You are hereAn Interview with Dr. Larry Schweikart

An Interview with Dr. Larry Schweikart

  • strict warning: Non-static method view::load() should not be called statically in /home/vaduva/ on line 842.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_argument::init() should be compatible with views_handler::init(&$view, $options) in /home/vaduva/ on line 745.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_validate() should be compatible with views_handler::options_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/ on line 589.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter::options_submit() should be compatible with views_handler::options_submit($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/ on line 589.
  • strict warning: Declaration of views_handler_filter_boolean_operator::value_validate() should be compatible with views_handler_filter::value_validate($form, &$form_state) in /home/vaduva/ on line 149.

By Virgil - Posted on 17 July 2006

Our latest interview is with Dr. Larry Schweikart, a professor of history at the University of Dayton. Dr. Schweikar has written more than twenty books on national defense, business and financial history; last week he was a guest on the Rush Limbaugh Show and and also worked as a ghost-writer for a well-known television evangelist. Dr. Schweikart was generous enough to take some time away from his busy schedule and answer some questions in light of his brand new book, America's Victories: Why the U.S. Wins Wars and Will Win the War on Terror, a book getting very positive reviews from Rush Limbaugh, The National Review and the Wall Street Journal.Virgil Vaduva: Dr. Schweikart, thank you so much for your time and for agreeing to answer some of my questions. I know that there is a saying in English to not judge a book by its cover, but I just love the cover of your new book. One could say that it is the best expression of the book itself: an unmatched resolve of our military forces. Is there a story behind the cover picture?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: Hi Virgil. Actually, I'm very happy with that cover, but the image I tried to get our publisher to use was one of just two soldiers, one in a Continental dress in the shadows passing off the flag to a modern soldier in the bright foreground. Fortunately, my publisher is better at selecting images than I am. And, no, there is no particular "story" to this image, other than it encapsulates several of the themes: discipline, yet individuality (note the number of dress styles, yet they are all regulation); intensity, yet informality enough to allow adaptation and change; and, of course, determination.

Virgil Vaduva: As you already know I spent much of my life in a Communist country where throughout my childhood and teenage years I was constantly told by my father that "America will eventually free us from Communism." I believe this kind of perspective on the United States is prevalent throughout the world in places experiencing dictatorships and government abuse; the U.S. is always expected to come and deliver the defenseless from the jaws of totalitarianism. Why do you think that is?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: First, it's "our turn." Greece did this job for a hundred years, keeping the Persian hordes from overrunning Europe. Later, the British Empire spread western ideas of human worth and republican government around the world. Neither of these, Greece or England, was perfect, and neither was a representative democracy as we are, but the concepts of the west were embedded deeply in their militaries. We are now, in some cases, almost alone in standing up to Islamic jihadism---with some essential help from the Aussies, the Brits, the Italians, some of the eastern Europeans, of course. But it was the U.S. that took the first step after 9/11 to say we not only had to respond to the attacks themselves, but to clean out that part of the world's cesspool that breeds such problems. Now we're out front, taking the arrows, so to speak, because we are doing the job few others will do. Just look at Iran. Everyone keeps ducking the Iran issue because, deep down, they KNOW that a United States under George W. Bush will not tolerate a nuclear Iran to become a genuine threat to us, or to other nations. "Let America do it" is their cry.

America's Victories

Virgil Vaduva: A major thesis of your book is that the United States will win the war on terror (and other wars) not only because of military might, but because of the different kind of spirit and attitude American people have towards war, life and difficulties encountered through life. I certainly agree with you, but could you elaborate on what in particular you see as the reason for Americans having a different kind of spirit and attitude than the rest of the world?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: It is a continuation of the Hanson thesis that the West has developed an essentially different way of fighting that includes concern for the sanctity of life, free expression, a willingness to use technology, a reliance on citizen soldiers who are then allowed extensive autonomy, and an ability to learn from losses. Some of these are no-brainers for us in the West: "Learn from loss? Who doesn't?" Yet bushido Japan and jihadist Muslim states have shared the view that to make an error is a shame, to admit it, a double shame. How can you learn from a mistake if it is a shame to admit you made a mistake in the first place? Whether in war or business, we are incredibly tolerant of failure---look at our bankruptcy laws, which is another essentially western device.

