« Arab World Turning Against Hezbollah | Main | President Bush: Unplugged »

"Tell it to the Marines!"

As Israel continues its systematic destruction of Hezbollah in Lebanon, the usual suspects are already looking to protect the terrorists from their just desserts. UN kleptocrat Secretary General Kofi Annan is looking to the five permanent members of the Security Council (the US, Russia, China, France, and Great Britain) to take the lead in a peace-keeping mission to Lebanon, to separate the two warring sides.

Stories like this make me wonder if Annan and his ilk are so stupid that they don't remember history, or so arrogant that they think we don't. Because I can't see a third explanation.

First up, it's a fool's errand. There is no "peace" to "keep." If anything, the situation would call for "peace-makers," a military force to go in and forcibly separate the two sides -- and that would indeed be insane. Peacekeepers are for enforcing a cease-fire or some other cessation of hostilities, and we are nowhere near that yet.

Secondly, the United States should have absolutely no interest in protecting Hezbollah. Far too many people tend to forget that as of September 10, 2001, Hezbollah had killed more Americans than any other terrorist group in the world.

Thirdly, any American contribution to such a force would most likely involve the Marine Corps. And to send them into that situation would be a terrible, terrible idea.

In 1983, the United States sent forces into Lebanon in order to keep the peace after Israel, fed up with endless attacks by Hezbollah, attacked and devastated Lebanon. (Sound familiar?) And during that attempt at peace-keeping, Hezbollah sent a suicide bomber in a truck loaded with explosives into the US base in Beirut, killing 242 United States Marines.

The Marines have long memories. Their official motto may be "Semper Fidelis," but another term often associated with them is "no better friend, no worse enemy." Hezbollah earned its way on to the list of Marine enemies the old-fashioned way, and while events might have moved them down the list a little, not one damned thing has changed to move them off the Corps' shit list of folks who just need killing. To send them back into Lebanon to once again protect Hezbollah from the logical and just consequences of their actions would be a grave insult to the men and women of the Corps.

Don't get me wrong. I have absolutely no fear that, if ordered, the Corps would do exactly that if ordered to. The one defining element of the Corps, as stated above, is "Semper Fidelis" -- "always faithful." If ordered by their Commander In Chief to go into Beirut and protect Hezbollah from reaping the whirlwind they have sown, the Corps -- down to the last man and woman -- will salute, say "yes, sir," and march off and do just that.

But that fierce loyalty to the Corps is a two-way street. We -- as a nation -- need to be worthy of that awesome faith and trust they bestow on us. As they protect us, we need to protect them. And part of that is respecting their history, their sacrifices, and not putting them in such a situation as defending those who slaughtered Marines by the scores barely two decades ago.

Finally, Hezbollah is not a state. It is a criminal, terrorist organization, and as such deserves no protection from the United NATIONS.

Israel is taking out the world's garbage in Lebanon. Instead of trying to protect the filth, the world should be offering to at least hold the door.

(Hat tip to Wretchard of The Belmont Club, who (as usual) has an insightful take on the matter)


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Tell it to the Marines!":

» A Blog For All linked with Hounding the Hell Out of Hizbullah and Hamas

Comments (32)

Well put. If you're fighti... (Below threshold)

Well put. If you're fighting cancer, do you try to reach a 'ceasefire?' No. You go through the whole difficult process until it's destroyed.

Even if the UN tries to stop you.

Israel is taking out the... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Israel is taking out the world's garbage in Lebanon. Instead of trying to protect the filth, the world should be offering to at least hold the door. Meanwhile Israel is effectively killing many more Lebanese civilian including many children many of them foreigners Canadians, Brazilian etc than the Hezbollan Israel's campaign has killed 179 people, all but 13 of them civilians, and wounded more than 500" ."Denounce Syria and Iran and ceaslessly bomb and instill terror in Beirut the capital of a moderate largely pro-western ,30% Christian, democracy destroying much of the civilian infrastructure..mmmn

"all but 13 of them civi... (Below threshold)

"all but 13 of them civilians"

Except, of course, that they consider Hezbollah members to be "civilians," too, unless we catch them with weapons actually in their hands.

Yes, Steve, that's what hap... (Below threshold)
The Listkeeper:

Yes, Steve, that's what happens when Hezbollah chooses to shield its assets with civilians.

Sad, but the Lebanese gov't has the ability to make decisions that will save their people.

