You know how to get peace in the Middle East?
Dave spells it out for you in his latest column: sit back and allow Israel to blow the heck out of whoever the hell they want. And then just let peace settle over the region. Obviously, that's a recipe for certain success in creating a "new Middle East," the mantra that Condoleeza Rice has been repeating over the past few days. Yes, let's just allow Israel to decimate Beirut and turn one-fifth of Lebanon's population into homeless refugees. That won't alienate our Arab allies in the region AT ALL.
If Bush isn't going to put any of America's military muscle to stop the wanton killing that's occurring in the Middle East, he should re-visit that veto of stem cell research he signed last week. Given his ineffectiveness to act as a world leader and stop the indiscriminate bombing and deaths of Lebanese and Israeli civilians, he really shouldn't be calling stem cell research "murder."
Remember the time when the U.S. represented the interests of Israel by also engaging in good-faith discussions with Israel's Arab neighbors? I mean, for all of Carter's supposed pessimism, it appears that he was the only President to manage the unthinkable- hammer out a peace deal between Israel and a neighbor-state committed to Israel's destruction, Egypt. And now Israel's incursion into Lebanon has put severe strains on this relationship between Israel and Egypt.
Because remember, this is the "new Middle East." It appears that the Rice Doctrine of enacting diplomacy entails dragging her feet and stalling as long as possible so as the neo-conservatives can get their gun-crazy 'might makes right' jollies off while giving lip-service rhetoric as to why an immediate cease fire actually threatens peace in the region. Obviously for a "new Middle East" to emerge, you have to go through a period of carnage and massive death and destruction. It kind of reminds me of the quote from Donald Rumsfeld in the early days after the invasion- "Freedom is messy. Free people are free to do whatever they want." That may not be the exact quote, but its along those lines. Obviously, in the neo-consevative rationale, what happens, happens, and though they may claim the U.S. is the most powerful country in the world, it would be inappropriate to actually use this power. For peaceful reasons, that is.
Sidney Blumentahl writes a scathing expose on this latest ineffective U.S. foreign policy for Salon.com, and details the Rice Doctrine further. Besides the U.S. deserting its historical role as protector of Israel by being a good-faith negotiator, the Rice doctrine also includes:
Let's also not forget that if the President did, say, want to send our troops in and make a big show of kicking Hezbollah ass, he kind of can't because he sent them all to Iraq, thus tying his hands on any forceful U.S. military action as long as that pointless war continues. So that's another reason why Dubya is keen on letting Israel fight terrorists while we stand on the sidelines. Dave appears to have side-stepped this point in his column, however.
Dave may think Israel engaging in activities that will alienate and sever relations with surrounding Arab nations will somehow bring peace to the Middle East. For the rest of us sane folk, we realize that if you hold this neoconservative pipe-dream under just the slightest bit of scrutiny, you'll realize that it's completely ridiculous.
If Bush isn't going to put any of America's military muscle to stop the wanton killing that's occurring in the Middle East, he should re-visit that veto of stem cell research he signed last week. Given his ineffectiveness to act as a world leader and stop the indiscriminate bombing and deaths of Lebanese and Israeli civilians, he really shouldn't be calling stem cell research "murder."
Remember the time when the U.S. represented the interests of Israel by also engaging in good-faith discussions with Israel's Arab neighbors? I mean, for all of Carter's supposed pessimism, it appears that he was the only President to manage the unthinkable- hammer out a peace deal between Israel and a neighbor-state committed to Israel's destruction, Egypt. And now Israel's incursion into Lebanon has put severe strains on this relationship between Israel and Egypt.
Because remember, this is the "new Middle East." It appears that the Rice Doctrine of enacting diplomacy entails dragging her feet and stalling as long as possible so as the neo-conservatives can get their gun-crazy 'might makes right' jollies off while giving lip-service rhetoric as to why an immediate cease fire actually threatens peace in the region. Obviously for a "new Middle East" to emerge, you have to go through a period of carnage and massive death and destruction. It kind of reminds me of the quote from Donald Rumsfeld in the early days after the invasion- "Freedom is messy. Free people are free to do whatever they want." That may not be the exact quote, but its along those lines. Obviously, in the neo-consevative rationale, what happens, happens, and though they may claim the U.S. is the most powerful country in the world, it would be inappropriate to actually use this power. For peaceful reasons, that is.
Sidney Blumentahl writes a scathing expose on this latest ineffective U.S. foreign policy for Salon.com, and details the Rice Doctrine further. Besides the U.S. deserting its historical role as protector of Israel by being a good-faith negotiator, the Rice doctrine also includes:
Rather than emphasize the paramount importance of Lebanese sovereignty, presumably a matter of concern to an administration that had made a nation's sovereignty Exhibit A in the spread of democracy in a "new Middle East," Rice has downplayed or ignored it in favor of an uncritical endorsement of Israel's offensive against Hezbollah, which has destroyed much of Lebanon's infrastructure, made refugees of about 20 percent of the Lebanese, and treated the Lebanese government as a contemptible irrelevance. Rice's trip was calculated to interpose the influence of the United States to prevent a cease-fire and to give Israel at least another week of unimpeded military action.
Let's also not forget that if the President did, say, want to send our troops in and make a big show of kicking Hezbollah ass, he kind of can't because he sent them all to Iraq, thus tying his hands on any forceful U.S. military action as long as that pointless war continues. So that's another reason why Dubya is keen on letting Israel fight terrorists while we stand on the sidelines. Dave appears to have side-stepped this point in his column, however.
Dave may think Israel engaging in activities that will alienate and sever relations with surrounding Arab nations will somehow bring peace to the Middle East. For the rest of us sane folk, we realize that if you hold this neoconservative pipe-dream under just the slightest bit of scrutiny, you'll realize that it's completely ridiculous.
posted by true_slicky at 11:33 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home