What he said

Since I can’t say it better, I won’t try. Here’s just the opening of Charles Krauthammer’s most recent column about the world pile-up against Israel and what Israel should do it about it:

What other country, when attacked in an unprovoked aggression across a recognized international frontier, is then put on a countdown clock by the world, given a limited time window in which to fight back, regardless of whether it has restored its own security?

What other country sustains 1,500 indiscriminate rocket attacks into its cities — every one designed to kill, maim and terrorize civilians — and is then vilified by the world when it tries to destroy the enemy’s infrastructure and strongholds with precision-guided munitions that sometimes have the unintended but unavoidable consequence of collateral civilian death and suffering?

Hearing the world pass judgment on the Israel-Hezbollah war as it unfolds is to live in an Orwellian moral universe. With a few significant exceptions (the leadership of the United States, Britain, Australia, Canada and a very few others), the world — governments, the media, U.N. bureaucrats — has completely lost its moral bearings.

The word that obviates all thinking and magically inverts victim into aggressor is “disproportionate,” as in the universally decried “disproportionate Israeli response.”

When the United States was attacked at Pearl Harbor, it did not respond with a parallel “proportionate” attack on a Japanese naval base. It launched a four-year campaign that killed millions of Japanese, reduced Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki to a cinder, and turned the Japanese home islands to rubble and ruin. Disproportionate? No. When one is wantonly attacked by an aggressor, one has every right — legal and moral — to carry the fight until the aggressor is disarmed and so disabled that it cannot threaten one’s security again. That’s what it took with Japan.

Britain was never invaded by Germany in World War II. Did it respond to the blitz and V-1 and V-2 rockets with “proportionate” aerial bombardment of Germany? Of course not. Churchill orchestrated the greatest land invasion in history that flattened and utterly destroyed Germany, killing untold innocent German women and children in the process.

The perversity of today’s international outcry lies in the fact that there is indeed a disproportion in this war, a radical moral asymmetry between Hezbollah and Israel: Hezbollah is deliberately trying to create civilian casualties on both sides while Israel is deliberately trying to minimize civilian casualties, also on both sides.

There’s so much more, and it’s so well-written and compelling, that you ought to treat yourself to a trip over to the whole article.

UPDATE:  I realized that my quotation code vanished.  I’ve corrected it, so it should be easier to see what Krauthammer wrote, versus what I wrote (if the different content, depth, and style hadn’t already given that away).

Be Sociable, Share!
  • http://ymarsakar.blogspot.com/ Ymarsakar

    You should read Jimbo’s anecdotal account of his personal experiences with the UN. It isn’t pretty.

    http://www.blackfive.net/main/2006/07/kofi_annan_wors.html

    The UN was designed to keep the peace between the two superpowers, the Soviets and America. It did this by endless debates, endless obstruction, and endless footdragging and corruption. When the peace process is so corrupt that it is beholden to neither side, neither US or Soviets, then the US and the Soviets cannot achieve a decisive majority of power in the UN. The US and the Soviets allowed this to occur, because to the US, anything was better in control of the US than the Soviets. Ditto for the Soviets, anything was better to give power to in the UN, than American allies.

    So, what happens when the Soviets disappear and the purpose of the UN disappears as well? Jimbo describes it quite well.

    The UN Resolutions were never MEANT to be enforced. It was just a delaying function in order to give some time so that both superpowers could cool the pock down before they killed human civilization.

    You can better truely understand what the UN is now when you know what it was designed for originally. A lot of UN supporters and collaborationists have forgotten the purpose of the UN. So they fabricate purposes and pretexts in order to justify their theft and corruption in the UN.

  • Pingback: Webloggin - Blog Archive » What He Said()