As a man who delights in expressing himself when he has an opinion, I’ve found it difficult to do a follow-up to my initial piece on United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 1701 as I have such mixed feelings about this new UN mandate. While I doubt, given the track record of the United Nations, it will succeed, I see some hope in the Security Council’s unity in wanting to see Hezbollah disarmed, its recognition that Hezbollah is responsible for the war.
My biggest concerns about the resolution are that it failed to demand the release of the two Israeli soldiers whom Hezbollah kidnapped and that it failed to give the United Nations peacekeepers Chapter Seven powers to use force to enforce its demands that the terror organization disarm.
That said, I do not agree with those who see this resolution as an unmitigated disaster. It does build on Resolution 1559 in insisting that Hezbollah be disarmed. And while the previous resolution passed with only 9 votes (the minimum needed for passage of a Security Council resolution), all 15 Council members supported 1701. Every member-nation of the Council is now on record in support of disarming Hezbollah within Lebanon.
If a resolution were such a disaster for Israel, Lebanon would not be balking at its terms. According to the latest reports, the Lebanese army will not be asking the terror organization “to hand over its weapons.” Opponents of the resolution understood that this might happen, fearing the Lebanese government would not succeed in fulfilling the Resolution’s mandate to disarm Hezbollah.
Captain Ed believes Israel must make “sure that Beirut can take control of their own territory before they withdraw back across the Blue Line.” I agree. Unless Hezbollah is disarmed, the Lebanese government has not met it obligations under 1701 and Israel can maintain its forces in Lebanon.
Given the UN’s track record, I dare say the Secretary General will condemn Israel should its forces remain in Lebanon as they wait for the Lebanese Army to fulfill 1701 and disarm the Hezbollah terrorists. And he would mute his criticism of Lebanon and the terror organization.
While I don’t agree with those who say that this resolution amounts to a victory for Hezbollah, I don’t think it was a victory for Israel either. Under more resolute leadership, Israel might have been more aggressive in its offensive and overwhelmed Hezbollah in South Lebanon, severely weakening the organization and strengthening the hand of the other parties in the Lebanese government.
In short, Israel didn’t lose this war, so much as it was deprived of a convincing victory over Hezbollah. Had the Security Council delayed consideration of the Resolution for another week, Israel would have been able to more completely degrade Hezbollah’s forces and clean out more territory. Hezbollah wouldn’t be asking the Lebanese army to promise “not to probe too carefully for underground bunkers and weapons caches” because Israel would have already destroyed those bunkers and captured those weapons.
I am not yet as pessimistic as others on the Right are about 1701. It seems, however, to be a temporary solution, almost guaranteeing a further conflict down the road. At least, in that war, Israel will be better prepared to face its foe. But, war, even when necessary, is horrible. And the real failure of this resolution is not that it amounts to a defeat of Israel, but that the United Nations hasn’t done what it necessary to prevent further violence in the same region.
In time we’ll come to see who is the most disadvantaged by Israel’s failure to achieve a decisive victory in the current conflict. I’m just hoping Captain Ed‘s right and it’s Hezbollah.
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
#0 – “If a resolution were such a disaster for Israel, Lebanon would not be balking at its terms.”
I don’t follow your thought process there, Dan. The resolution is bad precisely because it left Lebanon / Hezbollah in an effective position to balk at its terms, and sure enough, they are now. Result: no disarming of Hebollah.
As I suggested earlier, it would be wonderful if the resolution (the disarming of Hezbollah) were carried out. But it doesn’t seem like it will be.
“1701 seems to be a temporary solution, almost guaranteeing a further conflict down the road… war, even when necessary, is horrible.”
I agree on both points.
What do you expect?
The UN is toothless because all of its members want it to be.
It is good for some things but unless the member states agree it is as effective as a comment section on a blog.
Hezbollah will not disarm, not because Israel was incapable at beating them but because Hezbollah is not a state.
It cannot/will not EVER be beaten through force.
When will the right in both countries (US and Israel) understand that armed conflict is what they need to survive, peace is their killer.
Israel gave Hizbollah peace in Lebanon, and Hizbollah did two things:
— Increase their armaments
— Start firing more and more weapons at Israeli citizens
Your promise and your premise are a lie, Keogh; Hizbollah has made that clear.
