• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

As whirlwind change is sweeping through the Middle East, America had better be comfortable with the choices the Arab community is making in its pursuit of self-governance. We have seen the result of poor choices of leadership in the past.

When the Arabs in Gaza wanted change, they chose a known terrorist organization to lead them forward. Hamas was seen as a benevolent group, handing out food and clothing as well as providing shelter for poverty stricken residents. The group was instantly embraced by the Palestinians. Hamas promised the change most Arabs wanted. They also agreed when Hamas blamed the Jews for all the ills they were experiencing.

Hamas was also handing out suicide vests to young jihadis bent on the destruction of their sworn enemy, Israel. The promise of 72 virgins and elevation to hero status is a hard temptation to resist for young, hopeless Arab males.

Fast forward to the tension in Egypt. After protesting in the streets and joining their voices with Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, the people removed Hosni Mubarak from leadership in Egypt. They are moving toward “free and democratic” elections.

What if the Egyptians elect the Muslim Brotherhood to lead their nation? It is clear many reached out to the Brotherhood to assist in bringing tens of thousands into the streets of Cairo. I can only imagine an Egypt where the Brotherhood controls foreign policy.

Many in the Brotherhood despise Hosni Mubarak for keeping peace with Israel. Many Egyptians still think all their problems are due to the conflict between their fellow Arabs and Israel.

Hezbollah wields its power in Lebanon. The Taliban and al-Qaida still have immense popularity in Pakistan and Afghanistan. Many in the Arab world prefer their seventh-century form of rule to the 21st century rule of the West – rule that the Jews in Israel embrace.

We now see uprisings throughout the Middle East – in Syria, Egypt, Yemen, Libya and Tunisia, just to name a few. These uprisings are about something very different than we have been led to believe by the likes of Jimmy Carter, Barack Obama and the jaded liberal press.

Jimmy Carter, to this very day, claims the discontent on the Arab street stems from the Arab/Israeli conflict. He swears all that’s needed for peace in the Middle East is to appease the Arabs by giving up Israel. To him, it is all the Jews’ fault. In his warped sense of reality, everything would be peaceful if the Jews would just leave the Middle East.

Recent events prove nothing could be further from the truth. Carter and his ilk have led us astray. The Arab problem in the Middle East is a problem with Arab leadership.

The raping of these people by their own ugly leaders is the problem: the imams, kings, ayatollahs and oligarchies of tribal misfits who don’t want the 21st century to come to their countries. The same group of warped religious fanatics keep women repressed and under a burqa. These leaders intimidate and control with fear. The same groups have fought each other for thousands of years over whose form of religion pleases Allah the most. It’s tribe against tribe, brother against brother.

Recent conflicts in the Middle East demonstrate clearly: It’s not the Jews’ fault, Stupid.

It is the fault of evil men who take advantage of uneducated, backward-thinking people. They’re men who will shoot their own sister for “adultery” to “protect” the family from shame and men who will encourage the slaughter of innocent men, women and children in the pursuit of pleasing their god. They cut off body parts and rape brides on their wedding day to keep their form of terror in place. And that’s just what they do to their own people.

It is time someone told the Arabs to get their act together. Or maybe the world should equip each side with enough weapons and bombs to allow them to kill each other until no one is left standing.

When George W. Bush made the decision to weed out the vermin that struck our nation on Sept. 11, he drew a line in the sand. Afghanistan quickly realized if it was going to harbor terrorists, it would be treated accordingly. It was time to get on the right side of history and eliminate the evils of terrorism or die with the terrorists.

He then decided to address the threat presented to the world in Saddam Hussein. After 17 U.N. resolutions, similar to that of recent U.N. resolutions Mrs. Clinton speaks about, Mr. Bush drew the line again in Iraq. Either you can cooperate with the will of the world or you will pay the price. A dictator who had gassed, tortured and raped his own people would be forced to listen to the world.

How quickly we forget the positive effects we are now experiencing from the swift and decisive actions taken by Mr. Bush. The Arab world witnessed that they would now see action from America and her allies, not just more empty words. Soon after he saw Saddam go down, Gadhafi decided very quickly to relinquish his nuclear weapons and behave. Imagine what Libya would look like today if Gadhafi had those nukes. It would not be pretty.

If we believe freeing a people so they can just choose another tyrant, dictator or terrorist group going forward is a solution, we are wrong. And the error will cost many more innocent Arab lives. If the Arab community would accept that a nationality is not responsible for their troubles, their lives will change for the better. Their economies will expand, health care availability will increase, jobs will replace jihad ambitions and real lasting peace will return to the region. If not, nothing will change.

It’s not the Jews, Stupid.

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.