Posse Incitatus

Michigan adopts Castle Doctrine

The Posse would be remiss if we did not note with pleasure the decision of Michigan's governor to sign the self-defense legislation into law.

When these bills were introduced, the usual suspects cried and gnashed their teeth.  Why blood would flow in the streets, mayhem would result and of course Dodge City or the Wild West would emerge in every quiet suburbian neighborhood.

Obviously, it didn't work.

As we noted at the time, Michigan was told to expect a similar crime wave right after it switched to a shall-issue concealed pistol license system in 2001.  Instead, the murder rate fell.

In fact, not a single CCW permit holder has committed the kind of outrage we were told was inevitable.

Is it any wonder that gun control groups now feel the need to create bogus gun rights organizations to advance their agenda?

Death by moral vanity

Blackfive asks a question that has been on our mind a great deal of late:  Is the West too 'civilized' to win wars?

He links to an article by John Podhoretz that points out that all the handwringing about civilian deaths in Lebanon, Iraq and elsewhere is remarkably one-sided; the West is the only party that really cares.

The Posse will go one better:  we have reached a strange point where the West cares more about the deaths of enemy noncombatants than it does about its own civilians.

Had Israel meekly submitted to daily barrages of rockets from Lebanon and done nothing other than conduct diplomacy, there would be nary a peep in the UN or elsewhere about the "humanitarian crisis."  Instead, Israel would be urged not to retaliate lest the "peace process" be damaged.  Pressure would mount - not for the attacks to cease, but for Israel to cave into the terrorists' demands and "stop the violence."

It is a strange condition, one that many commentators have struggled to pin down.  We believe it has, at its roots, nothing more substantive than moral vanity - a desire to seem superior no matter what the cost.

The death of one's own people is fine, so long as you aren't directly culpable.  Repeated deaths confer victim status, and only elevate the nobility one's losses.

Of course, in the case of Israel, these losses are someone else's for most of the West, which is another feature of this belief.

Our enemies don't care a whit about using their women and children as human shields.  The more that die, the better the ultimate public relations battle that will decide the war's outcome.

As of now, Israel remains firm in its resolve - perhaps because Jews are the only race that has faced complete premeditated extinction.

The rest of the West may not have his determination, however.  Certainly radical Islam hopes so.

The irony is that if the gloves suddenly came off, if women and children were blasted with the same bloody-minded fury that characterize enemy attacks, then they would perhaps be removed from harm's way.

Utlimately our own twisted morality prolongs the suffering of the innocent while endangering our own lives.

Exodus

The Posse was amazed to see a this story, which casts Israel's military in a surprisingly positive light.

While a US draft remains a pathetic left-wing scare tactic, the article highlights many of the reasons right-wingers support a draft in concept:  the rite of passage; the emphasis on civic responsibilities; the shared sense of national identity.

This got us thinking about the Old Days, when Israel was viewed as a lone democratic enclave amidst the Soviet-backed Arab client states of the Middle East.

Back then Hollywood was squarely on the side of the Jews, offering massive films with a cast of thousands to portray the struggle for Israel's independence in a sympathetic light.

Now they are more likely to wear the Palestinian equivalent of a KKK costume.

These are indeed strange times.

The world at war

One of the great things about the Strategy Page is the in-depth insight one can gain from its many little items.

The Posse noted that as far back as mid-June there was a discussion of whether Ethiopia would invade Somalia.

Over the past few weeks, this was followed up by reports of growing troop concentrations on the border.

Now the Associated Press reports that Ethiopia is ready to invade in support of the transitional goverment.

Of course, Somalia has long been a basket case.  What has changes is the impending victory of a pro-al Qaeda Islamacist movement.

From the moutains of Lebanon to the Fertile Crescent, the Horn of Africa to the Niger Delta, the Hindu Kush to the Golden Triangle and the Malay Archipelago - one force is moving the world in an uncoordinated but uniform manner to war.

Islam.

Howard Dean and the anti-war left may delude themselves that a high-profile conference and one of Bill Clinton's trademark bitten lips might have prevented the ongoing operations in the Levant, but the confrontation between radical Islam and West is deeply rooted and probably inevitable.

We will hazard a prediction that should Ethiopia invade, the western press will barely notice, nor will there be much demand for it to retreat from the likes of Nancy Pelosi or the Wise Men of the Democrat party.

Failed states

Austin Bay sheds some light on both the modern state system and why Hezbullah's rockets are so difficult to stop.

While a quite useful post, he omits the final key part of the old Westphalian state system: a concert of Great Powers willing to serve as arbitrators for violations of that system.

What is going on in Lebanon right now is the landward equivalent to piracy. 

Though we romanticize them today, pirates historically have been despised utterly and all of the world's civilized powers agreed to destroy them whenever they were found.

There was common agreement that "failed states" were a menance to the security of all involved.  If one power lacked the ability to assert control over a failed state (or, as was often the case, doing so would upset the balance of power) a partition was agreed upon.