Calarato, you offer a fair criticism of my piece. I think Lebanese balking (under Hezbollah’s influence) shows that the terms of the resolution are good. The problem is the enforcement mechanism.
As usual NDT you entirely miss the point.
The point and premise:
1. You cannot ever beat groups like Hezbollah by force. Only through engagement can they be beaten.
2. The UN will never be an effective solver of problems unless member states want to commit their own lives and resources to make it effective. To do that you need the type of diplomacy we saw during Golf War I and Bosnia.
1. You cannot ever beat groups like Hezbollah by force. Only through engagement can they be beaten.
Wrong answer, Keogh.
You see, as long as anti-Semitic leftists like yourself allow genocidal groups like Hizbollah, which has publicly proclaimed that their goal is to eradicate Jews, to hide themselves among civilians and use civilians as human shields, force will be difficult to use.
However, like in World War II, at some point, it will be realized that you leftists not only will not, but cannot curb the terrorists you protect, and civilians will have to be bombed in order to eradicate their threat.
If Lebanon wants to protect its citizens, you will urge Hizbollah to disarm, and you will use force to MAKE Hizbollah disarm. Otherwise, the Israelis will do it for you.
keogh, while your opinion sounds like a repeat of the standard Democrat “George Mitchell: We Must Accommodate the Terrorists” plan, you fail to appreciate major realities on the ground, in the air, or in the UN.
First, on the ground. While Hezbollah is not a nation-state in the classic sense, it does have the tacit acquiescence of Lebanon to operate with impunity in S Lebanon. It also has the unquestionable support of Syria and Iran and radical elements in Arabia and Egypt and Pakistan and the Islamo-fascists right here in the US, operating in our neighborhoods and openly in the masques.
To say that Hezbollah doesn’t understand “force” and the finite application of overwhelming force is to avoid the reality of the last four weeks. They DO understand it. The problem is that the US and political forces elsewhere could not –nay, would not– stand up and be counted in this chapter in the WOT when the going got tough. The US should have said: “Hey, Hezbollah… you had it coming. And I’d watch out if I was Iran, too.” Gosh, I wish the so called “Cowboy Diplomacy of Geo Bush” really existed.
The UN isn’t toothless because of its member states. How dare you suggest that member states haven’t been supportive of the wide ranging and oftentimes silly missions of the UN –even when it isn’t in a member state’s interests, those dues generally keep a coming.
The UN is toothless because it is a corrupt, overly bureaucratic, wasteful, inefficient organization that has its own hand out first in any issue of consequence. The best it can do on any given day is monitor… if we can keep them from raping the natives. It should be closed down, our dues should be stopped and the entire diplomatic community in NYC should be sent packing.
The place for diplomatic pressure by Americans is not at the UN or in Lebanon or Israel. It is in Syria, Iran, Russia and China.
Second, in the air –and by that I mean public air, PR, world media. Hezbollah can claim victory no matter what happens in S Lebanon because, in order to stay relevant to its supporters in S Lebanon and outside of Lebanon, it has to appear victorious. Just like when the PLO and Arafat were poised to be pushed into the sea. And no matter what happens, it will claim victory in the Arab world.
Hezbollah does understand force. So do its backers in Syria, Iran, Russia and China.
The tragic reality you miss is that we –Americans– needed Israel to succeed in this venture far more than even the Israelis needed it. Hezbollah and Hamas and IslamoFascists are THE threat. Not the Patriot Act. Not datamining. Not expedited wiretaps. Not strip searches of Democrat leaders of the MSM.
The problem of the AmericanLeft and all her institutional supporters have is that they fail to keep their eye on the ball… and the terrorists are scoring big points in the WOT at our expense.
To opine that the only way to secure lasting peace is to accommodate Hezbollah through dialogue is to again fail to apply the lessons learned on the playground –bullies do exist no matter how long we talk; they only cease when superior force is applied.
The course you suggest will neither bring peace, nor the disarmament of Hezbollah. Nor will peace be secured by the UN’s involvement.
Frankly, the answer to peace in the MiddleEast is to “disarm” the UN… no, disband it. And allow the Israeli Defense Forces to smash Hezbollah all the way north into Syria if need be. And in the meantime, take out those Iranian reactors and scientists and infrastructure.
NDXXX and M-Matt, brilliantly executed.
Regards,
Peter H.
Thanks Peter.
