Monday, August 14, 2006

Whatever Happened to "Unconditional Surrender?"

My subject for this post was kindled by reflecting on the so-called "war on terror" and the situation between Israel and Hezbollah, which is just one battle in the larger conflict. Without doubt, this has to be the most curious "war" I have seen in my lifetime, and I am certain that history will flag it as one of the most curious in the history of warfare.

To preface my remarks, I am going to state at the outset that I feel no need to repeat most of the platitudes so easily thrown up by well-meaning Christians these days whenever a conflict arises. Some things ought to be givens. No one naming the name of Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior WANTS war, bloodshed, murder or mayhem. However, the Bible is not pacifistic and neither is biblical Christianity. There is a time for war and a time for peace. Western civilization is faced with a war it did not want and does not seek. How the West responds to the current gauntlet being slapped in its face and thrown to the ground will be telling. Thus far, I am not encouraged.

Looking back over U.S. history, I believe there has been a sea change in the way America responds to such challenges, and that sea change has been fanned by a host of contributing factors. Identifying those contributing factors will be the subject of another post in due time. But for now, let us look back at the conflicts in America's past, specifically World War II. Once war was declared and our nation was committed, our policy was "unconditional surrender." We didn't look for negotiation with Hitler, Tojo and Mussolini. Our view was simple. "We didn't begin this war, but we're going to finish it." To our leaders (and to the bulk of the American people), nothing less than total victory was acceptable. We believed that the war machines of the Axis powers must be smashed, and we would not accept anything other than unconditional surrender. Otherwise, military action would continue until the attacking power was devastated. Eventually, unconditional surrender was what we obtained. After the conflict, the key leaders of the attacking powers either committed suicide or were caught, tried and hung.

Japanese Admiral Yamamoto understood this. When the radical militarists in Japan were beating their chests following Pearl Harbor, the admiral was not so gleeful. He stated, "I fear all we have done is to awaken a sleeping giant." He also foretold that the aroused wrath of the American people would be terrible and devastating to Japan. He was right.

That was then. Today, we have a threat facing us that is just as dangerous as the militant fascism of World War II. But Americans seem to have lost that steadfast spirit that united the nation in the face of that dark shadow. We've been too infected with the United Nations/Diplomatic virus borne by globalist tzetze flies. It started in Korea and culminated in Vietnam. Of course, these were "police actions" and not real wars. Yeah, sure. I could say more about the United Nations, but I'd get my blood pressure up and would be awake all night. I'll do that later.

A large chunk of our Western allies are timorous, fretful and vacillating when it comes to a united action against this threat. To his credit, the UK's Tony Blair seems to understand the stakes, but he's taking a lot of heat at home over it. It's sad, too. The brave, united people that endured the German blitz and inspired the world during the Battle of Britain were of another generation, and the country's capital is now jokingly called "Londinistan" in many quarters. The same could be said of several European capitals and cities.

How does this relate to Israel and Hezbollah? Simple. Israel seems to have been forced to back off, and the world will rue it. I think there is plenty to criticize about the Olmert government's inept handling of the conflict, but that, too, will come later and by Israeli politicians whose warnings have largely been unheard. Israel's policy should have been to use overwhelming force and to accept only unconditional surrender as an end. The United States and Western powers should have stood solidly by Israel and fought along with her if need be. It didn't happen that way. I am sorry to say that only more bloodshed lies ahead, because demon-possessed fanatics like Nazrallah and his ilk lust for it. Rather than being crushed, the poisonous snakes are left alone to breed, multiply, fortify and bite again down the road. Again, we will rue the day that we let Kofi Annan decide matters such as this. Our own administration began well in Afghanistan. What happened?

I conclude by issuing a challenge to so-called moderate Muslim nations, as well as individual Muslims. You say that the terrorists don't represent Islam, nor you. Great. I am glad to hear it. Put some action behind that then, and start turning them in. Don't give them aid, comfort or sanctuary. As far as the Muslim governments are concerned, let me see you put your money where your mouth is. Round them up. Execute them if necessary. Close down the madrassas that are teaching the young how to spew hate. Let me see some of you actually have Israel on your maps. Stop allowing the Muslims in your nations who oppose the fanatics to be persecuted and killed. Let's see your news media actually report both sides of the issues, and report them fairly.

Nations such as Jordan and Pakistan have done quite a bit. More can be done, especially by Saudi Arabia. In fact, responsibility for quite a lot of this nonsense lies at the door of Saudi clerics and money. Now it might come back to bite them, and none too soon. There are many Saudis who privately want change, but are fearful of expressing it. This is also sad.

Until we begin seeing some concrete evidence that the majority of Muslims are really, really with us in this "war on terror," all protestations to the contrary are only so much bloviating or prevarication.

It's time to return to the doctrine of unconditional surrender. I just hope that our governments aren't the ones who will be surrendering.

6 comments:

crownring said...

The Saudi royals are in an extremely precarious position, Sola. Radical Saudi clerics have attained to a great deal of power and they're the ones who are keeping the people of Saudi Arabia in chains. Many of the Saudi royals have been investing their money out of the country for the sake of their own security should the government fall and they're forced to flee for their lives.

There are a lot of people in Iran who do not like the current state of affairs in Tehran either and would welcome change there as well. The reason that they don't speak up is that they are quite frankly sick of revolution and are often persecuted. Quite simply, being sown inside of a sack and then stoned or shot to death does not appeal to most people, particularly those whom have children. A former hairstylist of mine would not say she was from Iran because she didn't wish to be persecuted here either.

Joe B. Whitchurch said...

Sola, part of the problem is when the same media that feigns moral outrage with Mel Gibson, emboldens terrorists by picturing Israeli soldiers as intentionally butchering Minnie and Mickey Mouse holding children. Check it out here. Aish.com's New short Movie - Photo Fraud in Lebanon:
Horrific bias. Makes Gibson story small change by comparison imho. See the flash movie account above and tell me what you think...and feel...if you are the grieving parent of a dead Israeli soldier today.

Abby said...

I wouldn't compare Britain of today with Britain of sixty years ago. The threat then was obvious and external, we got warnings of air raids rather than being bombed to bits on buses with no warning, and London is full of Muslims, whether you like it or not, and every time George Bush comes on the television making typically bigoted and ignorant remarks about the Muslim terror threat, the London media have to cover the outrage amongst the Muslim communities in Britain that hatred is being stirred up against them from the American President. So no wonder Blair is taking "heat" for his stance.

Amazingly enough, Muslims are not a hive collective, and the ones who live in Britain for the most part live here because they love Britain and not because they want to kill everyone who isn't a Muslim. So every time George Bush generalises about Muslims I wish he would just keep his mouth shut.

It's not like the Britain of sixty years ago. You have told me not to comment on things I don't understand. Well, British culture and politics are not your strong suit.

SolaMeanie said...

Abby,

Thank you for your comments. I pray that the Lord will bless you and your family abundantly in the days ahead.

When you have some extra time, you might want to read up on the peace of the Quraysh and what it means. That might help explain why I am so concerned about this issue. It's just a part of the whole ball of wax, but important.

Abby said...

Solameanie,

What do you propose doing? About the Muslim threat? Pogroms? Ghettoes? Round them all up and send them to extermination camps? What exactly? These are law abiding and peaceful citizens living amongst us who contribute much to the British economy.

And then there are the extremists. And the extremists need to be stopped. But calling all Muslims "the enemy" is very much in line with Nazi Germany's thinking. It's overly simplistic and it's backward and counter-productive.

I don't know how to solve the world's problems but scapegoating people because they have brown skins and go to Mosque is not the way forward.

Thanks for the recommended reading, I will try, but at the moment I'm reading up a lot about the Second World War.

SolaMeanie said...

Abby,

All I can do is ask you to read again what I said. Read it two or three times if need be. Did you see where I mentioned those Muslims who did not support the actions of the killers, and how the respective governments need to protect them from reprisal? I think that in and of itself should show that I am not calling ALL Muslims the enemy. Also, nowhere did I suggest having pogroms or concentration camps.

As to profiling, in my view this practice isn't racism or bigotry. It's common sense. If those who are trying to kill you are largely Middle-Eastern Muslim men, it makes no sense to strip search an 90 year old Dutch grandmother at the airport just so someone's "self-esteem" won't be hurt.

If there was a Welsh gang of killers out there targeting people who rode subways or airplanes, you can bet that I'd want anyone named Griffith to be scrutinized.

Be that as it may, we will accomplish nothing by shredding each other. I do pray for the safety of you and your family, and that God will guide your government in catching all those responsible for this current wave of terror.