It isn't 1945 and Israel isn't America, but Ariel Sharon's son Gilad wants Israel to flatten Gaza like America did Hiroshima.
The son of the former prime minister of Israel feels it is time to stop playing around and address the Hamas electing constituents in Gaza the same way Israel handles Hamas: quid pro quo.
Gilad says that Gaza citizens aren't innocents to be considered; they're willing participants in a war because they elect to support a gang of terrorists like Hamas.
The U.S. State Department says Hamas is a terrorist organization too. In fact, they deemed them a foreign terrorist organization back in 1997, crediting them with carrying out suicide bombings, rocket launches, improvised explosive device attacks, and shootings--against civilian targets in Israel no less.
If Americans condoned their acts here they would be considered part of the terrorist group, like the four Calif. men arrested for plotting to aid Al-Qaeda recently. So it sounds logical that Gilad thinks Gaza residents shouldn't be able to aid and abet a terrorist group and think they are going to not have to suffer a violent fate for it. Right?
"The Gazans aren't hostages; they chose this freely, and must live with the consequences," Gilad said.
America dealt with its Japanese conflict by bombing it. So it isn't as if Gilad Sharon is talking about doing anything that is unheard of in war times, of course. Although average Americans unfamiliar with war don't like the thought of bombing anyone, even if they are dragging people through the streets and chopping off their heads. Not that the latter is occurring right now.
Fox News reported on Tuesday that Hamas actually dragged an Israeli sympathizer through the streets of Gaza. So in light of that fact, which is worse: bombing your enemies and their supporters or dragging them through your city's streets on the back of a motorcycle? Bombing almost seems more humane compared to that.
How much more barbaric can you get than dragging a live body on the ground like that?
No wonder Sharon's son wants to end the bloodshed by just bombing the lot. If war is going to be neverending, and if the participants on the field of battle are going to stoop to dragging civilians through their own streets, well, how can bombing a war zone be worse?
It is war, after all. There's going to be casualties in war. And Gilad Sharon says that in a war you choose to minimize those casualties on your side, as he is proposing is done through bombing, "We're running out of time -- we must achieve victory quickly. Victory would be swift, and the lives of our soldiers and civilians would be spared."
And while the main goal in any war is winning against one's opponent, the second most important goal is choosing a war method and weapons that reduces your casualties and loss. And that's what Ariel Sharon's son Gilad is proposing.
Photo of Ariel Sharon by Helene C. Stikkel