NDT,
First:
“Anti-Semetic leftists” ????!?!!!!?!
Jeezz…cut that crap out…
Second, this war is nothing like World War II. NOTHING
Further, we could not MAKE the Taliban, Viet Cong, Al Queida in Iraq, or anyone else Disarm. How can’t you see that?
Matt,
You fall into the same trap as NDT (but you didn’t resort to such awful slurs, thank you)
Since Hezbollah’s goals are simply one surviving member, we cannot win. You cannot smash them anywhere. If we kill 1,000,000 of them, if 1 lives, they win and will be able to recruit and in a few weeks be back killing innocents.
Military force does not work against such a decentalized ememy. History should show you this.
Further, we have zero leverage with Syria, Iran, Russia and China. How do we apply pressure on them?
In fact, all Russia and Iran have to do is turn down their oils spigots and America will quake (no, drilling in ANWAR won’t solve this) and China could flood the market with dollars and ruin the American economy.
Those countries have more leverage over us then we do with them.
Sorry but we must follow the steps Britain used to eliminate the social power of the military wing of the IRA. Its difficult and longer but it’s the only way.
Unless of course we use nukes and chemical weapons to kill everyone in the middle east…then maybe we could do it…I don’t have the will for that…do you?
Beirut is a thousand times cooler than Tel Aviv.
Friends, while I disagree with Keogh\’s points, it\’s unfair to call him an anti-Semite. In his comments to this post, I see no evidence of anti-Semitism.
Given some of the rhetoric of our critics, please at least acknowledge the relative civility of his tone in this thread. He made a point, albeit one with which I disagree, without baiting any individual. And deserves credit for engaging you. Show him the same courtesy in challenging his arguments.
Though I agree with some of his second point in comment #5.
Fair enough. Please feel free to delete or amend my comment accordingly.
In fact, all Russia and Iran have to do is turn down their oils spigots and America will quake (no, drilling in ANWAR won’t solve this) and China could flood the market with dollars and ruin the American economy.
First, as one can see from this reference, the amount of oil that the United States imports directly from Russia, China, and Iran is negligible.
True, their doing so would affect the price of oil on the world market, which would hurt; however, that’s why the US has a Strategic Petroleum Reserve of already-purchased oil, which is there specifically to prevent the economy against price shocks of this nature.
Furthermore, given that Iran’s primary consumers are Asian countries, including China, and Europe, and Russia’s primary consumers are European countries, the shutoff of exports from these countries would harm them, not the United States. Furthermore, since both Iran and Russia’s economies are virtually oil-dependent (over 80% of Iran’s total economy), they would be in essence slashing their own throats. Not only would they be depriving themselves of export dollars, they would be damaging the economies of their primary consumers.
In addition, China’s economy is based primarily on US exports. In order for them to export things to us, we have to be able to buy them — which is part of the reason they’ve been so willing to finance the United States’s debt. If they were to crater our economy, they would lose one of the primary props of their country’s economy.
So, in short, unless these countries are suicidal, none of them will do anything of the sort. However, given that Ahdimejad is a lunatic who wants to drop an atomic bomb on Israel, I think the US should be prepared for Iran to be suicidal, with the understanding that Democrats and leftists in the United States will block any attempt to do anything about it until millions of people are vaporized.
Military force does not work against such a decentalized ememy. History should show you this.
Actually, what history has shown us, from the actions of Marion in the Carolinas during the American Revolution, through the Spanish resistance to Napoleon, and including the Viet Cong, is that guerillas, albeit with greater difficulty than a regular army, can be hunted down and destroyed — provided they are not supported by a regular army, as Greene did for Marion, as Wellington did for the Spanish, and as China and Russia did for the Viet Cong. Notice that the French Resistance, despite a great deal of elan, had little effect upon the Wehrmacht until it was directly supported by regular armed forces.
In this day and age, while terrorist groups like Hizbollah don’t have — at least overtly — regular armies helping them, they have even better; committed leftists who protect them from having to disarm and who enable and defend their placing their armaments among civilians.
One additional point the Viet Cong were effectively destoryed as a fighting force after TET. The NVA were the force we were fighting after that. Israel did not fight with spirit that have shown in the past. The warrior attitude appeared lacking.
