How to Lose in Five Easy Steps!

Now war and peace-making are at times difficult things to balance. Sometimes there is a break in the action in order to see if a longer-lasting ceasefire can be established. Sometimes “goodwill gestures” are made in order to build confidence between sides. I have seen historical photos of Israeli and Arab officers hashing out ceasefire details during previous wars. Two states and two armies that have nothing to do with each other sometimes need to talk either directly or via intermediaries in order to reach some goal of mutual interest. I imagine Iran’s lack of firing at Israel while shooting at its neighbors may have been related to Israel sending through a third party a detailed description of what would happen should Iran choose to attack the Jewish state again.

Though there are times for peace, there are also times for war. Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran are not normal nation-states that weigh national needs against military objectives. They are psychotic Islamic terrorists with the only goal being world Sharia domination. They might buy into a short time-out, but they will never agree to an end of hostilities as the US experienced with various foes over the centuries. I remember feeling both confused and happy the first time I saw American warships sailing into Vietnam for a formal visit. On the one hand, the US lost to North Vietnam, the Official Enemy of my youth. On the other hand, Vietnam could be a solid hedge for the US against China, and that is a good thing. The problem with the Shia and Sunni terrorist axis is that there is nobody normal at home. Their goal is total victory, and you can’t use the Board of Peace or negotiations to get to a final outcome. The terror threat must be annihilated and then maybe, just maybe, there is a chance for a better future. But the US is giving the bad guys more and more chances. Do I hear Witkoff and Kushner in this mix?

When we look at the trajectories of Japan and Germany from 1945 to the present, we always say that unconditional surrender was the key to rebuilding those nations into the pro-US countries they are today. And that is unquestionably true: without the Axis losing completely, it would have been very hard to restructure their societies towards democracy and capitalism. A woman who worked directly with General MacArthur in Japan spoke of the massive, wholesale changes the general made, like giving women the right to vote and stripping feudal landlords of their property and divvying it up among others. Because he was the viceroy and Hirohito gave his full support, MacArthur could do a national root canal and the patient could only smile and ask if he could do the same on the other side as well.

There is one point of the post-World War II period that is critical but nearly ignored. The US was gracious and helpful to Germany and Japan partly out of fear of the communists. If Stalin had fallen and Russia was mired in internal strife, I don’t know if the US would have been so generous to the much-hated losers. The reality was that in Germany, Italy, Greece, and Japan, there were Soviet-backed communist movements gunning for leadership. The US had a strong interest in making the alternative to communism appealing to contain Soviet expansion. If there had not been that pressure, I am not sure that Germany and Japan today would look any different than Afghanistan and Iraq.

The US leadership has to understand that the terror axis must be defeated completely before there can be a move to “the next step” of a quiet Lebanon, a rebuilding Gaza and a new Iran. Arnold Schwarzenegger did the world a great service by introducing us to the Terminator: it has no concern other than completing its mission. The mullahs and their violent offspring around the world are Terminators: they don’t care about comfort (though they steal their people’s money), food, or stability. They want dead Jews, Christians, and other non-Muslims. They want world domination, and a nuclear bomb would make up for a lack of conventional power and reach. Hamas must be disarmed and dismantled. Ditto for Hezbollah. And we’re not talking about window-dressing, where some European guy in a tie says that the job is done. Either they’re dead or selling Halal pizza in Leipzig. There can be no more Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Period. Non-negotiable. Don’t give us “we’ll lock their weapons in Gazan lockers, and we’re the only ones who know that the combination for the lock is 34 left 22 right 18 left”. Same for Hezbollah. If the Lebanese want European tourism and lives without BOOM, then Hezbollah has to go. If they are too weak and cowardly to do the job, then let Israel do it and stop with “the Lebanese Army is here to the rescue”. The Lebanese Army would lose to its shadow, while Hezbollah is a serious paramilitary organization.

And as to Iran, if strangling it leads to the same level of destruction as blowing it to bits, then please keep the Straits closed to Iranian shipping. The last number I saw had the mullahs and IRGC losing $435 million per day due to a lack of oil revenue. If the US noose around the Straits can get the job done, then that is great. But if it takes a shooting war again, then go for the energy infrastructure and bridges. Destroy them and then give daily news conferences to tell the world what the Iranians already lost that day — like the late, great General Schwarzkopf showing the luckiest man in Iraq.

It may be somewhat better to go to war with a proper enemy who follows all of the laws of war and the Geneva Convention. When they lose, they do so honorably and uphold all treaty obligations thrust upon them by the winning side. When you go to war with terrorists, they will lie, cheat, misdirect, and keep fighting until either they or you are dead. Israel and the US have the firepower to win, but they don’t have the head or will to win. If 90 percent of the violence is to finish off the last 10 percent of the terror threat, they choke up and ask to negotiate rather than get the job done. It’s ugly business, but so is fighting the same people and groups for 50 years. Don’t you ever get tired of it and want to finish it off?

If you want to win, go for victory. If you want to lose, go with the Board of Peace, Lebanese negotiations, and Pakistani/Qatari-Witkoff mediation with Iran. There are winners, and there are negotiators. The latter never win, but they always have work. So which is it going to be?