Sunday, August 13, 2006

The UN Ceasefire that will not hold - and if it did, it would simply be a chance for Hezbollah to re-arm

The United Nations is unreal. Do they really think that Islamic terrorists (which, by the way, according to the cable news channels, it is not politically correct to use Islam and terrorism in the same sentence) will adhere to a cease fire? And if they did, all they would do is re-arm. By the way, yesterday 247 Katyusha rockets made their way into Israel. The fighting has intensified as the so-called cease-fire approaches.

And this news comes on the heals of information that the London Terrorists recently stopped by the British were going to use their little children to carry out the plot.

And Hezbollah has said they will not voluntarily disarm (really? What a shock!)

The United Nations hold to an agenda that is doomed to fail.

This truce will not take hold. The self-righteousness of the UN sickens me.

I'm so flabbergasted by this, I don't even know what to say. It reeks of madness, and of danger to Israel and freedom worldwide.

By the way, notice that the New York Times didn't jump into the debates over the foiled terrorist plots in Britain - - because the NYT and the liberal left opposes the information gathering techniques used to stop the terrorists. You know, things like spontaneous phone surveillance by the NSA of suspected overseas calls, and coerced interrogation of captured terror suspects.

Good thing the ACLU and NYT has no influence on the Scotland Yard, otherwise, the plot might have succeeded.

If by some strange chance this cease-fire succeeds, people forget, Hezbollah and the Islamic Radicals began this war with Israel, rather than simply return two soldiers. This will not be a cease fire if the fighting stops. It will be a chance for Hezbollah to re-arm.

In the meantime, Kim Jong Il has re-emerged, and our judges here believe that the American Voter's wishes should be overturned when concerned with abortion, sex predators. . . and the liberal left has decided that God is a larger threat than terrorism.

Okay, sorry for bouncing around, but this is getting ridiculous. How stupid can the left be? How low can they stoop?

I have a feeling that the answer is worse than we can possibly imagine.

A cease-fire would be great if it could succeed because of course nobody wants war, but the bad-guys must be put away, not left in place. This cease-fire by the UN is weak and allowing the bad guys to get away to fight another day, with a larger armament.

The left and enlightened people of the world miss that, somehow. They miss it all. They just don't get it, and that is a shame, because all of us will pay in the long run for their short-sightedness.

Oh, by the way, why isn't the U.N. passing a resolution pushing sanctions against Syria and Iran for their part in this war, and their support of worldwide terrorism?

4 comments:

Patty said...

By this time we have enough evidence against the publishers and owners of the times and on members of the aclu to bring charges of treason against them. Why on earth we don't take the hard line in these issues is beyond me.

jarhead john said...

The NYT won't support the war on terror, because they feel that it violates the rights of the "freedom fighters." While pathetic, at least they're somewhat consistant.

The hypocrisy of this entire cease fire is appalling. The terrorist nutjobs will indeed rearm and re-fortify their positions. Probably with the aid of the Lebanese army, which is supposed to be ensuring the direct opposite.

huwtube said...

I have to disagree with the tone of this article. You have dismissed the possibility of a peaceful end to the conflict (one which eventually emerged) by referring to Hezbollah as terrorists. Well exactly who a terrorist is depends on a matter of definition. As far as I am concerned, the state of Israel has become a terrorist organisation through its bombing campaign on Lebanon. This action was designed to bring terror to the Lebanese people through violence and destruction. As for Hezbollah, firing rockets at the army is not really terrorism. Now the kidnapping and shelling was a terror campaign of sorts. The lesson? Stop using terrorist to describe groups of people because it demonises them when we need to do business with them. Hezbollah act as a substitute for a government and proper national army, which Lebanon might have it it hadn't been decimated by Israel 24 years ago when they invaded.
As for linking this to the terror plot that was foiled in the UK, well that's just tenuous and ill conceived. At any rate, we don't even know if there was a plot. The police have remained quiet as to what exactly would have happened on the 10th of August and no further information has come to light. Many suspect it was a way to divert attention from the government's failure to speak out over Lebanon-you may remember the Westminster email on 9/11: 'This would be a good day to bury bad news'

Douglas V. Gibbs said...

you're entitled to your opinion, but when terrorism lands on your home as it has against Israel, and you live in a continuous state of war because of redical Islamic terrorists constantly pounding on your population centers, then maybe you'll see it differently.