I think the reserve only has enough oil for a week or two and some of that is set aside for the military. I am not sure that is a viable option
I think the reserve only has enough oil for a week or two and some of that is set aside for the military. I am not sure that is a viable option
Further, Russia, China, Iran and others don’t really have to listen to their populace. They can do what they choose to meet the geopolitical ends. Then they Blame America and the population believes them.
History – I think you are wrong – History shows all that guerilla groups need is support from the general population to survive. They don’t need an army.
Israel, failed at destroying them because the population supports them.
The Taliban still survive because the population gives them support.
Al Queida gets the same type of support.
Etc Etc. Etc.
Actually military violence gives them more support from the population, thus they grow stronger. If Israel would have kept up their operations, all Hezbollah would have is more money and more recruits while Israel would have more dead civilians and a wasted reputation.
To make them weaker you must marginalize the military wing by making the political wing stronger. Thus the politicians have legitimacy. Once they have legitimacy they have a stake and something to win and something to loose.
A slight amendment to your comment #15, Majordad, it wasn’t the attitude of the Israeli “warriors” that was lacking, but the resolve of Israel’s political leadership.
I think the reserve only has enough oil for a week or two and some of that is set aside for the military.
Nope.
Further, Russia, China, Iran and others don’t really have to listen to their populace. They can do what they choose to meet the geopolitical ends. Then they Blame America and the population believes them.
Well, then, since the United States will be blamed anyway regardless of who does what, why should we not do as we please and what makes the most sense for us?
Actually military violence gives them more support from the population, thus they grow stronger. If Israel would have kept up their operations, all Hezbollah would have is more money and more recruits while Israel would have more dead civilians and a wasted reputation.
You make the assumption that the Lebanese do not realize that Hizbollah’s aggression against Israel is the reason for the military operations.
If that is the case, perhaps they will think twice about allowing Hizbollah to put a missile launcher in the middle of their village if they know that doing so will bring swift and immediate retribution against them.
Of course, what leftists like you refuse to acknowledge, keogh, is that Hizbollah does not take no for an answer; they shoot civilians who refuse their demands to act as human shields, and they shoot people who publicly criticize them.
We know why you can’t admit that, though; it destroys your argument that the Lebanese people “support” Hizbollah when it is made obvious that the choice they have is to support Hizbollah or die at Hizbollah’s hands.
One wonders what destiny the Lebanese people would choose if Hizbollah were no longer able to threaten them with death if they did not comply. But the only way that would happen is if Hizbollah were disarmed — which leftists like yourself refuse to do.
NDXXX & MajorDad, nice job of responding to keogh. Good going.
I’m sorry that it will no good.
keogh doesn’t believe in military force to quash terrorism anymore than you can convince him that the UN is a failed institution better suited for diplomatic teas and refugee supplies than monitoring or peace keeping.
Like many before him, keogh sees the world from a suspicious angle when the military is involved. Thank goodness guys like keogh haven’t had the reigns of power in the US since 1976-1980.
I call it the George McGovern, Eugene McCarthy, Mikey Dukaksis, JimmineyCricket, John Kerry wing of the Democrat party. Appeasers all –that worshipped at the altar of St Neville Chamberlain.
And it’s frightening to think that there is YET another generation of appeasers and accommodaters waiting to “pad the kneelers” for terrorist groups… they have learned nothing in the last 4 years. “Work with the political arm” in order to disarm the terrorists? What sheer madness. Not even Clinton went that far in selling America down the river.
Sen Henry Cabot Lodge –speaking about the UN’s precursor (the League of Nations) said he doubted his fellow Americans had either the will or stamina to wage a battle against the spreading threat of revolutionary madness in Palestine, the Balkans or Spain.
He was right then. Wilson’s League got gutted and Americans returned to splendid isolationism… something many on the Left want to recreate in this century, too. And it lasted for America until FDR got the ships in a row and could provoke the Japanese.
History is bent on repeating itself. The threat is never real to the Left until the yellow star patches are being sewn on their garments or their loved ones die as innocents.
Nope keogh, the Israeli military should have taken this war right past Beruit and into the streets of Damascus –while letting all other Arab countries know that to assist Syria would warrant unilateral action against their own capitals.
Public opinion on the Arab street shouldn’t matter to the US or Israel. There is no appeasement of terrorists or IslamoFascists. They can be bought, sure. They can be undermined, oh yeah. We can corrupt their leadership and we should without restraint. They must be watched and denied sanctuary.
