If this report is true, it seems monumentally stupid on Syria's part (not that there's anything improbable, or wrong with that). In fact, it seems like a golden opportunity for Israel to salvage some face from what is so far (relative to Arab expectations) a disaster.

Israel could take out Syria's tanks with a trivial effort, and no losses whatsoever. If they think that they're somehow going to get the Golan back in this little imbroglio, Baby Assad (or whoever is really running the country) is even dumber than he looks.

Perhaps he is planning to use the UN as a screen while he makes a dash to occupy the land.

Not in this day and age. Mechanized warfare in the face of USAF or IAF air superiority is just not very smart. Fighters might not be as effective as infantry at clearing out terrorists, but they certainly do a number of tanks and supply trucks these days.

Syria has to at least know about Hezbollah's intent to escalate the conflict with Israel. So I wonder what their real plan is.

The US (or the UK, for that matter) could solve the entire problem of Islamic jihadism in half an hour. It will almost certainly come to that, eventually, after a few more outrages.

Why wait for them to kill some more of us? Why not do it now?

"The US (or the UK, for that matter) could solve the entire problem of Islamic jihadism in half an hour."

Really? How? Do tell. If the answer is anything along the lines of "nuke Teheran", consider that there are 1.4 BILLION Muslims on the planet, none of whom would react terribly well to the pre-emptive annihilation of a Muslim city.

That certainly wouldn't end Islamic jihadism. It could easily START World War III, and I'm talking the real deal, global thermonuclear armageddon here, not some trite redefinition of a terrorist campaign.

JD, I do not advocate it, but the "half hour solution" would not be to nuke Tehran, but to nuke every city in an Arab or Muslim country with a population greater than, say, 10000 people. Suddenly there aren't 1.4 billion Muslims, but more along the line of .4 billion Muslims, with no support base for any terrorism because the states that fund and train the terrorists have ceased to exist.

Now, I don't think that it has to come to that. One of the reasons that I think Bush's strategy was a good idea was that it neatly avoids that end with some political jujitsu. But either we need to apply to Iran what we applied to Iraq, or we need to realize that Bush's strategy will or has failed, and come up with a replacement.

I thought that Hezbollah was supposed to be on the ropes a few weeks ago. Isn't that true?

Mabey they are preparing to invade after Iran nukes Israel on the 22nd?

Something tells me that we are on the verge of the execution of one of the most poorly though out plans in history.

Vox Day points out in his WND column "Riding the Weak Horse II" today, that Iran is only half the Islamic problem. Saudi Arabia funds most of the madrassas in the US and other western countries. He also proposes a first step of western countries getting tough with cultures (Islamic) that refuse to assimilate.

Orville, is that the same Vox Day who thinks the Moon landings were faked?

http://voxday.bl0gspot.com/2006/08/fortuitous-loss.html

Jeff, thanks for the support. I also don't think it has to come to that. But I think that it will, because no Western leader has the guts to do what needs to be done, before what needs to be done is genocide. Incidentally, genocide isn't the right word, because race isn't the issue; religion is.

No Western leader has the guts to do what needs to be done, because they are all more interested in the trappings of power, and in party political advantage, than in the future of other people's children. (One can be sure that their own children will be OK.)

What needs to be done, in every Western country? Immediately stop immigration from any country with a Moslem majority population. Immediately ban the production, display and sale of any Moslem religious item, including the Koran, prayer mats and halal meat and other goods. Ban the wearing of religious emblems and dress in schools - to their credit, France, of all countries, have already done this one.

Ban the building of mosques, or conversion of existing buildings to same. And enforce existing laws against forced marriages.

Start security profiling, right now.

Start working really hard on indigenous and alternative energy sources, and slap a 200% import tax on oil from the Middle East.

Some of this will hurt, but what is the alternative?

Mecca. Medina. Amman. Damascus. Riyadh. Cairo. Beirut. Islamabad. Khartoum. Dacca. Kuala Lumpur. Baghdad. Tehran. Kabul. Jakarta. And so on and so on. All glowing in the dark. Along with New York and/or Washington and/or London. The latter which will have precipitated the former.

Most societies and countries at war make strenuous efforts to eliminate the fifth column, We are encouraging it.

Fletcher says: Most societies and countries at war make strenuous efforts to eliminate the fifth column, We are encouraging it.

You're also encouraging stupidity. You're convinced you're preaching the solution and you're only preaching hate. You can defend your points (as you see them), but you're preaching hatred. One of the biggest problems we have in this world is the inability of people to talk to each other for hatred. Perhaps the best way to start solving this problem is what you suggested. We can nuke your house.

I forgot something. Arrest or deport, depending on whether or not they are citizens, the rabble-rousing psychotic clerics who are already here.

And start enforcing existing laws against incitement to murder, incitement to riot, inciting religious and racial hatred, treason and sedition.

Most of the worst of the rabble-rousers are demonstrably and publicly criminal; why aren't they in jail, back where they came from or six feet under?

Because it's not PC, and in some cases the politicos might lose votes, that's why.

Britain has a particular problem; in many constituencies, the current government has a sitting MP because of Moslem votes, which they would lose if they got tough. They might even be kicked out of power, and we can't have that, can we?

It's not for nothing that one of the nicknames of the current British Foreign Secretary is Jaq al'Straw, or that Mr. Galloway is often referred to as the Member for Baghdad South.