You Cannot Solve any Problem Unless You Understand It

The standard line most news outlets want to feed us these days is that the world would be a much more peaceful place if not for President Bush. It's not a terribly cogent or well-supported argument, but it goes something like this:

Bush's invasion of Iraq enraged the Islamic world, which led to the Iraqi insurgency and the ascension of Ahmadinijad in Iran and the election of Hamas in the Palestinian authority. His heavy-handed foreign policy also somehow inspired North Korea's dangerous nuclear activities and missile tests.

Basically, it's all Bush's fault, including the Sunni-Shi'ite turf war in Iraq, Hamas tossing rockets into Israel from the area in Gaza they were voluntarily given only a few months earlier to buy peace, and both Hamas and Hezbollah raiding Israel to kill and capture soldiers.

I have this little character flaw, where I want to hear the facts to support whatever conclusion is being made about any issue. The Hate Bush movement has been so relentless that it seems to permeate everything these days, and the impression is that most Americans seem to agree that he's somehow responsible for all these problems in the world.

My own search for facts, while not completely exhonerating Bush, doesn't make him the villain either. Here are a few basic facts:

Iran and Syria are the two most prominent terrorist states. They fund and support Hamas, Hezbollah, and anybody else who shares their goal of wiping Israel off the map. Hezbollah's weapons are supplied by Iran with logistical support from Syria. (And most of the weapons are purchased from Russia and China.)

The Hezbollah incursion into Israel that started the current war in Lebanon just happened to take place within a day of Iran's deadline for responding to the UN on the demand they stop nuclear weapons development. Could it reasonably be concluded that the Hezbollah agression was ordered by Iran as a distraction?

Most of the escalating violence in Iraq is Sunni vs. Shi'a. It's not so much an insurgency as it is a civil war to determine which sect will rule Iraq. I think both sides see what's happening in America and figure our troops will be gone by the next presidential election, if not shortly after this year's elections. So they are trying to establish an advantage for when the power vacuum occurs after our troops leave. If and when we leave Iraq, the most likely outcome will see the Iranian-backed Shi'ites taking over. Want Ahmadinijad in charge of Iran and Iraq? Vote Democrat.

Everyone but the US and Israel is yelling at Israel to "cease fire". As if Israel's the culprit in the conflict. It conjures and image of the referee at a boxing match (the UN) grabbing the winning fighter's arms and pinning them behind his back so the losing fighter can pummel him at will. It seems to me that everybody knows that's not the way to stop a fight. This weekend, Israel saw rockets being launched from that Lebanese town and bombed it, killing some civilians in the process. What incredible outrage was leveled at Israel. But what about the outrage toward Hezbollah, who routinely targets civilians and launches their rockets at Israeli towns indiscriminately every day? CNN bends over backward to present both sides of the conflict equally?

Finally, what the critics seem to be saying is that Bush should essentially give the rogue countries what they want. Stop helping Israel. Leave Iraq. Leave the entire middle east alone. Make a deal with Ahmadinijad so he'll stop building nuclear weapons. Make a deal with Kim Jong Il so he'll stop building nuclear weapons and trying to launch them at us.

Let's see, how has that worked in the past? Well, as I mentioned before, Israel gave Gaza to the Palestinians for peace, and how did the Palestinians respond? In case you haven't heard, by daily rocket and mortar attacks across the border into Israeli towns and a cross-border raid that killed soldiers and captured others. Then there's North Korea, where Bill Clinton gave them food and nuclear technology in exchange for a promise they wouldn't use it for weapons. How did they respond? By immediately breaking the agreement to feverishly develop a nuclear weapons development program.

Finally, there's the Islamic radical agenda. They haven't been secretive about their goals. First, they want to wipe Israel off the map and remove all western influence from the middle east. Then they want to spread Islam, by force if necessary, across the planet. To be specific, that means that governments around the world will be run by the Ayatollahs. Islam is the only religion permitted by law. Anyone holding onto any other religion will be executed, or if they are lucky, enslaved.

And what was that you were saying again? Oh yeah, all this is Bush's fault.

Good luck in your fantasy world. Elect your favorite liberal pacifist to congress this fall and see what happens. You might want to get a head start on those Koran studies and go shopping for a prayer rug and burkha.