But at the end of the day, they are still terrorists and they’ll kill us if given the opportunity.
What keogh doesn’t grasp is that Israel succeeded in denying Hezbollah sanctuary. The trick will be to make the average Lebanon citizen feel the pain of living with those vile creatures in their midst.
I completly agree NDT
Those terrorits terrorize not only us but their own people
They are bad. And yes we should do what we want regarding those others countries. However we should not make the same stupid mistakes Israel and the Bush administration have been making.
Further, you still haven’t challenged or dealt with my main point.
There is no way we can stop them with our or Israel’s armed forces.
Look at Iraq/Afganistan/Lebenon for crying out loud.
The notion of kill kill kill war war war has Failed Failed Failed!
Or,
you could take the easy way out and blame the leadership like GPW but the reality is still real.
Strategic Oil Reserve – I had no idea it held so much. Holy cow, lets stop taking all oil from foreign countries and live on the hog for a few years!!!!
Further, you still haven’t challenged or dealt with my main point.
There is no way we can stop them with our or Israel’s armed forces.
Look at Iraq/Afganistan/Lebenon for crying out loud.
The notion of kill kill kill war war war has Failed Failed Failed!
Oh, we could do quite nicely, if we were willing to embrace the necessity of doing what needs to be done as we did in World War II.
But unfortunately these days, people are trying to fight a war while appeasing naive leftists like yourself who refuse to admit that Hizbollah doesn’t want peace with Israel — they want Israel erased and the Jews eliminated.
You, keogh, are nothing more than the most recent generation of Hitler appeasers.
Ahh..
Predictable Predictable.
Out come the Chamberlian comments…
You are obviously living in the past.
Unfortunately there are no lessons to be learned from WWII to now.
To win wars of the present you must have tactics of the present.
Get out of your Rommyian Cold War, State-to-State conflict mindset!
It will take us down the road of defeat.
How can you not see that?
Because, Keogh, we are dealing with people who have openly stated that their goal and purpose is genocide, who have and will continue to endanger civilians to carry it out, and who are openly contemptuous of peace and disarmament, even now defying an clear international resolution to give up their weapons.
Sounds a lot like Hitler to me.
What Hitler did was what Hizbollah is doing now; exploit Europe’s fear of war and force concession after concession after concession, all while claiming he only wanted “peace” — and then invading and attempting to destroy the countries who tried to appease him.
Had Hitler been met with a steady, strong force and had it made clear to him that the Allies were resolute and would not tolerate his actions — history would be very different today.
But again, you and yours will appease, appease, appease until another six million Jews die — and then you will be hypocritical enough to think that building a Holocaust memorial exculpates your inaction.
keogh, the problem is that your world view is constrained from just reading headlines, talking big in front of other high schoolers, and thinking the George McGovern way is applicable.
Like many others, you’re the one needing a serious reality fix. We’ve answered your question of “Why not appeasement now. Why not compromise and build up (give money to, legitimize) our enemy’s “political wing” rather than fight its “military wing” –do you even know that not’s distinct in this case, unlike N Ireland?
keogh, you’ve read the correct answers here; you just don’t and won’t comprehend.
It’s as simple and complex as just that.
keogh writes: “Further, we have zero leverage with Syria, Iran, Russia and China. How do we apply pressure on them?”
Are you really that naive? It’s like going back to 1st Grade with you… and frankly I don’t have the inclination nor the time to respond to insincere nonsense.
You guys are living in the past
Throwing around words like appeasement….
Jeez.
Your arguments and barbs are the same that folks threw around in the 60’s and 70’s.
They were worthless then and they are worthless now.
This is a NEW kind of war.
That is something even Bush talks about (but he has no strategy to fight this new war)
Get out of the past you two…
Seriously…your platitudes will bring thing this country to a great defeat.
But maybe that is what you want…maybe you hope that out of the rubble of defeat we can rip up our inconvenient constitution to create a country that thrives on your dreams of paaaast livin’
If you want to engage your Hizbollah pals, keogh, go do so yourself.
Don’t hide here in the United States behind our defense forces.
Why aren’t you in Lebanon right now engaging Hizbollah and demanding they disarm?
No answer?
Funny…the Left has been predicting the defeat of the USA since the 1960s. When will they ever get it right?