Steve, did it ever occur to... (Below threshold)

Steve, did it ever occur to you that Hezbollah isn't going to report accurate casualty figures? They don't want the world to see they're getting their butts kicked.

I guess you forgot to menti... (Below threshold)
LJD:

I guess you forgot to mention foreigners Canadians, Brazilian etc that travelled, of their own accord, to a country harboring terrorists.

...and don't forget that ALL of the Israelis killed were military, because of course they all have to join the military to protect their country from terrorist neighbors.

Steve, Why do you k... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Steve,
Why do you keep excusing such evil or "garbage" like the Hezbollah? If you feel so strongly about it, there is a simple solution: can you and your liberal friends on the left will move to form a human shield for the Is civilians from Hezbollah and Hamas bombs.
Hezbollah is despicable for hiding among the civilians to shield themselves from attacks. And people like you are despicable for not condemning them.

Steve Crickmore at July ... (Below threshold)
d_Brit:

Steve Crickmore at July 17, 2006 11:44 AM

You Sir are either woefully ignorant of the facts or in all probability 'twisting reality' to suit your pro-terrorist agenda.

If you are ignorant of the true situation you can quickly educate yourself through just a bit of reading.

Otherwise, you are beneath contempt.

In the Arab-terrorist world... (Below threshold)
cubanbob:

In the Arab-terrorist worldview, there are no Israeli civilians. Israel ought to fight fire with fire and treat the Arabs in kind. And since Arabs, who are always reminding us that they are all brothers, outnumber the Israeli's 50 to 1, Israel needs to start inflicting proportionate casualties at the minimum if she ever hopes to end this 60 year war against her.

Well Jay I dissagree. The U... (Below threshold)
serfer62:

Well Jay I dissagree. The USMC should go to Lebanon, but not a peacekeepers rather as rescuers. The disgrace of unloaded weapons would not be repeated.

By the way the residents of Beirut are in neigbourhood groups, ie Christans here, Armenians there. So heznollah neighborhoods are open game, all killed are hezis.

Its truely ashame that terrorist lovers like steve are in America...

Steve - You're correct as t... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Steve - You're correct as to the facts, but if you are stating that to suggest that Israel is wrong I disagree. The reports are that Israel is dropping leaflets in advance, warning citizens of the bombing. It doesn't take much intelligence for a Lebanese parent to understand that their children are in danger.

The people of Lebanon chose to wage war with Israel - and they got what they wanted. I have no sympathy for the fact that they are losing, and that civilian casualties are resulting. Israel needs to eradicate Hezbollah, and any Lebanese parent who doesn't protect their children should be the one blamed if the children are hurt or killed, not Israel.

October 23, 1983 we lost 22... (Below threshold)

October 23, 1983 we lost 220 Marines, 18 Sailors, and 3 Soldiers totally 241 in the Beirut Bombing. A total of 270 lost during our peacekeeping mission.

Note of interest: http://thewalk.beirutstamp.com

"The Marines have long memo... (Below threshold)
Kell:

"The Marines have long memories."

Yes we do... I joined in '86 and knew two Marines who had to help dig their fellow Marines out of the rubble. I wasn't there, but those stories come to mind every time I hear "Beirut" and it is still sore spot for many Marines.

Jay I loved that write-up o... (Below threshold)

Jay I loved that write-up on never forgetting what happened. While the bombing wasn't even a blip on my radar when I was a kid. I was well educated on it when I joined the Marines in 92. I knew guys who were in Beirut and when your talking about scars that run deep in the recent history of the Corps I would have to say Beirut is still up high on the list with several still active duty Marines out there. I would say as of right now Israel is acting in the best judgement of the world and we should do nothing to prevent this course from acting out.

Lee?"Israel needs ... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Lee?

"Israel needs to eradicate Hezbollah, and any Lebanese parent who doesn't protect their children should be the one blamed if the children are hurt or killed, not Israel."

That's very hawkish. I applaud your couragous turn of cheek. I knew you'd start to understand the world is not as soft as, well, you know. Equal to the U.S. taking out Saddam as a first step toward protecting our children, no? But your logic suggests to me that it's time for Cindy Sheehan to blame herself for her son's death defending our freedom since you view all our activities in the Middle East as equivalent to terror.

I am pleasantly surprised b... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

I am pleasantly surprised by Lee 's post. There may be some hope for him.

