Tuesday, December 30, 2008

Why the Fuss About "Disproportional" Force? Nothing Else Makes Sense!

By John W. Lillpop

With the expiration of the cease fire truce between Hamas and Israel, rocket attacks against southern Israel have intensified and threatened to engulf the region in all out war.

On December 26, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert appealed to Gazans to stop the attacks or face a violent response.

On December 27, Israel began a major campaign to counter ongoing rocket fire out of Gaza. Since then, Israel has not stinted its efforts and has doubled its troops along the Gaza border. 6,500 reservists have been called to arms.

Naturally, fuzzy thinkers throughout the world, including those hiding in the United Nations, have condemned Israel for using "Disproportional" force.

Why is it that, when it comes to Israel, any use of force, regardless of provocation, is automatically disproportional in the eyes of those who hate Jews and the United States?

Much of the world would, if possible, eradicate Israel into non-existence as a Jewish state. Drive the Jews into the sea, they say, and the world will be blessed with peace and universal love.

Much of the world would have Israel wait until disproportional force is used against her, before reciprocating in equal measure.

However, from the Israeli perspective, disproportional force is the only strategy that makes a lick of sense. After all, the objective is to survive and that means stopping rocket attacks launched by a terrorist group, right?

Given the fact that Israel's only hope for ending the violence against her own people is by using disproportional force, why delay? Go after the terrorists, and root them out with all you have!

To do otherwise would be foolish and would only result in even more loss of life.

Although President-elect Barack Obama is still weeks away from taking office, one must wonder how much his looming presidency is escalating the drive toward war in Gaza?

Last spring, for example, Hamas political adviser Ahmed Yousef said that the terrorist group supports Obama's foreign policy vision.

"Actually, we like Mr. Obama. We hope he will [win] the election and I do believe he is like John Kennedy, great man with great principle," he said last April. (1)

For his part, candidate Obama declared that Hamas has "legitimate" claims and that the U.S. needs a foreign policy that needs to determine the root causes of problems and dangers. (2)

Are Hamas and Israel "acting out" in order to set the tone for the new president?

The larger question: Just what is it about being a community organizer from Chicago that qualifies anyone, regardless of how clean and articulate, to deal with international issues like the war between Israel and the Palestinians?