Regards,
Peter H.
“go do so yourself”
That is a fairly ridiculous comment.
It’s a quote similar to the classic rant of the Bush supporter:
“If you don’t like it, leave.”
Or possibly it shows that you now agree with me by you wanting to send US citizens over there to begin the process,
I am happy that you have finally come around.
Congrats! You are a liberal.
Actually, Keogh, I’m simply challenging you to go to Lebanon and insist that Hizbollah disarm — and, if they refuse, start taking their weapons away from them.
After all, since you insist that Hizbollah only wants peace, there should be no problem, right?
Just so you know,
I have been there and in the near future I might head back (this time only Israel)
If I see any Hezbollah I will talk to them for you…but wait, the Israelis couldn’t find them very well…how do you suppose I find them?
Further, it seems you now feel that engagement is the only way to go forward!
I am happy to have convinced you.
Pretty soon I will be reading from you that Evan Bayh is the person who will bring sanity back to the political process!
I look forward to that and more agreements with you.
I have been there and in the near future I might head back (this time only Israel)
If I see any Hezbollah I will talk to them for you…but wait, the Israelis couldn’t find them very well…how do you suppose I find them?
Why? Are you afraid that Hizbollah will shoot you?
Further, it seems you now feel that engagement is the only way to go forward!
Actually, no; I simply think that your being shot in the head is the only way that you will ever figure out that Hizbollah wants to kill you.
I’m only going to Israel becuase that is where my job will send me.
If you want to pay me to go to Lebenon I will gladly go!
Its a great country, with great people.
keogh, it’s LEBANON not Lebenon. Even great people in great countries expect you to spell their names right.
Lebanon is also a crime-ridden, war-torn, terrorist filled country. If you don’t look arab and can speak the language fluently, I’d advise you to keep your naivety and life intact… don’t go there.
There is no Paris of the MiddleEast anymore and Lebanon should not be a vacation destination for any thinking human being.
I have been there.
Its can be rough.
But if you treat the poeple with respect and polietness they are so so so so nice
Just don’t stare at the guys there. That can cause problems
First of all Hezbollah is not more terrorist than IRA was, however Israel is nothing to Lebanon, compared what UK was to Irland. Understand that “All good people” are not praying for Hezbollah’s defeat. Actually, since the world’s more than half is praying for defeat of USA and Israel. So when you are talking like Israel is the hero here, consider that you can be the minority thinking so.
Second. The reason that Hezbollah cannot be defeated, is that they are found “right”, “just” and in politically correct situation by most of the people and so people keep joining their ranks. They are “freedom fighters”. If they aren’t that means I don’t know what freedom fighter in the world is. If you kill Nasrallah there will be someone else to replace him. If you somehow destroy Hezbollah, there will be a new organization to replace them. These people are not mad. They are fighting in a certain way because they are forced to such a war. As the reasons remain there, the idea of armed strugle remains there and Hezbollah remains there.
And for the brilliant ideas about power play, that Israel should be left alone to wipe out everything in ME. I can understand your hate against Muslims. But I can’t understand how stupid you can be. What do you think that Israel did ? They simply can’t deal even with Hezbollah alone. Yet you gonna put them in front of all Muslims ? There is a limit how long they can go with such operations before the enemyhood against Israel all around the world becomes a wave that will wash out the map from their dirt.
Iranian Mullah’s are much more intelligent, peacefull and of common sense compared to guys like you. Those like Bush, Blair and Sharon, are the actual facsists. Learn that “fascist” does not mean “those who dont accept American rule”
Ahmedinejad is a honorable leader. What he says about Israel is not unknown or something new. But what new is, those who are talking like him, now seem to be really right. Even if I had any hope about peace in ME with Israel, the last war in Lebanon clearly proves that Ahmedinejad is right and only way to peace is destruction of Israel.
And finally. All these plans are not for the good of Israeli people neither for good of American people, but the purpose is to satisfy a few power-hungry maniacs, who were to be the elites of the politics in civilized world.
Nothing is more fun than you guys are discussing all about these like you yourself will win something from all these. Wake up guys ! Those who will collect the fruits of the bloody victory won’t share them with you just because of your brilliant ideas.
You are speaking so much from violence and war, in cold blood, like they are ordinary things. I wonder how long you could stand at that point if the corpse lying there would be one of your beloved ones.