There are endless examples of this, from the creation of Belgium to the partition of Poland.  The endless dynastic wars of 17th and 18th century Europe were largely motivated by the question of who would control these marginal areas.

By the 19th century, this system was formalized with the Concert of Europe.  The Great Powers could and did act to suppress extra-territorial threats to the international system (see the 1848 revolutions).

The Posse notes that a large part of the reason for terrorism's growth and the increasing failure rate among modern states is the unwillingness of the international system to police its own.  The Great Powers no longer have the willpower or - in many cases - the capability to enforce obedience to international norms.

It is far easier (in the short run, at least) to pay lip service to the forms of sovreignty while paying tribute to the most obnoxious piratical organizations in the hope that they leave you alone - and go bother someone else (such as Israel or the U.S.).

But the problem hasn't gone away and now it is increasingly clear to even the most short-sighted diplomats that failed states and semi-failed states are a threat to everyone's security.

The vastly increased power of modern weapons mean that instead of an isolated raid on some forgotten settlements, a modern pirate incursion can mean massive damage to a major city and economic paralysis over an entire region.

To paraphrase Churchill:  Never in the field of human conflict have so few had the ability to destroy so much. 

What we are seeing are the first formal steps to remedy this problem.  The script is familiar:  Arab regime incites Israeli anger, gets slapped and sues for peace.

But this time, there's a new ending:  the West isn't holding Israel back.

France and Russia may issue communiques about Israel's "disproportionate" response, but neither are willing to invoke their nuclear umbrella to check Israel.

There are no major shipments of armaments to reinforce Syria or Iran in the event of major hostilities.

This may seem a small distinction, but it is an important one.  Major trends start with minor events.  We may be seeing one unfolding before us.

Proportionality

The transnational elites and the anti-war left have found a new code word to conceal their dislike for Israel: Proportionality.

Apparently, nations are expected to respond to acts of war in a restrained, moderate fashion.

Exactly what this fashion is, we are not sure.

During the 1990s, the Albright school held that it was the height of sophistication to simply ignore terrorist attacks.  It was a variation of Woodrow Wilson's earlier "too proud to fight" school of pacifism.

Like its predecessor, it failed badly.  Murders enjoy killing helpless victims.  For a death cult like radical Islam, helpless victims are merely an added incentive and proof of their power.

But the proportional disclaimer has found some strange fellow travellers.

While of course denouncing the Zionist Entity, Saudi Arabia and other Arab regimes took the rare step of criticism Hezbullah for it's role in the crisis.

The Posse agrees with Captain Ed that this is doubtless because the Saudis fear Iran more than Israel - a very sensible belief, by the way.

However, there is also a great fear among the Arab dictatorships that the chaos sweeping the region will no longer be halted after only a few days with a UN-enforced cease fire.

The fall of Saddam has set a dangerous precedent and there can be no question that leaders from Cairo to Riyad are pondering what it must be like to go from a palace to a cell - or grave.

The problem with the Middle East wars has in fact always been their proportionality - Israel only fought to survive, never to eliminate its long-term threat.

That restraint may now be exhausted.

Ironically, this is because Israel's other restraint - a refusal to inflict widespread civilian casualties - remains intact.

Israel tires of "teaching lessons" to Arab tyrants only to have to repeat the gesture every 20 years or so.

It is increasingly clear that regime change is the only long-term solution for terrorism.

This is what looms large over the Arabian Peninsula.  If Israel takes the final, forbidden step and not only invades Syria but deposes the regime, a new standard will have been set.

Ultimately, that is what the Saudis fear more than anything else.

Israel must widen the war

As the crisis deepens, it seems to the Posse that Israel has only one option:  to broaden the war to Syria and eventually Iran.

A limited operation is impossible.  "Graduated pressure" will not work, certainly not as long as Hezbullah can count on indefinate resupply and reinforcement from Iran and Syria.

These sanctuaries are what has allowed terrorism to flourish and expand for decades.  The obscene practice will not disappear until it becomes clear that there is a price to be paid for sponsoring acts of war by terrorist organizations.

And let there be no mistake, Hezbullah's claim to be at "open war" with Israel is merely the latest example of pathetic bluster designed to be consumed by ignorant Western and Arab populations.

Hezbullah was already waging open warfare.  How else can one describe rocket attacks, cross-border raids and kidnappings of on-duty soldiers?

Whether the West will fall for this smokescreen remains to be seen.

At this point, the Bush administration remains firmly in Israel's corner.  As more propaganda regarding civilian airstrikes and atrocities are spread by Hezbullah and its media allies, it is imperative for the Bush administration to remind the American people exactly who these people are.

Captain Ed notes that the price of waiting for the latest provocation may be more than letting Hezbullah's chief evade Israeli bombs.

That is why it is futile for Israel to wait for further outrages before settling scores with Syria.  The entire state system in the Middle East is dysfunctional.  The US invasion of Iraq rattled some cages and certainly holds out the promise of change, but more is needed.

