Euro-Sissies and such

In the past two weeks the North Koreans (hereafter referred to as Norks) launched a few missiles in the direction of Japan and the US. Hamas kidnapped as Israeli soldier. Hezbollah kidnapped several Israeli soldiers (in this case, Druze Muslims) into Lebanon.

Prime Minister Koizumi, of Japan, told the Norks to knock it off, otherwise Japan would be forced to take hostile action. The Israelis undertook an invasion of the Gaza Strip and of Lebanon.

The reaction of the UN was something like, "Hold on, Little Elvis. Don't even think about defending yourself against the Norks. They only meant it in good fun." And "Hey, Israel. Don't you realize that you're supposed to be the Muslim world's punching bag? Put on a Band-Aid and get over it."

Isn't it interesting that the UN, and the European faction in particular, are talented in telling other countries what to do when they are not in danger? Within the last year the French prime minister (no capitalization for the French) Jack Chirac (I know it's really Jacques, but who cares?) told the world that any attack on La Belle France by a terrorist nation would result in a nuclear response. But, for some reason, he and his Gallic government feel that the Israelis should take a bunch of punches before responding. But that's the French for you -- philosophizing when the problem isn't their pidgin and cowering when it is. The rest of Europe isn't any better. For the love of God, even Britain seems to have swallowed Chamberlainism instead of learning from the great Winston.

Here's the deal. Kim Il Jong (or is it Kim Jong Il?) is an evil little man. Not only has he threatened Japan and the US with his missiles, he has, in the past, actually sanctioned the kidnapping from Japan Japanese citizens for the purpose of teaching Japanese to his minions. He is reputed to have actually had kidnapping Asian actresses so that he can have sex with them. Is this the type of guy that the UN wants to defend?

As far as Lebanon goes, at one time Beruit was called the Paris of the Middle East. At that time the country was controlled by Marionite Christians. Then in the late 70s the resident Muslims protested and started a civil war that resulted in Beruit being known as the Balck Hole of the Middle East. Late last year there was an attempt among the moderate Lebanese to mount a protest against militant Muslim control, but the the protests came to nothing. Hezbollah still retain seats in the parliament and controls the army in the south of the nation.

Hezbollah decided to take on Israel and Israel, instead of folding like your typical Euro-weenie, decided to fight back. And that's what pisses off Europe. Israel, a little country, decided to fight back against Jihad while Europe sits wringing its hands about being "inclusive."

I don't know about you, but I'd much rather have Israel watching my back than France or Germany or even Great Britain.

Finally, and I know that I'm being scattershot in this post, no country in the world has benefited by being ruled by an Islamic government. A Christian government, or even a non-communist secular government equal progress in freedom and technology Islamic rule equals mud houses or reed houses and Sharia law.

Which would you choose?