Brainwashed? Part two

Now to the situation in Israel.

My first reaction is that Israel has every right to defend itself against acts of unprovoked aggression. Hezbollah entered Northern Israel unprovoked; they killed eight soldier and captured two; if that is not an act of aggression, I don't know what is.

Part of Hezbollahs strategy - spurred obviously by Iran and Syria, its main underwriters - was to test the relatively new Prime Minister of Israel. Olmert ran, after his mentor Ariel Sharon was incapacitated by a stroke, and was elected four months ago. Unlike previous Prime Ministers, Olmert, lacks the military credentials of his predecessors, and it is my view that Hezbollah wanted to test his resolve by launching the attack.

I therefore cannot understand how people can be critical of a nation that elects to defend itself. What would France do if they were attacked with no provocation? Would they sit by quietly and believe they were deserving of it?

I can understand, however, criticism about the severity and the extent to which Israel has retaliated. The images from Qana, where a building housing children was bombed, resulting in deaths hurts Israel.

It is clear today, that Israel miscalculated the severity with which they chose to respond. The scary thing is that after almost three weeks, Hezbollah looks far from defeated. Israel has repeatedly blasted their communication infrastructure - or so they think - but Hezbollah TV is still up and running. If Israel calls a ceasefire, Hezbollah will be seen as the clear victor throughout the Middle East.

But I wish people critical of Israel, look at who started this war and apportion blame appropriately.

I really believe that radical Islam is a grave threat to world peace. I am not advocating war as an antidote; instead, it has to be a war of ideas and values. Tony Blair made a far more convincing and eloquent appeal than I can ever hope to make on this subject recently.

I am often told, that when I mention radical Islam, I am clubbing all Muslims together and that is wrong, because the majority are law-abiding, peace-loving citizens. I have Muslim friends too, but that is besides the point. I think the problem throughout the Muslim world is that there isn't a core group of vocal activists who actively oppose the thoughts and ideas unfurled by their radical Muslim counterparts. If there is one, it is muted. Religious leaders on the other hand have unfettered freedom to disperse their ideas without challenge or debate. And the ideas they espouse are in direct opposition with much of what we in the West consider civilized. I think that is the central problem; the challenge that will confront us in the future.