Only a complete upending of the existing order will bring about peace in the Middle East.

As Mark Steyn has pointed out again and again, "stability" is our enemy in the region.  The status quo is intolerable and ultimately unsustainable.  Better to end it now, before Iran has nuclear weapons.

Iran has repeatedly stated it will defend Syria.  This must now be put to the test.  Iran's options in the event of Israeli action against Baby Assad are quite limited:

1.  Increased terrorism;

2.  Missile attacks on Israel;

3.  Closure of the Persian Gulf to shipping.

The first option is already in play.  One doubts that Iran is holding much back here.  Furthermore, with Hezbullah and Syria fully engaged, Iran's ability to strike would be extremely limited.

This brings us to missile attacks.  Any such attacks would likely be met with retaliation at this point, possibly including America if Iraq was overflown.

The damage to Israel would be minimal, unless Iran has considerable skill in targeting systems - which has not yet been demonstrated.

This leaves the final option, which would assuredly bring the West into open war with Iran.  It is the trump card of the Mullahs, but also likely the last card they can play.

The Posse is of two minds about its use.

On the one hand, we deplore the thought of more slaughter and destruction.  We hope for a world where our children know peace, not where death in battle becomes the norm.

However, there is also the sense that a greater war is brewing and the longer it is postponed, the more desperate it will be.

Better to fight now, when the West still controls the balance of power than in, say ten years, when the nations of Western Europe are even more intimidated by home-grown Muslim fanatics.

Wasn't the regatta marvelous?

Pursuing our Great War theme, the Posse is highly amused by Valerie (Plame) Wilson's new lawsuit against the vice president.

It reminds us of nothing so much as the Edwardian social circuit in its twillight; the idle rich and indolent nobility obsessing about matters that are ultimately inconsequential and strike future generations as utterly absurd.

Captain Ed is correct that this has the potential to be one massive perjury trap for the Wilsons and their mendacious allies in the CIA.

What is more, the notion that the identity of an agent whose husband wrote a highly controversial article in the New York Times is more consequential than, say - proven terrorist money tracking programs - is beyond belief.

The lawsuit is a pathetic attempt to revive a losing issue.

But more than that, it shows that the Democrats are totally beyond their depth.  This CIA agent - presumably an expert in her field - stews over the slight to her career and her husband whilst the world teeters on the brink of unrestrained global warfare.

This passage from the article is key:

The lawsuit accuses Cheney, Libby, Rove and 10 unnamed administration officials or political operatives of putting the Wilsons and their children's lives at risk by exposing Plame.

What of the lives of the rest of us?  The Posse would posit that Mrs. Wilson's blindly partisan agenda at an agency that should be worried about protecting the American people presents a far greater threat to far more lives than her precious children.

The "me generation" indeed.

One other question: will the lawsuit deduct the proceeds from her husband's book from any lost pay she is alleging?  Just asking.

The guns of July

Everyone on the Internet is an expert, some arguing that this plays into Iran's hands, other suggesting that Sharon set a trap.

The Posse has a different take.

The current situation in the Middle East cannot endure.

For fifty years and more the region has festered, always on the brink of a larger, total conflict.

In the days of the Cold War, the superpowers ensured that there could be no real winner in the Arab-Israeli struggle.

Now that restraint is gone.

Most commentators have drawn parallels between the current ocnflict and World War II.  We believe World War I may be a better example.

Then as now one had a international elite that believed completely that war was impossible and that commerce, goodwill and progress could overcome it.

This international pressure kept the lid on repeated crises, until a series of fatal miscalculations upended the existing world order.

The despotisms in the Middle East are every bit as antiquated as the Habsburg, Romanov and Hohenzollern empires.  They too may be swept aside by forces they seek to direct but cannot in fact control.

Liberal churches invoke Blair's Law

Austin Bay notes the decline of the "mainline" Protestant churches, and - as one would expect from a veteran wargamer and numbers cruncher - focuses on the statistics.

However, the Posse was drawn to the substance of the collapse, to wit:

The Presbyterian Church USA is famous for its 1993 conference, cosponsored with the United Methodist Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America and other mainline churches, in which participants "reimagined" God as "Our Maker Sophia" and held a feminist-inspired "milk and honey" ritual designed to replace traditional bread-and-wine Communion.

This not only demonstrates the theological idiocy of these denominations, it provides yet another proof of Blair's Law.

In this case, all of the limp-wristed, would-be-hip branches of Christianity are gradually merging into one financially crippled, theologically bankrupt and worshipper-free Church of Nothingness.

We've written of our conversion to Catholicism before, and it was nonsense such as this that first set us on the path to the Holy Mother Church.

We were not certain Rome was right, but we knew that these fools were definately wrong.  Under the circumstances, it is easy to see why so many young people turn the austere fanaticism of radical Islam or the even more overtly hedostic Wiccan/neo pagan groups.