Virgil Vaduva: You also mentioned Rome and other great civilizations of the past which have eventually collapsed for many reasons, one of which is the lack of respect for the sanctity of life; you give numerous examples in your book of instances when many American lives were lost in the effort to save those who were in distress, even enemies. How would you parallel that effort with what we often see as a losing fight against abortion here in the United States? Is the U.S. in danger of losing respect for the sanctity of life as well?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: I differ from you insofar as I don't see us losing that fight at all. The numbers, in fact, are overwhelmingly on the side of the pro-life movement, and slowly, even courts are rolling back abortion "rights." Surveys show that younger people especially are pro-life, and a couple of years ago we crossed the threshholed where a majority of Americans no longer believed Roe v. Wade was a legitimate ruling. The lesson I tend to draw from Rome is, if you plan to expand your territory, you better increase your population in those territories with loyal subjects. If the Romans, from the get-go, had developed a citizenship process for the Germans that involved some degree of "Roman-ification," they would have lasted even longer. But they went half-way, trying to keep the Germans as an effective buffer while at the same time denying them citizenship. We, on the other hand, through our Northwest Ordinance, have been nearly alone among all countries in the world in allowing conquered peoples to become citizens. We set Cuba free, pulled out of North Africa and France, and even left the Philippines. We offered Puerto Rico independence, and they turned us down. No other power in history has gone to such lengths to ensure that those within its borders are homogenous.

Virgil Vaduva: Do you see the mainstream media as being dangerously antagonistic towards our military forces, or simply just another manifestation of the free nature of our society and government?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: No, the media is a different animal. It stopped being just "another manifestation" in the 1960s, and now has lost all perspective. The reasons are numerous: 1) self-selection and inbreeding among journalists at the top papers and television stations, in which they have all come from the same journalism schools and have no background at all in business or the military; 2) lack of military service, in which most editors and reporters have never served, and thus, are hostile to the military; and 3) insulation from market pressures. The mainstream newspapers and television news shows, for example, are mostly parts of larger chains that can carry a loss in the news division if it means increased prestige at swank parties. There is no way a market-responsive NY Times could print what it does and survive if it was not being subsidized at many levels. Just consider advertising: the "majors" don't have to advertise, because the other papers all quote the NY Times and the LA Times, and the WaPo.That is millions of dollars in freebies every year.

Virgil Vaduva: One thing that I personally struggle with is Christ's commandment to love our brothers and even love our enemies, and bless those who persecute us. Although it seems like an impossibility, how do you see reconciliation between Jesus commanding us to love enemies and the necessity of war against those bent on killing us at any cost? Is it even possible to reconcile the two, or is the question getting lost between the lines?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: That's a great question and a constant source of, I think, misunderstanding for Christians. I begin everything in my Christian life with John 1:1: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was WITH GOD. . . ." All scholars accept that this word "logos" there means Jesus. If Jesus was "with God" in the beginning, then He must have been there when God commanded the Israelites to wipe out Jericho, AI, and dozens of other cities, or to fight innumerable battles. What did Jesus say when God issued those commands? The Bible tells us there can be no disagreement between God and Jesus, anymore than your eyeballs can disagree where to look: They are the same, one. So Jesus said "Yes, and Amen" when God gave those orders. We have for too long tried to detach Jesus from His presence in the Old Testament, and thereby create a pacifist Jesus. I'm convinced the commandments on blessing your enemies and praying for those who persecute you are absolute; but they are also individual. They do not refer to nations. Paul tells us in Romans that the government does not bear the sword in vain, but to "execute wrath." Isn't that interesting? He didn't even say, "execute judgment," but wrath! Why? For the same reason that there is a prohibition against murder in the Old Testament, but not against the government executing people by law: Goverment, the representative of God's authority on earth, as Paul tells us, must do collectively so that we do not take upon ourselves individually to do. In the case of murder, you might be tempted to kill the killer of someone you loved. You don't have that right---only the state does, because you are not God's agent, the government is. And remember, Paul said this of a PAGAN government, Rome. How much more appropriate is it of a Christian and just government, ours?

