Friday, July 21, 2006

Middle Eastern Logic

About an hour ago, Fox News reported that Lebanon's government is threatening resistance if Israel mounts a ground assault across its borders. Let's think about the progression of this situation for a moment:

1. Hezbollah kidnaps Israeli soldiers and holds them captive, then attacks Israel's towns and cities with missles with impunity from the safety of Lebanon.

2. The Lebanese government takes no action against Hezbollah's assaults on Israel--either because it is incapable, or unwilling.

3. Israel retaliates against Hezbollah and considers the possibility of injecting infantry into Lebanon.

4. Representatives of the Lebanese government assure the world that an invasion from Israel will face opposition from Lebanon's military.

So here's my question: Why should Israel draw a distinction between this behavior and open support of terrorism? Utilizing the notion "If you're not with us, you're against us," that the Bush Administration set forth post-9/11, it seems the assumption that Lebanon is just one more enemy in a veritable sea of enemies is a reasonable approach. This prompts a second question: Why does the Bush Administration deem support of Lebanon's government necessary, when it seemingly deserves pulverization into rubble?

No comments: