Sunday, August 13, 2006


Do you know what happens when bad behavior is reinforced and rewarded? Imagine how it would be if your child did something terrible at school--say threaten other children, or a teacher; and your response was to give him money and praise for what he did. And, imagine further, what might happen if you then badmouthed the school authorities for having the audacity criticize him?

Go ahead and just guess how this influences the child's future behavior. You know the kid has intent to do some harm, and you pretend that he is harmless; or reasonable; or simply just needs reinforcement of his self-esteem and some unconditional love.

Now, let's imagine that the child is not exactly a child; but is a childish adult, filled with hatred and resentment of his own inadequacies; and who blames everybody (except himself) for his sorry state. Let's say he has stated clearly and repeatedly that he is going to kill the principal of the school and everyone else; and he is actively pursuing the means to achieve this end.

"How did this happen?" everyone (especially the parents) will cry when the child/adult in question succeeds in acting out his narcissistic and rageful fantasies.

The UN resolution is nothing but a piece of paper that makes everyone involved feel good; but which will have almost no effect in restraining the child/children in question. And, in fact, it will have the opposite effect of encourageing even more acting out and bad behavior. Just as the foolish parent above, who is primarily worried about the self-esteem and feelings of the out-of-control child; rather than trying to restrain his behavior for his own good and the good of everyone else, feels good that he is a loving parent by accepting and rewarding the bad behavior.
It is an unmitigated disaster--not just for Israel, but for all of the West. It will do nothing but embolden and encourage Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Iran and all the other terrorist organizations--whether they are actual states or presently stateless-- into believing that they can do whatever the hell they want and not have to suffer any significant consequences (the deaths of innocents are not consequences they happen to care about, in case you hadn't noticed).
Hezbollah says they will abide by the ceasefire, and I would say that if you believe this for one moment, then you are so far down the road to denial, that it is unlikely you will find your way back in time for the final denouement. When has any terrorist group abided by a ceasefire?

I'm sure it makes the terminally clueless (hat tip: LGF) happy that "peace in our time" has been reached. O happy day, indeed.

The people who "don't get it" are the la-la left who pretend they are "progressive", but always anxiously stepping back when confronted with reality. The Bush administration has made a huge error in trying to placate these morons who wouldn't have the guts to stand up and fight against the Islamofascists even if the fanatics find a way to nuke us (which they will eventually).

Well, why should they fight? They are on the same side as the enemy, and are after the same thing.

Thus, my modest prediction based on psychological and behavioral analysis of the situation: No good (and certainly no "peace") will come of the UN-mediated ceasefire/peace plan.

On the contrary, strap yourselves in for a wild and terrifying ride because the operators of the carnival of terror and their carny, flim-flam backers now have reason to believe they can win the whole shebang.

UPDATE: And so it begins. The ink is not even dry. And who's gonna make 'em?

UPDATE II: A sobering piece of analysis. I hope it is not correct, but I fear that it is.

UPDATE III: From MEMRI today: "Hizbullah's Victory in Lebanon Opens Door For Third Intifada". Do you begin to get my point?

UPDATE IV: Is something bigger going on? Jeff Goldstein is entertaining some alternative theories:
What I hadn’t counted on, however, was Nasrallah’s refusal to stop fighting long enough to get resupplied. Because now should he not, Israel will have international cover—and it will be a solid cover, as the US and Israel both capitulated to a much softer agreement than they came out for initially.

Which puts Israel (and the US) in the driver’s seat so long as the gamble pays off and Hizballah interprets the cease fire as a sign of weakness, and if—and this is the important bit—1) Olmert really isn’t the dithering feckless appeasenik he’s being portrayed as, or 2) the Israeli government is about to topple.

As Geezer points out, however, the unanimous multi-party vote—along with other signals (the confusion at Stratfor, Bush’s steady commitment to the fight against terrorism despite enormous political pressures; the fact that the cease fire agreement makes no sense for Israel, and would quite obviously weaken it)—suggests that something bigger is afoot here.

At least, that’s the conclusion I’m leaning toward now.

Which means that this Caroline Glick pieceis wrong—as was this piece by the (perhaps not terribly reliable) Israeli Insider, and this piece by Haaretz.

Or perhaps Israel is running its own disinformation campaign—giving off the appearance of a crisis of leadership while behind the scenes there are serious plans in place to take the next major step in the war on terror.

Is it wishful thinking?

Is it? I certainly want to believe it. I guess we'll see soon enough.

No comments: