Winning freedom for Kantar was one of the reasons Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah cited at the time for going to war with Israel in 2006.
[...]
On Tuesday [July 15, 2008], Hezbollah's commander in south Lebanon, Sheik Nabil Kaouk, called the swap an "official admission of defeat" for Israel.
It's clear how little Islam values life. If the comment by Hassan Nasrallah is to be believed, a war was started to free one man. Irrespective of any other reason in starting the 2006 month-long war, that the freedom of ONE man was among them clearly shows they are willing to throw away hundreds of lives on their own side to acquire the freedom of one man.
It's clear that Islam knows how to push Israel's button. What isn't clear, however, is whether or not Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev were alive immediately after their capture; it is possible that they died shortly after their capture from wounds received during. But it's also very clear that Israel values the lives of their prisoners far more than does Islam-- exchanging live men for coffins. What's not clear is whether or not Gilad Schalit is alive.
What's contemptible is Islam's lousy track record in maintaining the health of its prisoners. Equally contemptible is Israel's leadership during and after the 2006 war. One should never start a fight he doesn't have the stomach to finish. The truth of this is similarly borne out in the Democrat party's political stance-- its own Waterloo --from which they seek to undermine our own fight against Islam.
The best thing that could happen to Israel would be to lose Ehud Olmert as Prime Minister. The best thing that could happen to the Democrat party... well... let's not go there.
3 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Your second quote shows how the radical Islamofascists perceive events if they see this as an admission of defeat for Israel. Why then should it be so hard for the Bush-haters to see that a pull-out (something their fathers should have done [I love that joke]) would also be viewed as a defeat for us. Or that talks with their despotic leaders would be seen as weakness on our part. All the left has to do is listen to what these people say.
We should leave Iraq when our presence becomes less usefull than our absence. Real goals and acomplishments, not some PR timetable from either party in the struggle.
I couldn't agree more. But just because Osama claims victory doesn't mean he's won victory. Genuine Victory will not be achieved until some years down the road when Iraq has weathered a few elections and strengthened its ability to defend itself both from within and without. But that's not to say America has to be there for the duration. Our troops even now have been all but relegated to supporting roles for the Iraqi security forces. This is a trend that is very likely to continue. The Iraqi forces are doing a superb job considering their relative infancy.