Now, here's something that I think will blow the doors off some of your readers' cars. We know that prior to His going into the ministry at age 30, Jesus did what work? He was a carpenter, right? The town of Nazareth, where He worked, was a garrison town for the Roman army. What, exactly, do you think carpenters in Nazareth did? What do you think software companies near Wright-Pat Air Base do? He worked for the Roman army. I'm convinced that Joseph and Son were contractors for the Romans, and that they built barrackes, watch towers, ballistas, and even . . . crosses. Yep, the same Jesus who said to love your neighbor supplied weapons to the Roman army. Except there isn't a contradiction. Jesus said, "Peace. My peace I give to you, NOT AS THE WORLD GIVES IT." Well, how does the world give peace? Cease-fires. Treaties. Temporary cessations of violence. He did not come to give us that kind of peace, but a deeper, real, genuine peace that no government can provide. And finally, when He comes again, it will not be throwing flowers like someone from 1960s San Francisco, but with a sword, and, yes, people will die.

Virgil Vaduva: In your book you also mentioned "forgiveness" as another major tenet of Western Civilization. In contrast, Islamic societies are almost always revolving around shame and maintaining one's honor at any cost, including killing the innocent. Is this not another Biblically-derived attribute of our own society?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: It is, and that's a critical point. The whole notion of forgiveness is a Judeo-Christian concept. Yet it translates into our economy (bankruptcy laws) and our military (surrender). Forgiveness involves placing shame before the Father, and letting Him deal with it. So many cultures---bushido Japan, modern jihadist cultures, however---do not have such concepts. "Shame and honor" cultures will not allow you to make a mistake---an error is a shame, not just an error. This is why even economically these other areas of the world have difficulty surpassing us: they can copy us, quite well, up to a point, but they always lack the inventiveness. U-California Berkeley has MORE NOBEL PRIZES THAN ANY OTHER NATION!!! Why less inventiveness? Because invention involves repeated failure, and society has to be tolerant of failure. In Christianity, we live daily with the realization that we cannot measure up, yet are forgiven, so while I wouldn't say we "celebrate" failure (although some modern churches are coming dangerously close), we tolerate it like no other society. As a result, we always end up with more good ideas, whether in business or the military. I will categorically state that no "shame/honor" society can ever defeat an essentially free society without shedding its shame/honor code.

Virgil Vaduva: In light of the U.S. war on terror, and the current events taking place in the Middle East, what do you make of some of the recurring prophetic hysteria we see associated with these types of events?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: Well, it makes for good reading, that's for sure! I've read and enjoyed all the "Left Behind" series, and think the last one, "The Glorious Appearing" had some fantastic insights into what, I believe, will indeed happen. My problem with "end times" guys isn't that they are all wrong, but that I as of yet don't see the conditions as described in the Bible as ready for the apocalypse. For example---and these are just my views gleaned from scripture, and I know other Christians interpret these passages differently---the prophecy of David said that Jesus would sit at the right hand of God until all His enemies were made His footstool. Well, if Jesus is with God and we are here on earth, and we are the body, then that would mean that God's enemies ON EARTH would have to be His footstool. I don't see that happening as of 2006, do you? Paul said we would come into a "unity of the faith" before Jesus came. Well, that is starting to happen: Orthodox and Roman Cathlics are making noises about burying the hatchet, and the charismatic movement has brought Baptists and Catholics together in ways I never dreamed possible growing up in a Southern Baptist Church as a kid. But we're not there yet. All in all, I think the "hysteria" you refer to is that gnawing feeling out there, even among so-called unbelievers, that this stuff is real, and that there is a literal Jesus, and one day He is going to literally come down and kick butt.

Virgil Vaduva: Finally, as Christians, I believe that we should look for ways to better the world, help the poor and be living examples to those around us. It is evident to me that sometimes war is necessary, yet I can't help but think of a future when perhaps we could, as humans, get past our differences and try to solve problems without having to kill each other. Speaking both as a Christian and a historian, do you believe longing for a future without war is just a pipe dream or could it become a reality?

Dr. Larry Schweikart: I believe that God has supplied us with all we need to be healthy, happy, and victorious---war aside---and I also believe that just as in Jesus's day, there will be people of little or no faith. Remember He went back to Nazareth, having raised the dead and made the lame to walk, but in His home town, He couldn't even (as David Shiftlett says) "fix a parking ticket." He couldn't do anything. Why? The Bible is clear: "Because of their unbelief." So it doesn't matter how successful the "good" Christians are, you can only move as far as the weakest member in the faith process will take you. Upon reaching the Promised Land, two of the spies, Joshua and Caleb, said they could easily defeat the Canaanites, but 10 said they couldn't. The faith of Joshua and Caleb, because they were part of a community, was limited by the other 10. Now, we're JUST TALKING ABOUT CHRISTIANS in this future scenario, so even if the world were all Christians, it would be something of a pipe dream, because many Christians have "little faith." Reality is, even if the prophecies are interpreted as I think they should be---that many of the people in the world will come to Christ---you will still have substantial numbers of unbelievers, and you cannot walk over the free will of another person. They have a right not to believe. God gave them that right. So, longing for a future without war is not only a pipe dream, Jesus Himself said that just before His coming there would be "wars and rumors of wars." That doesn't sound very peaceful to me!

Virgil Vaduva: Dr. Schweikart, again thank you for this interview and for your time, and congratulations on a well-written, and excellent book that both honors and brings encouragement to our armed forces. God bless!

Dr. Larry Schweikart: Thank you for a wonderful interview.

Virgil's picture

I want to again thank Dr. Schweikart publicly for his gracious interview and for opening my eyes to a few issues I was unaware of. He made an interesting point regarding individual pacifism vs. inter-government pacifism, something I have never considered before. For someone who is on book tours, radio and TV shows, he was very kind to give us his time for this interview.

I also realize that Dr. Schweikart does not share the prophetic interpretation of some of our visitors, so I ask you all to show him the same grace, patience and respect he's shown us.

He will likely be reading the comments associated with this interview, so if you have questions for him, please feel free to post them here where he will read them.

Islamaphobe's picture

I heard Schweikart last week when a guest host had him on the program while Rush was hobnobbing with the moguls in CT, and I found him to be interesting and plausible. I loved his comment that "If Jesus was 'with God' in the beginning, then He must have been there when God commanded the Israelites to wipe out Jericho, Ai, and dozens of other cities." Can it be that God's way of dealing with the human condition changes as mankind "evolves" (hate that word) socially toward a higher (I hope) stage of development? I believe that it does.

Virgil's picture

Yes, I believe he did a great job on Rush Limbaugh, I greatly enjoyed the interview as well. He definitely presents a whole new perspective on the whole war, that is for sure.

EWMI's picture

Thank you for this interview Virgil.

I find it hard to be as optimistic as Dr Schwiekart about the war on terror.

I wonder when you know you have won a war against a method ...? Can we declare victory when we no longer have terrorists? I read recently where someone said: "All Terrorists are Muslim". I suppose they have never heard of the Tamil Tigers or even of the Stern Gang.

I am also interested in comments about the CIA's funding of the Mujahadeen who eventually became the Taliban. The CIA (your tax dollars at work) created the textbooks that were given to exiled Afghanis in Pakistan. They were strongly religious and promoted terror tactics that are now used against us. Of course Afghanistan was not alone, terror manuals were used to topple Central American regimes and others.

It further needs to be noted that Israel funded the foundation of Hamas as a foil to Fatah and that Hizbollah was formed as a response to Israel's invasion of Lebanon. Is there a strong case for believing that a great deal of the modern terror we see is actually Blowback?

More questions to follow

Virgil's picture

I think he is speaking more from a historical perspective rather than current events - I definitely recommend his book. He goes to great lenghts to show how more or less the character of the American people will ensure our survival. The past often will show how the future will unfold, and I think that seems to be true in this case. The more the terrorists attack us, the more our resolve will grow in defeating them - it is as if they want to defeat themselves!

EWMI's picture

Following is a comment by John Bolton I am seeking opinions on it:

Lebanon civilian deaths morally not same as terror victims -- Bolton

US Ambassador John Bolton said there was no moral equivalence between the civilian casualties from the Israeli raids in Lebanon and those killed in Israel from "malicious terrorist acts".

Asked to comment on the deaths in an Israeli air strike of eight Canadian citizens in southern Lebanon Sunday, he said: "it is a matter of great concern to us ...that these civilian deaths are occurring. It's a tragedy."

"I think it would be a mistake to ascribe moral equivalence to civilians who die as the direct result of malicious terrorist acts," he added, while defending as "self-defense" Israel's military action, which has had "the tragic and unfortunate consequence of civilian deaths".

The eight dead Canadians were a Lebanese-Canadian couple, their four children, his mother and an uncle, said relatives in Montreal.

The Montreal pharmacist and his family had arrived in Lebanon 10 days earlier for a vacation in his parents' home village and to introduce his children to relatives, they said.

Three of his Lebanese relatives died too, a family member told AFP.

"It's simply not the same thing to say that it's the same act to deliberately target innocent civilians, to desire their deaths, to fire rockets and use explosive devices or kidnapping versus the sad and highly unfortunate consequences of self-defense," Bolton noted.

The overall civilian death toll from the Israeli onslaught in Lebanon since last Wednesday reached 195, in addition to 12 soldiers, officials said. Twenty-four Israelis have also been killed since fighting began last Wednesday, including 12 civilians in a barrage of Hezbollah rocket fire across the border.

Copyright © 2006 Agence France Presse. All rights reserved.

Islamaphobe's picture

O.K., I'll take the bait. The deaths of all genuinely innocent civilians in warfare is to be regretted. In my judgment, however, Bolton is correct. In sending relatively primitive rockets to kill Israelis, Hezbollah's primary motive is to strike terror. In attacking Hezbollah, the Israelis are seeking military targets. I do not believe that the "soldiers" of Hezbollah wear military uniforms. These "soldiers" do not want the civilians in southern Lebanon to leave because they want the casualties there to be primarily civilian, if possible. That's good propaganda for the terrorists. Because the "soldiers" are in civilian clothing, they can shoot at the Israelis and blend in quickly with the local population. The Hezbollah "soldiers" who fire rockets commonly fire them from residential areas. Shooting at them inevitably means killing some civilians. I suspect, in fact, that some of the "civilians" that the Israelis have killed were armed members of Hezbollah. Don't believe all the news reports you read, attacking Israel and the U.S. I see you cite Agence France Presse. Enough said.

Most of the civilians in south Lebanon are Shiites, and many of them undoubtedly support Hezbollah. I would guess, but do not know for sure, that the Canadian victims referred to above were Shiites. Now it's not a crime against humanity to be a Shiite, and all deaths of truly innocent Shiites are to be regretted. One can hope, however, that some supporters of Hezbollah have the capacity to understand that Jews (or Christians, Hindus, Buddhists, and atheists) are human beings too. I have not seen much evidence of that capacity among the Shiites of Lebanon.

In World War II, the American armed forces killed many innocent German civilians. My family, incidentally, is largely of German origin though my surname is Welsh. I regret the deaths of those civilians, but better those deaths than to live under Nazi tyranny. The same goes for Islamic tyranny. The best way for Islamic terrorists to end the deaths of Muslim civilians is to quit being terrorists and become human beings who recognize that those who are different from them are also creatures of God.

EWMI's picture

No bait intended John.

Israel, according to Lebanese Christians and Muslims dropped leaflets on the southern Leb villages. The leaflets instructed people to leave. However immediately after the leaflets were dropped roads and bridges in the perimeter were destroyed. There are many stories of this sort, first hand from friends and aquaintances.

Comparing Family History:

My father was German and my Mother Dutch. My fathers father fought in Germany under the Kaiser. He refused entry into the Hitler youth of my Dad and his sisters. His (our) family experienced difficulty because of their stand. My father was later drafted and fought in the German army as a young boy of 17. He entered the army 3 months before the end of the war.

