Terror for the record

Bush’s current trip to Israel shows there is not going to be any let-up on terrorism rhetoric for a while. Both Bush and Olmert managed to ignore history again to sustain their policy positions.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert “There will be no peace unless terror is stopped. And terror will have to be stopped everywhere.”

Bush told Israelis that "illegal" outposts in disputed land must go and told Palestinians that no part of their territories can be "a safe haven for terrorists."

"We see a new opportunity for peace here in the Holy Land and for freedom across the region," declared Bush

So let’s take a quick trip down history lane:

Israel’s terror record, in part
The first aircraft hijacking was carried out by Israel in 1954 against a Syrian civilian airliner.
Grenades in cafes: first used by Zionists against Palestinians in Jerusalem on 17 March 1937.
Delayed-action, electrically timed mines in crowded marketplaces: first used by Zionists against Palestinians in Haifa on 6 July 1938.
Assassination of government officials: first carried out by the Zionists against the British in Cairo, when on 6 November 1944 Lord Moyne was assassinated by the Stern Gang. Yitzhak Shamir, a member of the Irgun and later leader of the Stern Gang and Israeli prime minister, was behind the plan.
Use of hostages as a means of putting pressure on a government: first used by the Zionists against the British in Tel Aviv on 18 June 1946. Zionism and modern-day terrorism:

American Revolutionary War

America did not have a standing army; this was a colony after all. The ‘Patriots’ or rebels faced a powerful military force hardened in European campaigns. Given the dynamic a vicious guerrilla warfare developed, a terrorist approach which left the British floundering.

The Americans did not wear uniforms, in some areas did not take prisoners and happily, in some cases, worked from within the British structures while directing fighters against them.

I’m not suggesting that either country was right or wrong is the means they adopted to confront overwhelming opposition. In fact we can equally reflect on Australia’s modern military practices.

Our strategists have focussed on the best use relatively small forces, and infantry and special forces have built a reputation for what are essentially guerrilla tactics. Surviving VC officers still talk about the Aussie diggers with awe. They have been likened to spirits in the Vietnam jungles, playing VC games better than the VC ever could.

A small group of SAS were deployed in Iraq a few days before the second Iraq war began. In tiny groups this mob were taking out front line deployments of hundreds of Iraqis. The efficiency of the Aussie troops in this sort of warfare is testified by the extremely low casualty rate.

My concern is just how far the likes of the Bush administration will go to justify their rhetoric, a rhetoric largely developed to mask endemic corruption. Given the current US political dynamic I an surprised the lame duck is even allowed out into the wider world.