On the other hand, the NYT ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

On the other hand, the NYT is beneath contempt.

http://michellemalkin.com/archives/005548.htm

IN THE COMPANY OF THE ENEMY
By Michelle Malkin · July 16, 2006 08:13 AM

Which side are they on? The New York Times settles the question definitively with a hysterical, unreality-based lead editorial today recycling the BDS attacks on the War on Terror--but even more so with this disgusting pictorial tribute to Iraqi terrorists killing American soldiers, spotted by the vigilant Charles Johnson at LGF. The picture featured by the Times is just one of many being hawked here as a photo compilation titled "In the Company of God by award-winning New York Times photographer, Joao Silva."

"list of folks who just nee... (Below threshold)
MIke:

"list of folks who just need killing"

Hmm, sounds like a pretty good description of Hezbollah to me....

Lee?"Is... (Below threshold)
Mac Lorry:
Lee?

"Israel needs to eradicate Hezbollah, and any Lebanese parent who doesn't protect their children should be the one blamed if the children are hurt or killed, not Israel."

That's very hawkish. I applaud your couragous turn of cheek. I knew you'd start to understand the world is not as soft as, well, you know.

News Flash Lee has been kidnapped and an impostor is posting in his name.

Newflash: Lee stopped his h... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Newflash: Lee stopped his hormone therapy.

"Equal to the U.S. takin... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Equal to the U.S. taking out Saddam as a first step toward protecting our children, no?"

No, not even close. Nice to see the Bush apologists trying to ride on Israel's coattails -- trying to suggest that our invasion of Iran was anything other than Rumsfeld's and Cheney's wet dream, realized by a chimp president who couldn't think his way out of a tight parking space.

What we're seeing in Lebanon is how it's done -- you attack the core where the terrorists live and the world will accept the collateral damage.

Our invasion into Afghanistan was justified, or invasion into Iraq was not.

Yup, even the Sunni ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:


Yup, even the Sunni prefer "our method" now. So the American left as represented by the despicable NYT is beneath contempt. Any decent people on the left should strongly condemned the NYT or any entities that try to smear the US military again.

http://www.captainsquartersblog.com/mt/archives/007523.php
America's Stock Rises Among The Sunni -- As They See The Alternative

Lee,Our invasion int... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Lee,
Our invasion into Afghanistan was justified, or invasion into Iraq was not.
------------------------------------------------
So the liberal left would rather have Saddam Hussein still in power with his rape rooms/torture chambers and the full oil-for-food corruption in place. Also his funding for the Hamas terrorists would continue as well. The liberal left would also prefer a competition between Saddam and the mullahs to see who can kill more Jews?

"Nice to see the Bush apolo... (Below threshold)
Cro:

"Nice to see the Bush apologists trying to ride on Israel's coattails -- trying to suggest that our invasion of Iran was anything other than Rumsfeld's and Cheney's wet dream, realized by a chimp president who couldn't think his way out of a tight parking space." - Lee

Sh*t, I must have missed the memo.

"So the liberal left wou... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"So the liberal left would rather have Saddam Hussein still in power..." blah, blah, blah.

We should have entered Afghanistan and turned their sand to glass until we had nailed Bin-Laden. Personally, at that time I was advocating use of nuclear arms if needed, and the vast majority of the American people--left, right, and center--were behind the hunt for Bin-Laden 100%. Yes, there would have been outrage at the use of the nuclear option, but it was the right thing at the time. We knew where Bin-Laden was, and should have used any and all means to take him out. Who would have stood up to defend Bin-Laden? Who would have dared?

It should have been a 30 day operation - tops, and it would have taught the region and the rest of the world that if you attempt to give safe haven to terrorists - you pay the price. Bush however had a broader agenda, and was quick to minimize the hunt for Bin Laden. Bush's failure to execute on the war on terror, abandoned in favor of a war against the guy who made his Dad look stupid, is the seminal failure of his 8 years in office.

Israel is showing you republicans how you go about fighting terrorists - take notes.

Lee, darling:"What... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Lee, darling:

"What we're seeing in Lebanon is how it's done -- you attack the core where the terrorists live and the world will accept the collateral damage."

Yet another hawkish remark from soft hands. So you agree with Bush dropping smart bombs on Al Qaeda training camps in Iraq? Isn't that "the core" or is it Bin Laden's cave somewhere or Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's suburban home in Baqubah? Since you now unwittingly agree in principle that President Bush's was justified but just didn't recognize the location of the 'core' could you tell us where it's located.

