Search  |  Login  |  Register

‘Reasonable’ Response to Hamas?

By David French1404939201000

As a terrorist organization is lobbing rocket after rocket at the Israeli civilian population, President Obama is urging Israel to act with “reasonableness and restraint.”

Let’s define “reasonable.”

When an enemy force consistently and deliberately does all that it can to terrorize and kill as many of your citizens as possible, with no regard for the difference between military and civilian targets, the “reasonable” thing to do is obliterate that enemy. Destroy it. There is nothing unreasonable about self-defense, and there is nothing unreasonable about destroying an armed enemy force. In fact, our own military has a long and proud history of destroying enemy armed forces, and our nation and the world tend to achieve far better outcomes when our military is given the free hand to do the truly reasonable thing: defeat the enemy.

But since we’re defining “reasonable,” let’s also define “unreasonable.”

It is unreasonable to expect Israel to exercise more restraint than the United States would under similar circumstances. It is unreasonable to demand that Israel abide by made-up rules of “proportionality” that we’ve rightly rejected for our own armed forces. It is unreasonable to assume that the so-called “honest broker” role requires this nation to blind itself to truth and violate its own laws by funneling hundreds of millions of dollars per year to a terrorist “unity” government. 

Between the United States, which has pledged to continue funding the Palestinian government, and Israel, which is now dropping bombs to protect itself from terrorist aggression, the only nation that is violating international norms and its own laws is the United States. It’s a violation of federal criminal law to provide support to a designated terrorist organization, like Hamas. Yet the Obama Administration has been unable to provide any meaningful reassurance that the money we send the Palestinian Authority won’t aid Hamas, a member of the PA’s government. Meanwhile, the right of national self-defense — which Israel is now exercising — is embedded in the U.N. Charter.

So, who’s truly reasonable?

This article is crossposted on National Review.

Latest in
Jihad

ISIS Beheads Four Christian Children?

By Matthew Clark1418070129650

The brutality and barbarism of ISIS – the Islamic State – has been well documented, but the latest report is unspeakable. The Christian “Vicar of Baghdad,” the Rev. Canon Andrew White, recounted that ISIS jihadists recently beheaded four Christian children. As the Christian Post reports : "ISIS...

read more

Jihadists Psychologically Dominate

By David French1415129197072

Everyone who’s spent five minutes in the Middle East knew — or should have known – this was going to happen : The Obama administration’s Syria strategy suffered a major setback Sunday after fighters linked to al-Qaeda routed U.S.-backed rebels from their main northern strongholds, capturing...

read more

“Self-Radicalized” Islamic Terrorist?

By Matthew Clark1414519268955

“Self-radicalized.” It’s a term you are bound to hear a lot of, along with “lone wolf” and “recent convert to Islam,” in the wake of two separate terrorist attacks in Canada and one in New York City last week. In Canada , a self-proclaimed jihadist, who at the very least was inspired, if not...

read more

Law That Radicalized Pakistani Muslims

By ACLJ.org1414438850326

By Shaheryar Gill In a trial and appellate process not befitting any judicial system, Aasia Noreen (“Asia Bibi”), a Pakistani Christian woman, was sentenced to death for expressing her faith in Jesus Christ. Her accusers perceived her statement that she believed in Jesus and not in the prophet...

read more