My mothers father was a member of the Dutch undergound. He fought the Germans and worked to hide those sought by them.

My anti war stance is driven by an inquisitive mind and the stories and attitudes of the majority of my ancestors.

mazuur's picture

Excellent words!



Virgil's picture

Ok - you are Israel, Hezbollah walks across the border, blow up a humvee and kidnaps several of your soldiers. What do you do (considering that in the past kidnapped soldiers were never returned and never heard from again). What exactly is your response?

EWMI's picture

Well, you bomb the country and its military who are also the enemies of the terror group. (Which you helped create in the first place) Oh yes and be sure you bomb the dairies and the pharmacies and the power plants. And for good measure the Christian areas of Beirut (that has just happened).

Oh and By the way. Even the Israelis said that the the soldiers were captured as they tried to enter Lebanon. That would make them POW's.

Anyway what you really do is secretly enter Syria, which has been happening. (Debka is an Israeli news source that published that yesterday.) That will get them to return fire so that Syria and Iran will join the trouble and America will be drawn in.

Just watch it.

So I wonder if the Christian deaths have a moral equivalence ....

... stupid question.

Virgil's picture

You didn't answer my question Al. If you were in Israel's shoes, what solution would YOU have when Hezbollah kills your soliders and kidnaps them. Rather than criticize, give me your solution and what you would do please...:)

EWMI's picture

I am sorry I did not answer.

I would say, "my soldiers have crossed the border into your territory. Please be sure that they are kept in accord with the Geneva convention. And of course we will do the same with the 900 Palestinians including women and children."

If the Lebanese did not kidnap them but a militia group inside did, I would call on a diplomatic mission first. I would assist the Lebanese goverment and military to find them. This is always how it is done ... always.

Virgil's picture

All that has been tried in the past - what makes you think it will work this time?

EWMI's picture

Ok the timeline of the events reveal that Israeli troops were ambushed on Lebanons side of the border on July 12 before any of this began. They had come looking for a soldiers killed in a Merkava tank as it attempted to enter Lebanon before that.

Now here is the problem; Israel's soldiers are killed/captured in an illegal incursion in another country and they choose to tear the whole country apart? They have flown about 2000 armed sorties.

It just does not make sense.

JL's picture

Let see Al,

People across the border shoot missiles at Israel country. The leaders of the other country are a) unable to control the militants, b) unwilling to control the militants, c) backing the militants.

If the answer is a) there is no government in Lebanon to conduct diplomacy with. Therefore diplomacy is not a solution.

If b) something must be done to make the government of Lebanon feel more threatened by doing nothing than by doing something. Therefore diplomacy has already failed.

If c) Lebanon is behind this act of war. Therefore, diplomacy must be extended by the means Clausewitz suggests.

No matter what answer, Israel has little choice. It must either attack or surrender.

The real question is why do we support all sides of this?



JL Vaughn
Beyond Creation Science

EWMI's picture

While this could descend into a who started first exchange, I think there is some merit in understanding that Arab interests are seldom addressed in Western media.

It is understandable that you may not be aware that Israel has planted 400,000 land mines in South Lebanon in and since the 80's invasion. These still kill children today. Lebanon has asked for but been denied the location maps of the mines. Since the retreat from Lebanon Israel has held several farms in Lebanense territory. They have also kidnapped many Leb. farmers and business people. Further to this there have been constant violations of Leb. sovereinty even to the point of air strikes for the last 20 years. This is all pretty faithfully reported in Jewish papers BTW.

The war in the 80's has never ended, yet all we ever hear is that those crazed Muslims can't stop shooting rockets.

Now we have an amazingly harsh campaign after two Israeli soldiers were kidnapped in Lebanon. Not in Israel, in Lebanon, not in Israel in Lebanon.

Now just watch closely as this accelerates into a much broader war. Israel, according to Debka is already in Syria and the US is already in Iran. Neither of these countries has yet been charged with returning fire but trust me ... the time is at hand.

chrisliv's picture


That's an important point that is rarely ever mentioned in the mainstream US media, about how the two Israeli soldiers were captured on the Israeli occupied Lebanese territory, Sheeba Farms, I believe.

