Posted By Moshe Phillips
The May 11, 2011 Wall Street Journal editorial “Engaged to Hamas” at first glance seems like the type of clear thinking on the Middle East that is missing from The Washington Post and The New York Times. The conclusion of the editorial stated:
There’s no way for any donor or for Israel, which transfers customs and other receipts to the Palestinian Authority, to ensure that money won’t be used by Hamas to launch more rockets on Israeli school buses.
Good, right? But here’s the problem – and it’s a big one – everything in that last line is correct, it is what is not being said that is the key to why the entire Arab-Israeli conflict goes unresolved. Even if Hamas does not “launch more rockets on Israeli school buses” assumes that Hamas is not evil and both needs and serves to be utterly and completely destroyed. Destroyed because it is evil. The moral thing to do is to destroy evil when it poses a “clear and present danger” or likely will again.
When the Allies after World War Two conducted a systematic effort of denazification it was not because the Nazi Party or Nazi ideas were going to be threat in 1946 or 1947 but because the Nazis’ ideas were dangerous enough that if not outlawed and fought and vanquished on the battlefield of ideas then the Allies had every right to believe that they might have to return to combat on the actual battlefield in the 1950s or 1960s and fight the Nazis again.
The purpose of war is to permanently eliminate the threat coming from your enemy. Far too often history has revealed that wars are things that must be won decisively or they will cause subsequent conflicts that grow in both intensity and the degree of devastation. Evil must be confronted and evil must be destroyed. Hamas is evil. Hamas is the enemy. Hamas must be eliminated.
Destroying Hamas is the right thing to do.
Destroying Hamas is a necessary thing to do.
Destroying Hamas is possible to do.
Read Entire Story in News Real Blog