for the second part -- that Israel’s problems are about public relations -- I’m not so sure.

The assumption is that world opinion is open to hearing Israel’s side of the story. But that hasn’t been the case for years. From the “Jenin massacre” that was no massacre to the idiotic charges of “genocide” that erupt across the Arab world the moment Israel defends itself from missiles or “martyrs,” the presumption is always that Israel is the villain. When it turns out the facts support Israel, it’s at best a footnote or proof the Israelis have manipulated the media.

Question: If Israel is always hell-bent on murder, massacres, and genocide, why is it so bad at it? If its battle plan called for a slaughter, why kill “only” nine people? Why not sink all of the boats?


Meanwhile, is it really the case that Hamas is objectively “good” at public relations? Or Hezbollah? Or Iran? Really? I just don’t see it. To me, these PR operations are less Wag the Dog and more Baghdad Bob (the Monty Python-esque spokesman for Saddam Hussein’s regime). But instead of everyone laughing at the lies and idiocy, millions of people nod their heads in agreement.

North Korea recently sank a South Korean ship. The international reaction has been muted and sober. Turkey -- the Palestinians’ new champion -- has been treating Kurdish nationalists harshly for generations; no one cares. The Russians crush Chechens, the Chinese trample Uighurs. Real genocides unfold regularly in Africa. Iran is pursuing a nuclear bomb. Hamas is openly dedicated to the destruction of Israel. So is Iran.

And yet the only villain as far as much of the world is concerned is Israel. Always Israel.

But none of these facts matter. Indeed, it’s tiring even to recount them in an environment where big lies matters more than obvious truths, where self-defense is “aggression,” where restraint is “genocide,” and where the heirs of Gandhi wield steel pipes.


-- Jonah Goldberg is editor-at-large of National Review Online and a visiting fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. © 2010 Tribune Media Services, Inc.



To: Sully- who wrote (80093)6/4/2010 2:24:45 AM
From: Sully-1 Recommendation  Respond to of 90947
 
Israel, Disarmed

By: Charles Krauthammer
National Review Online

The world is outraged at Israel’s blockade of Gaza. Turkey denounces its illegality, inhumanity, barbarity, etc. The usual U.N. suspects, Third World and European, join in. The Obama administration dithers.

But as Leslie Gelb, former president of the Council on Foreign Relations, writes, the blockade is not just perfectly rational, it is perfectly legal. Gaza under Hamas is a self-declared enemy of Israel -- a declaration backed up by more than 4,000 rockets fired at Israeli civilian territory. Yet having pledged itself to unceasing belligerency, Hamas claims victimhood when Israel imposes a blockade to prevent Hamas from arming itself with still more rockets.

In World War II, with full international legality, the United States blockaded Germany and Japan. And during the October 1962 missile crisis, we blockaded (“quarantined”) Cuba. Yet Israel is accused of international criminality for doing precisely what John Kennedy did: impose a naval blockade to prevent a hostile state from acquiring lethal weaponry.

Oh, but weren’t the Gaza-bound ships on a mission of humanitarian relief? No.
Otherwise they would have accepted Israel’s offer to bring their supplies to an Israeli port, be inspected for military materiél, and have the rest trucked by Israel into Gaza -- as every week 10,000 tons of food, medicine, and other humanitarian supplies are sent by Israel to Gaza.

Why was the offer refused? Because, as organizer Greta Berlin admitted, the flotilla was not about humanitarian relief but about breaking the blockade, i.e., ending Israel’s inspection regime, which would mean unlimited shipping into Gaza and thus the unlimited arming of Hamas.

Israel has already twice intercepted weapons-laden ships from Iran destined for Hezbollah and Gaza. What country would allow that?

But even more important, why did Israel even have to resort to blockade? Because blockade is Israel’s fallback as the world systematically delegitimizes its traditional ways of defending itself -- forward and active defense.

1. Forward defense:
As a small, densely populated country surrounded by hostile states, Israel had, for its first half-century, adopted forward defense -- fighting wars on enemy territory (such as the Sinai peninsula and Golan Heights) rather than its own.

Where possible (Sinai, for example), Israel has traded territory for peace. But where peace offers were refused, Israel retained the territory as a protective buffer zone. Thus Israel retained a small strip of southern Lebanon to protect the villages of northern Israel. And it took many losses in Gaza rather than expose Israeli border towns to Palestinian terror attacks.

But under overwhelming outside pressure, Israel gave it up. The Israelis were told the occupations were not just illegal but at the root of the anti-Israel insurgencies -- and therefore withdrawal, by removing the cause, would bring peace.

Land for peace. Remember? Well, during the past decade, Israel gave the land -- evacuating southern Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005. What did it get? An intensification of belligerency, heavy militarization of the enemy side, multiple kidnappings, cross-border attacks, and, from Gaza, years of unrelenting rocket attack.


2. Active defense:
Israel then had to switch to active defense -- military action to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat (to borrow President Obama’s description of our campaign against the Taliban and al-Qaeda) the newly armed terrorist mini-states established in southern Lebanon and Gaza after Israel withdrew.