Peace to you,
C. Livingstone

EWMI's picture

It strikes me from that comment that you may not be aware of some history. The story of Lebanon is readily available from both Leb. Jewish and neutral sources. Briefly, Israel occupied Lebanon for 20 years, Hezbollah was formed to push them out. Israel left but held on to several farms in the south. Israel has continually engaged Hezbollah across the border since the withdrawl. Many Lebs have been kidnapped within Lebanon and some Israelis have also been kidnapped in Lebanon, just like the 2 soldiers. In the past there have been several successfull prisoner exchanges between the two. (Israel taking back soldiers kidnapped in Lebanon in exchange for non military personell including women and children also kidnapped in Lebanon)

Israel left 130,000 land mines in Lebanon after the withdrawl, so far all but about 40,000 have been cleared. These have cost lives of countless Leb. children. Lebanon has sought through diplomatic channels, the maps of the mine fields from Israel but this has been denied.

A couple of years ago Rafik Hariri was assasinated in Lebanon. This resulted in Syria leaving Lebanon. This benefited the current campaign.

The difficutly is that that Western media faithfully reports that Israel has been rocketted but seems blind sighted by the violations of Lebanese sovereignty. All Jewish newspapers seem to report both sides. It is also noteworthy that Israel could not stop Hezbollah so how can it expect Lebanon to do so?

In regards to balanced reporting,, and Arutz Sheva reported last year that several Israelis had been arrested poisoning wells in Palestinian areas. The same group has been caught several times in the past. Israel to their credit, worked to curb this. A long standing western view is that Israelis don't poison wells, in the west not a single paper reported the incident. My point? Western media is far more pro Israel Militancy than Israeli media!

My concern is that the current escapade will extend into Syria and Iran. Debka (pro Israeli) has already reported that Israel is in Syria today and that the US are in Iran. As far as we can see we are just waiting for the shooting to start.

What do you think?

chrisliv's picture


It seems perfectly consistent that this author would appeal to Rush Limbaugh. I'll guess that Michael Savage and Ann Coulter are fans too.

Peace to you all,
C. Livingstone

Virgil's picture

I understand someone attacking Rush or Savage, but Anne? Now what did baby-doll Anne Coulter do to you? :)

mazuur's picture

Hey now, back off my man Michael (Savage). He is course but tells it like it is (90% of the time anyway).



Virgil's picture

Agh Rich...come on man. I can't stand him for more than five minutes. :)

mazuur's picture


what?...are you crazy? Michael! Michael! Michael!...LOL



mazuur's picture


Plus, I meant to say Michael was "coarse" not "course".



Virgil's picture

Yeah, I know. Every since he told a homosexual on live tv on MSNBC to "choke on a sausage" and "I hope you get AIDS and die" I lost respect for the guy..not that I had much to begin with. Any Christian who wishes death on someone else is highly questionable in my opinion.

mazuur's picture

I wouldn't call Michael a "Christian". He makes is very clear all the time to me when he tries to talk about religion. His statements concerning the Bible, God, all roads leading home, and many more, make it clear that he hasn't the foggiest idea what he is talking about concerning Christianity.

Plus, I did state he is only right-on about 90% of the time. He definitely has some serious faults on some things. But, he does cut through all the crap concerning politics (he is right concerning liberalism being a mental disorder), and the march of Islam in the world, and some other topics.

"Any Christian who wishes death on someone else is highly questionable in my opinion."

hmmm...that is strange thing to hear you say, but I'm not going to go there.



EWMI's picture

Have you looked at Anne's adams apple? There is an interesting rumour that she ... well, how do you say it on a Christian forum ...

Virgil's picture

Oh now...:) that's what someone on dailykos would say about her.

EWMI's picture

Yeah I know .. tongue firmly planted in cheek ...

Recent comments


Should we allow Anonymous users to comment on Planet Preterist articles?
Yes absolutely
No only registered users should comment
What are you talking about?
Total votes: 43