This depressing NY Times story about how Europe through weak kneed cowardice and shortsighted thinking that almost overwhelms one with its stupidity has allowed itself to become the chief financier of al Qaeda dovetails nicely I think with much of Europe's and much of the left's in general equally shortsighted take on Gaza - namely, the willingness of these people to appease the terrorists by rewarding their tactics in order to avoid the unpleasantness of what confronting that terror necessarily gives rise to - much easier to just demonize Israel and hope thereby to shame them into an ill-advised truce rather than confront the true threat head on. And just as with the paying of ransoms to al Qaeda's kidnappers the utterly predictable has happened, kidnappings have increased to the point where Europe is now the chief source of capital for terrorists who would like nothing better than to turn Europe into a pile of ash, what the hell do these morons think is gonna be the consequence of appeasing Hamas who is throwing its own citizens in front of bombs in order to terrorize Obama and the EU into just such an appeasement? It's clear Hamas believes that eventually the redoubtable idiocy of the 'world community' is going to step in and stop Israel - and at that point Hamas wins. Which is why I say, if you're not supporting Israel 100% in this endeavor, you're serving the interests of rabid anti-West terror - you're paying the ransom.
As I was reading the Times story it also occurred to me, and I don't remember it being addressed in the article per se - but it occurred to me that European countries paying these ransoms aren't simply doing so to save their people - they're also doing it to keep Islamist extremism off the front pages - with a growing Muslim problem throughout Europe which is giving rise to reactionary right wing animus all over the place, countries like France really don't wanna see pictures of their citizens being beheaded popping up on TV screens - much simpler to just pay the ransom and pretend everything's fine - this very much in keeping with Obama's attempt to address Islamist extremism by ordering gov't agencies to simply stop talking about it - which may not seem as obviously a bad idea as paying a ransom to these people, but the consequences are pretty much the same - their interests are advanced, ours diminished.
As I was reading the Times story it also occurred to me, and I don't remember it being addressed in the article per se - but it occurred to me that European countries paying these ransoms aren't simply doing so to save their people - they're also doing it to keep Islamist extremism off the front pages - with a growing Muslim problem throughout Europe which is giving rise to reactionary right wing animus all over the place, countries like France really don't wanna see pictures of their citizens being beheaded popping up on TV screens - much simpler to just pay the ransom and pretend everything's fine - this very much in keeping with Obama's attempt to address Islamist extremism by ordering gov't agencies to simply stop talking about it - which may not seem as obviously a bad idea as paying a ransom to these people, but the consequences are pretty much the same - their interests are advanced, ours diminished.