The result? The Lebanon war of 2006 and the Gaza operation of 2008-09. They were met with yet another avalanche of opprobrium and calumny by the same international community that had demanded the land-for-peace Israeli withdrawals in the first place. Worse, the U.N.’s Goldstone report, which essentially criminalized Israel’s defensive operation in Gaza while whitewashing the casus belli -- the preceding and unprovoked Hamas rocket war -- effectively delegitimized any active Israeli defense against its self-declared terror enemies.


3. Passive defense:
Without forward or active defense, Israel is left with but the most passive and benign of all defenses -- a blockade to simply prevent enemy rearmament. Yet, as we speak, this too is headed for international delegitimization.

But, if none of these are permissible, what’s left?

Nothing. The whole point of this relentless international campaign is to deprive Israel of any legitimate form of self-defense.

The world is tired of these troublesome Jews, six million -- that number again -- hard by the Mediterranean, refusing every invitation to national suicide. For which they are relentlessly demonized, ghettoized, and constrained from defending themselves, even as the more committed anti-Zionists -- Iranian in particular -- openly prepare a more final solution.


-- Charles Krauthammer is a nationally syndicated columnist. © 2010, The Washington Post Writers Group.


.



To: Sully- who wrote (80093)6/4/2010 2:33:13 AM
From: Sully-1 Recommendation  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 90947
 
Disgracing America

By: Mona Charen
National Review Online

Pres. Barack Obama, who got his start in politics in the living room of domestic terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn and spent his first year in office apologizing for American history, has now decisively tipped U.S. foreign policy toward America’s enemies. Events of the past week have left no doubt.

There is a pattern.
President “Let No Crisis Be Wasted” Obama twists events to justify his radical agenda. A financial crisis becomes the excuse for a massive health-care entitlement. An oil spill is exploited to push an unpopular energy tax. And a jihadist publicity stunt -- the Gaza flotilla -- becomes the occasion to throw Israel to the wolves.

One mentions Ayers and Dohrn not to dwell on the past but because -- hello! -- the pair has been involved with the Free Gaza movement, one of the organizers of the so-called Freedom Flotilla. Venezuela’s Hugo Chávez has announced that he too would like to participate in the next running of the blockade -- and why not? President Obama has blessed the project.

By 1) declaring through Secretary of State Clinton that the blockade of Gaza is “unsustainable and unacceptable”; 2) joining the U.N. Security Council in “condemn[ing] those acts which resulted in the loss of at least ten civilians and many wounded”; and 3) having a White House official tell the Washington Post that there is now a “general sense in the administration that it’s time to change our Gaza policy,” the Obama administration has handed the terrorists a victory.

To review:
In 2005, Israel unilaterally withdrew from Gaza, forcibly uprooting 8,500 Jewish settlers and evacuating all soldiers. The Palestinians were left free to form their own government and run their own affairs. Much of value was left behind. MSNBC reported at the time that “American Jewish donors....bought more than 3,000 greenhouses from Israeli settlers in Gaza for $14 million last month and transferred them to the Palestinian Authority. Former World Bank President James Wolfensohn, who brokered the deal, put up $500,000 of his own cash.”

But the day after Israeli troops departed, the greenhouses were looted. MSNBC reported: “Palestinian police stood by helplessly Tuesday as looters carted off materials from greenhouses in several settlements, and commanders complained they did not have enough manpower to protect the prized assets. In some instances, there was no security and in others, police even joined the looters, witnesses said.”

In 2007, Hamas, the Iranian-backed, Islamist terror group, staged a coup and gained control of Gaza. Too busy to tend greenhouses, they occupied themselves raining 10,000 missiles on Israeli cities and sending kidnappers and suicide bombers across the border.

Israel imposed a blockade to prevent Hamas from receiving weapons or the materials from which to make weapons. Egypt too blockades Gaza. Food, medicine, and other humanitarian relief flow to the inhabitants on a daily basis through Israel. There is no humanitarian crisis in Gaza. As the Washington Post, reports “Gazans readily admit that they are not going hungry . . . [but they] used to be earning $100 per day, smoking Marlboros and going to Egypt every two months on vacation.”

Hamas’s charter, calls for Israel’s destruction, and for the murder of all Jews “no matter how long that should take.” By focusing on the blockade -- as the jihadis and blockade-runners would wish -- instead of on Israel’s justified self-defense, the administration has undermined our own arguments for defeating terrorists.

The administration let it be known that it had “warned” Israel to “use restraint” against the Gaza convoy. There was no corresponding warning to Turkey about supporting and supplying the illegal flotilla. Come to think of it, where was the U.S. warning to Turkey or Brazil for linking arms with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad last month and easing Iran’s path to a nuclear bomb?

The depths of President Obama’s radicalism were evident a year ago, when he sided with Hugo Chávez and the Castro brothers against the people of Honduras as Chávez wannabe Manuel Zelaya attempted to seize power in violation of the country’s constitution. For an American leader to side openly with leftist thugs was shocking.

And when President Obama lost his voice as thousands of brave Iranians braved clubs and bullets to demand their freedom, his values were suspect.

But this week is a new low. Under President Obama’s leadership, the United States has capitulated to terror tactics and to the despicable temptation to blame Israel. America has always been the one country in the world that reliably countered the bullying and the grotesque double standards much of the world applies to Israel. Obama has now joined the jackals. What a disgrace.


-- Mona Charen is a nationally syndicated columnist. © 2010 Creators Syndicate, Inc.


.