Are you in estrus?

Lee, So you support... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Lee,
So you support using nuke on Iran now? IRan is the leader of the worldwide jihadists.

Glad that you have abandoned the Kosskids.

All this circular logic has... (Below threshold)
bobdog:

All this circular logic has me all swimmy-headed. My God, I just about agreed with Lee.

I love the talk of the left... (Below threshold)
retired military:

I love the talk of the left in this matter.

1st

"Israel's response isnt measured, it is over the top"

Lets see

1. Hezzbalah (spelling) says they are at war with Israel.

2. Israel says it is at war with Hezbalan

Will someone please explain where this ridiculous idea of fairness in war cropped up? Is a measured response to Israel killing 10 insurgents to allow the insurgents to kill 10 soldiers??? "Hey we shot down one of your planes so you can shoot down one of ours now"

That idea worked real well during the revolution, Civil war , war of 1812, WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam. Oh wait it has never worked.

This goes under the liberal playbook of "there are no winners and there are no losers because if a person is a loser it will hurt their feelings.

Give me a freaking break.

2nd

We have the left mime that Israel should stop attacking and let the situation calm down. SAYS WHO???? What military genius thought that up??? Not one that wanted to win a war. Is Israel stops without getting their demands met will only encourage the terrorists.

In short if a bully gives you a bloody nose you dont give him a bloody nose and call it even. You beat the crap out of him so he knows to leave you the hell alone.

I hope that when a democrat does get back in as President (maybe around 2016 or so) that noone attacks us. We will be trying to sit down and talk to them with tea and crumpets while one of city still has the mushroom cloud over it.


3rd

Lets let the UN handle it.

Oh yeah. Put UN Troops (That is US troops with blue helmets) over there and tell them "Hey you cant shoot back or do anything else except be a target". I can see Iran sitting still of US troops in Lebanon. Last time we were there we umm lost 200+ marines and did squat. I cant imagine that folks will sit still for that again.

And we all know the UN has SUCH A GREAT TRACK RECORD.

I am just wondering how "measured" Israel's response will be if their 2 soldiers show up dead.

Funny how the guys that do ... (Below threshold)
bobdog:

Funny how the guys that do the heavy lifting can see through all of the hysterical hand-wringing and equivocating from the feminine left.

Retired Military, you're on the mark.

Earlier most of you, seeme... (Below threshold)
Steve Crickmore:

Earlier most of you, seemed to have, gone off on a tangent...My main point it is not the Lebanon civilians who should be the indiscriminate ones sufferring heavily from Israeli reprisals (Their government recently with US encouragement kicked out the Syrians and have endured a long and bloody civil war) but the two countries that Israel and the USA has pointedly denounced Iran and Syria who finance and arm the Hezbollah remain unscathed. Admittedly a poor metaphor but The US didn't bomb Poland and Hungary even in 56, when Moscow was directing and financing subjugating the satellite states.. Dubya ' if you want to stop this shit' make that call that you wanted Kofi to make to Syria, and temporise Israel at the same time. Otherwise the situation may really spiral out of control, and to return to Jay's point as The Washington Post says "Israel would almost certainly insist that the United States provide a major portion of the(peace keeping) contingent and command it. But regional experts question both the U.S. will and the ability to provide forces. "The military is overstretched. Most of the army is wrapped up in Iraq," said Norton, a retired army colonel and former West Point professor. "A deployment in Lebanon would potentially be interminable."

Steve, you're still coming ... (Below threshold)
Sentry:

Steve, you're still coming down on the side of 'peace at any cost.' Israel bowed to the demands of the UN and it means that terrorists can now attack more deeply into their country than ever before. Peacekeepers can only keep the peace if both sides are willing to abide by that peace. Other than that, the 'peacekeepers' are a human shield between the two and sitting ducks for both sides. Peacekeeping is a futile and pointless mission if one of those sides wants a war. And it's not Israel that started it, or wanted it, but they will by God finish it. And the US would be as honorless, cowardly, and ultimately as irrevelant as the UN if we didn't help them.

A parting shot: which side in this conflict is intentionally targeting civilians? Which side has as their stated goal to wipe Israel--men, women, and children--off the map? The line between them could not be clearer.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy