Move right along. Y'all can tell me that the West is full of evil Zionist neocon warmongers all you want, but the reality of the matter is dramatically different:
Basically, here's the situation we are faced with:—We in the West largely think of things in terms of "diplomacy" and "negotiation," because that's the state of the world we've
grown into. This state of affairs wasn't reached overnight, but rather was the end result of countless
wars amongst ourselves. The results of each period of conflict has historically led the nations of the West—the Christian
nations of the West—to institute rules, bodies, and procedures that helped to lessen the impact of war on the civilian
populace. And these are the frameworks that lead us to think of every conflict in terms of dialogue.
The portion of the Islamic world that seeks global domination (Jamaat-al-Islami, Hezbullah, Hamas, the Iranian Revolution, the Muslim Brotherhood—They're all related in intent
, at the very least) does not
abide by such dialogue. These groups have repeatedly proven that they have no intention of abiding by the Geneva Conventions—taking diplomats hostage, refusing access by the International Red Cross to prisoners, funding non-uniformed guerilla forces, hiding behind civilians.
What if there are
groups out there, as Hezbollah obviously does, that want
to undermine the governments and institutions of the West? That refuse
to participate in the same conventions and agreements that we, the West, bind ourselves to?
I'd love to hear some responses from my handful of left-leaning, "progressive" readers:—How exactly does
one dialogue with a "rogue" entity that doesn't abide by any agreed rules of conduct?
How can we in the West respond to violence committed against
us, if we can't even get beyond the point of thinking in terms of "discussion?"
It's food for thought, if nothing else.