Military Solutions and Moderation

Come now various and sundry assembled deep thinkers, writers, artists, etc., penning a declaration to The New York Times, decrying warfare in the middle east, urging an end to "military solutions". They lament the fact that "moderation in the struggle is perceived as weakness".

Oh? What is the "moderate" response to an entity like Hezbollah (the "Party of God"; the mother of all misnomers), which refers to Israel as a cancer to be exterminated? (A thought reiterated by the Iranian President the other day) How does one respond "moderately" when people walk into restaurants or board buses, carrying bombs designed to murder massive numbers of civilians? What is the "moderate" response to Bin Laden?

All things considered, I prefer the response the American Air Force sent Al-Zarqawi. Nothing subtle; impossible to miss the point. After all, if "moderation" worked, Hezbollah would have withered when Israel retreated from Lebanon years ago. Instead, it grew in numbers, sophistication, and murderous belligerence.

Which brings us back to the heartfelt writing of the assembled sages.

Gandhi succeeded only because he contested against a civilized opponent. Movements like his, directed at the Soviets, the Nazis, or the Chinese, produce the Gulag, Auschwitz, and Tiananmen Square. Diplomacy only works when both sides respect common standards of decency. You simply can’t negotiate with someone with a passionate desire to massacre your children. (As was demonstrated in Iraq just the other day, when these nice fellows planted a bomb on a soccer field where children were playing.) Perhaps these avatars of civilization simply can't fathom that people actually hold such uncivilized thoughts.

Consider the Japanese fighting code in World War II, which produced massive casualties among innocent civilians, was exemplified by the brutal treatment of prisoners, and found its clearest expression in Kamikaze pilots. American leadership, faced with that kind of nutty fanaticism, steeled itself to the requirement of taking the casualties necessary to extirpate that idea, root and branch, and to transform Japanese society into one which could hardly imagine ever having held it.

A substantial number of folks, mostly Islamacists, have become devotees of a homicidal, indeed genocidal ideology, for which they willing sacrifice themselves to murder innocents. No alternative to a "military solution" exists (absent a sudden outbreak of sanity among the nutjobs in the Middle East). And only one outcome is acceptable, from the perspective of the United States, Israel, and civilization.

Given our druthers, America and Israel would – tomorrow – delightedly consign our entire militaries to museums. Tanks and planes consume huge sums better spent on massive tax cuts, never mind the irreplaceable lives of our young men and women we often ask them to sacrifice for us.

Unlike our adversaries, we do not burn with a passionate desire to beat children’s brains out with rifle butts. We won’t be driving airliners into buildings in their countries any time soon. We modify our weapons to minimize civilian casualties; they modify theirs to produce the greatest possible number of dead babies. When we kill, we do so reluctantly, and grieve at be compelled to do so; they celebrate and dance on the bodies.

America and Israel ask simply to be left alone in a world in which people can life peaceful lives in freedom. To our adversaries, our very existence constitutes a reason for killing.

"Moderation" in the face of THAT? It’s akin to standing in the wreckage of the Trade Center and equally enjoining both the victims and the perps, "that’s enough of that".

One cannot be neutral, or "moderate", in such a struggle. It’s not merely a case of "he started it", but "he started in now; he started it before; he’s pledged to start it again; and he’s arming to the teeth to kill my kids."

Bad people – evil people – really exist. They own guns and rockets and tanks. They are pointing those guns and rockets and tanks at the good guys – that is to say, us. They are pulling the trigger and killing our kids. If that isn’t reason enough for a "military solution", what is?

The good guys suffer much rather than resort to military solutions. The provocation must be great. How many nations around the world would be better places after a visit from the 101st Airborne? How many tinpot dictators lording over populations of miserable serfs might find a more suitable position courtesy of the US Marines? And, yet, we withhold. Perhaps, in the face of all-too-common evil, we should stand prepared to speak more often in the only language evil understands.

The Middle East will one day be populated by free, prosperous, civilized men, lacking the blinding hatreds and maniacal fanaticism which characterize the region today. Like present day citizens of Japan and Germany, those folks will look back with amazement at the actions and beliefs of their ancestors. But just as it took a "military solution" to bring Germany and Japan into the civilized world – and a clear willingness to do the same finally brought the Soviets to ground – the same will be necessary for the Middle East.

We – the good guys – fight in Iraq, fight in Lebanon, fight in Afghanistan, and look reluctantly toward North Korea and Iran not because we want to, but because we must. The consequences of "moderation" can be seen in lower Manhattan. No one wants war, but if one clearly needs to be fought, let’s get about fighting it and winning it. If fanatics burn with a passion to die for their cause or their god, we should oblige them. Every day of delay permits the forces of evil to grow stronger. As Israel learned, when it bent to world opinion, acted "moderately" and left Lebanon (and Gaza), the bad guys only moved their rockets and bombs closer. And bought more of them. They surrendered not a ounce of their malice.

During WW II, the Japanese essentially pledged to fight to the last man. The only way to defeat them was to prove that, if such was the price they were willing to pay, we were willing to exact it to win. Eventually, they came around to our point of view, but not until our resolve was clear and it became apparent that absolutely nothing would remain of Japan if she continued to fight.

Liberty will advance, country by country, around the world. Peacefully, when possible, but through all necessary means. The forces of freedom will exact the price that our intractable adversaries claim to be willing to pay. The result will be the same: peace and freedom. They can participate, either as free men, living peaceably, or as combat fatalities. But we should reiterate, as one of our greatest presidents said:

Let every nation know, whether it wishes us well or ill, that we shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty.

If ever there comes a time when we are not willing to pay that price, on that day will liberty end.