The Spirit of Entebbe - Doing the "Unthinkable"

Liberal opinion in the US along with the entire political spectrum in Europe take the position that military action against Iran, if it does not give up its nuclear program, is "unthinkable" and would be a "disaster". In an attempt to play "warrior" they put up all kinds of reasoning about tactical problems against eliminating Iran's capability militarily (scattered facilities; "buried too deep"; "unacceptable" (by who?); civilian casualties). Apparently, military action is only acceptable and feasible for "humanitarian" causes like Kosovo and Bosnia - and most definitely only against White/Christian regimes like Serbia.

Since Iran has been able to ignore things like economic sanctions with impunity (aided and abetted by Russia, China and our so-called allies), peremptorily taking all forms of military action off the table amounts to giving Iran a green light to do anything it wants without fear of significant retaliation. All the Liberals in the West recoiled with horror at Hillary Clinton's suggestion that Iran would be obliterated if it attacked Israel, giving Iran, in effect, the go-ahead to obliterate Israel if it should ever gain the capability to do so, without any fear of consequences (after-all we wouldn't want to hurt innocent Iranian civilians just because they would be joyful at any effort to annihilate the dirty Jews!).

As always, pusillanimous western "leaders" are ready to give up others' freedom and lives, just so they can live up to their "high" pacifist principles. Of such intellectually bankrupt mindsets are historic disasters fashioned. Are you listening, Barrack Hussein Obama?

To show their bona fides and to seal the deal, Liberals always like to talk in military terms, throwing around words like "tactical" and "strategic", setting up straw dummies - only to knock them down - to argue that military action is not feasible and, thus, should be "off-the-table": In this instance, they assert that the only option is aerial bombing (shades of Serbia!) and that, since Iran's facilities are scattered and dug in, the US would have to use very heavy weapons, like bunker-busting bombs or even tactical nuclear weapons (oh heaven forefend!) that would result in civilian casualties - something that, apparently, was not a big moral issue when bombing Serbia. Yet, of course, the actual military campaign may and SHOULD include special operations forces attacking on the ground to take out the hidden and deeply dug-in targets. Sadly, the kind of ground action that would be required may end up being near-suicidal missions.

In our current mind-set, especially as the Bush administration comes to and end and pacifism, in the person of Democrats, dominate our country (remember, "It’s all about the troops") these kinds of missions will not be undertaken by the USA. The unfocused, deluded, American public will be stirred up to oppose such a mission unless someone can demonstrate "imminent" danger and, certainly, the Democrats and the Liberal-dominated media will ensure that that will not happen.

For the Israelis, however, the equation is quite different. For them it will be a question of "suicide missions now; or assured national suicide later". It is hoped that under better and more resolute national leadership, the Israelis will re-ignite the "spirit of Entebbe" and do what needs to be done... And Iranian "civilian" casualties be damned.