Europeans have their own version of George W. Bush.

José Maria Aznar, former prime minister of Spain, published an opinion article with the London Times Thursday saying the world must support Israel because "if it goes down, we all go down".

Aznar, who has joined the 'Friends of Israel' campaign to which David Trimble, a foreign observer taking part in Israel's flotilla raid probe, also belongs, calls on Europe to refuse to put up with cries to eliminate Israel as part of global Christian-Jewish cooperation.

"Anger over Gaza is a distraction. We cannot forget that Israel is the West’s best ally in a turbulent region," Aznar writes of the IDF's calamitous raid on a flotilla bound for Gaza on May 31. 

Actually, Egypt, Turkey and Jordan are by far better allies than Israel.  None of these countries has ever launched an attack killing dozens of Americans, planned to get the US involved in a foreign war by bombing Western interests or had agents caught in a major spy ring.  As a matter of fact, not even Iran or Syria has done those things.

Aznar says the real threat to the region is extreme Islamism, "which sees Israel’s destruction as the fulfillment of its religious destiny and, simultaneously in the case of Iran, as an expression of its ambitions for regional hegemony".

"Both phenomena are threats that affect not only Israel, but also the wider West and the world at large," he adds.

Aznar concludes by saying that Israel is the West's first line of defense against the chaos set to erupt in the Middle East, and therefore must be protected.

How does one say “We fight them over there so we don’t have to fight them over here” in Spanish?

Is there any stupider argument than the first line of defense one?  This is an immigration issue, not a 19th century land war.  Muslims settlers are legally flying into Western airports and the politicians who facilitate this act as if the only way to Europe is to march through the Levant!  Hold the line Judea!

Perhaps they mean this metaphorically.  Something like “Muslims will be emboldened if they destroy Israel.” But even this is nonsensical.  What act of “appeasement” with regards to Israel lost parts of the Netherlands, Sweden and France to Islam?  

If Aznar was really concerned about Islamization, he could’ve spoken up against Muslim immigration when he was Prime Minister.  In fact, he didn’t and went ahead with European integration.  The only time he bucked the globalist consensus was when he joined Bush’s war on Iraq.  If men this stupid are the defenders of the European peoples and their cultures, we are truly in trouble. 

Please, spare me the talk about the “West” and what we must do to defend it coming from those who are destroying it by mistaking bad metaphors for reality.  We need to ask ourselves why today a “conservative” is one who invokes the “West” when he means Israel and Europe and an "extremist" is one who invokes the “West” when he means Europe only.

The fallout from Israel's May 31st seizure of an aid convoy headed for the Gaza Strip is revealing some new dimensions to the incident. Credible information has surfaced that the Turkish NGO organizing the ill-fated Peace Flotilla, Insani Yardim Vakfi (known as IHH), has ties to the international jihad. IHH allegedly raised funds and recruited Muslim fighters for holy war in the Balkans and Chechnya.

In the ongoing crisis in relations between Tel-Aviv and Ankara, Israel’s most fervent supporters in the United States have been quick to seize upon the IHH charity’s jihadist connection. Yet they omit the fact that key figures within the Israel lobby have long encouraged the use of mujahideen in Eurasia to advance U.S. interests. And the very same lobby that now warns of Turkish power has been instrumental in its rise.

It’s inaccurate to claim that the mission to Gaza was just a grand terrorist ploy, but certain activities of its sponsors should not be overlooked, especially in a geopolitical context. If IHH was involved in finance and logistics for past conflicts in Bosnia and the Caucasus, such operations would align with Turkish strategic interests. This is especially relevant since the flotilla had Turkey’s informal support.

While conducting a military raid on a local police chief and a local prosecutor in Iraq, you may find yourself tempted to fire upon a pregnant mother of 10 and a pregnant mother of six. You may then be tempted to dig the bullets out of the corpses with a knife and make the murder look like an unrelated stabbing. These are on the job hazards of the modern military, I suppose.

But if you can resist the temptation, Uncle Sam may have a medal waiting for you back home: 

U.S. troops in Afghanistan could soon be awarded a medal for not doing something, a precedent-setting award that would be given for "courageous restraint" for holding fire to save civilian lives. 

The proposal is now circulating in the Kabul headquarters of the International Security Assistance Force, a command spokesman confirmed Tuesday.

"The idea is consistent with our approach," explained Air Force Lt. Col. Tadd Sholtis. "Our young men and women display remarkable courage every day, including situations where they refrain from using lethal force, even at risk to themselves, in order to prevent possible harm to civilians. In some situations our forces face in Afghanistan, that restraint is an act of discipline and courage not much different than those seen in combat actions.

"Soldiers are often recognized for non-combat achievement with decorations such as their service's commendation medal. But most of the highest U.S. military decorations are for valor in combat. A medal to recognize a conscious effort to avoid a combat action would be unique.

Consideration of such an award, first reported by an Associated Press reporter in Afghanistan, doesn't mean that, if approved, troops would be pressured to prevent such casualties at risk to themselves, Sholtis said.

Giving a medal for restraint was proposed by British Maj. Gen. Nick Carter, ISAF's Regional Command South commander, during a recent visit to Kandahar by Army Command Sgt. Maj. Mike Hall, the top U.S. enlisted member in Afghanistan, Sholtis said. 

U.S. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal, the ISAF commander, has placed a premium on preventing civilian deaths, having last year tightened the rules of engagement for air strikes and other combat operations in an effort to prevent fatalities. Such deaths build resentment among a populace the U.S. is trying to win over as part of its counterinsurgency strategy to simultaneously drive out the Taliban and strengthen Afghan government.

I'm sure our occupied brethren (/facetious) in Mesopotamia will sleep easier tonight.