Hezbollah “A Formidable Foe.” Who Knew???
And now, straight from the cover of DUUUHHH!!! Magazine: Israel has found Hezbollah to be a tougher enemy than they expected. Heellllooooo!!!!!!!!
Let’s see, what’s that saying about repeating history if you don’t learn from it…and something about neurotic people doing the same thing over and over and over and being just shocked when they keep getting the same result.
Haven’t any of our world “leaders” ever read The Art of War? Supposedly it’s required reading for high-ranking military officers. It’s also part of the curriculum at a lot of business schools.
Apparently our leaders have read the repeated warnings to “Know Your Enemy.” They’ve read over and over not to underestimate the enemy. A country won’t be easy to conquer just because it’s smaller. A guerrilla group won’t be a pushover just because they’re poor or under-equipped.
So our geniuses have read these lessons, and they keep saying “let’s conquer this country; they’re smaller than us.” “Let’s send in a few missiles and take out this guerrilla group once and for all.”
How many times throughout history has this happened? In the 1700s, France and England both dismissed those ragtag peasants and rebels who were dissatisfied. And look what happened.
Every time we sent a few more troops into Vietnam, it was “OK, this’ll finish them off.” Didn’t happen.
Thirty years later, Bush and Cheney said “it’ll be a cakewalk. Our soldiers will be greeted as liberators.” Uh, ahem…
And now it’s Israel’s turn. “Let’s take out that ragtag terrorist group once and for all. They won’t be any match for our tanks and missiles.”
We’ll see…
posted by Tom Harper @ 5:39 PM
11 Comments:
Great post.
It does seem leaders tend to overreach sometimes, thinking they will be exceptions to the lessons of history when it comes to things like invading and conquering, or ruling with an iron hand. Even if the words "I don't think this is a good idea" ever crossed the minds of people like Paul Wolfowitz, Dick Cheney or GWB, such people are still stupid enough to think they are chosen to succeed, or that they are somehow exceptions... and that a concept as flawed as the Iraq war could actually produce results that would be favorable to the U.S.
As much as I think Bush would like unlimited power for himself as president, with no term limits, no Constitution, no Senate, no House, no Supreme Court, no checks or balances whatsoever... I am confident that if those are his ambitions he won't succeed, and that he can't succeed. If he was dumb enough to try something like martial law, I like to believe Americans would not stand for it. What scares me is, I think he IS stupid enough to try it, and that we may be one more major terrorist attack away from the attempt.
"In the 1700s, France and England both dismissed those ragtag peasants and rebels who were dissatisfied. And look what happened."
Are any of our world leaders able to look at such things and draw logical conclusions? I am really not sure Bush is.
Snave: Yeah, I don't know what it is about running a powerful country. If you have enough power, all history lessons and common sense seem to just go out the window.
Israel's one of the mightiest countries in the world, in spite of their small size; and now it seems they're making the same mistakes that large bloated has-been countries have always made.
I'm not on either side in this Middle Eastern war (except that our country needs to stay the hell out of it).
Not a great post. Why don't you just come out with it: You're rooting for Hezbollah!
Donald, surely you jest.
I don't see anyplace where Tom actually said, or even insinuated he was "rooting for Hezbollah!" He is simply pointing out what appears to be a truth, that is, that leaders of powerful nations don't seem to learn from history. He simply points out how things have happened in the past, and how things are happening today. He is pointing out that Israel may well be getting more than it bargained for this time. I'm not rooting for Hezbollah either, and I happen to be in agreement with what Tom says: our leaders should do a better job of paying attention to the lessons of history.
Great post, Tom.
Donald Douglas: You need to sharpen your reading skills a little. Nowhere in the post did I say was "rooting" for anyone. And in an earlier comment I said: "I'm not on either side in this Middle Eastern war (except that our country needs to stay the hell out of it)." Can't get much clearer than that.
Annonny-Maus: Christianity and Islam are both hateful and dangerous religions. The Bible and Koran both have lots of peaceful passages, but the extremists of both religions only focus on the hateful parts. (You bought a Koran? Have fun.)
"...the old "league of nations" method of thought, and appeasement and tolerance are the thought patterns of a bygone era." Careful what you wish for. Japan and China own us financially, and if we got in a war with China, who knows? We may need the UN to protect us from everybody that Bush has alienated.
Snave: Thanks for your comment.
Annonny-maus: I hadn't heard of CAIR or Anti-CAIR. But good luck in fighting their lawsuit. At least we agree on religions. I'm an Agnostic. I think most religions are just an excuse for hatred and bloodshed.
This "donald douglas" character is a complete 'tard. If he actually knew how to both read AND comprehend the words simultaneously, he never would have left such an idiotic comment.
Take care, Tom,
ariK
Oh, and as for my 2 cents on BOTH "the bible" and "the koran" (I see no particular need to bless either textbook with capitalization): GET THE FUCK OVER IT, PEOPLE, these book were written by mere mortal men...and as random human homeboys, who is to say that the words contained in either are sacred?!?
There is a copy of The Art Of War somewhere in this mess beside me. Great book writen by a wise man, but I'm afraid it goes over the head of most of today's world leaders.
God Bless America, God Save The Republic.
Ariadnek: Yup, that's about it, the Bible and Koran were both written by mortals. And probably translated and re-translated lots of times. The Word of God/Allah?? Don't think so.
David: It's a great book. I still have it, but I haven't looked at it for a long time. I keep meaning to dust it off and re-read it.
Of course Annony-maus is probably referring to ORGANIZED religion, in which case I agree: I abhor it also. In case that isn't what was meant, though...
Here is the definition of "religion" from www.m-w.com:
Main Entry: re·li·gion
Pronunciation: ri-'li-j&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English religioun, from Anglo-French religiun, Latin religion-, religio supernatural constraint, sanction, religious practice, perhaps from religare to restrain, tie back -- more at RELY
1 a : the state of a religious (a nun in her 20th year of religion) b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance
2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices
3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : CONSCIENTIOUSNESS
4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith
Somehow, I have to believe that a belief in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of all fits with definition #2 of the word "religion" in that such a belief represents at least a personal set of religious attitudes or beliefs, which I think is cool for anyone who has such religious beliefs.
Post a Comment
<< Home