The Middle-East Isn't Standing Still

The NY Times has an editorial mostly confirming their Bush Derangement Syndrome. Not only are they a worthless source of opinion on Iraq, they'd like nothing better than for the Dems to tie up Bush with subpoenas and investigations. As usual, they don't have America's best interests at heart, only their pathetic, appeasement-minded, Liberal political agenda. What a waste of paper.

Via Hot Air, it seems Hamas Hezbollah (and yes, I know the differnce) has left the Lebanese government, while Iran has offered to arm the nation with ballistic missiles. Obviously Iran and Syria are seeing an opening to destabilize Lebanon - and now we're supposed to talk with them about stabilizing Iraq? That's a joke.

Yes, it's true Baker, Gates and even Blair seem to want to open a dialog with Iran. All that is going to do is put off a war until tomorrow, giving Iran more time to prepare, as well as consolidate more of the region. But it isn't clear that will be the only advice of the commission, or if Bush will take it.

However, in the final analysis, the entire report due in December could come far too late. Israel has been making noise about Iran and I cannot imagine them sitting idle as Iran continues merrily along the nuclear path while also continuing to destabilize the region.

Whether the US wants war with Iran may be a moot point. Like all terrorist efforts today emanating from the Middle-East, they have a way of finding us, whether we want confrontation, or not.

Hopefully the mid-terms elections didn't remove Bush 43's resolve and backbone along with the Republican Congress.

Comments

[LJ]

it seems Hamas has left the Lebanese government

Uhhh, Hamas is leading the Palestinian government. Hezbollah is the Islamist group that has left the Lebanese government.

Hopefully the mid-terms elections didn't remove Bush 43's resolve and backbone along with the Republican Congress.

It's been clear for sometime that the Beltway (both the Dems and the GOP) will take whatever the Baker commission recommends as gospel. The fact that Bush 43 appointed a main member of that commission (Bob Gates) apparently at the urging of Condi Rice and Steven Hadley, means that Gates will be in a key position to implement whatever the commission suggests. Bush and the Congressional GOP will use it as cover, just like what happened with the 9/11 commission.

[Nikolay]

"it seems Hamas has left the Lebanese government"
The fact that you can't tell Hamas from Hezbollah is really telling. The Middle East was in the center of the world's problems for about five years, and you're still blissfully ignorant about the basics.
Yes, Iran is ruled by vicious bastards (though you can't tell how much are they supported by the people), but maybe someone had to tell this Bush before he eliminated main Iran's enemies in the region and effectively turned Iraq into Iran's client state?
Having talks with Iran is a bad option, but you don't have good options after such immensely stupid decisions as Bush made in last five years.

[Dan Riehl]

The fact that you can't tell Hamas

Oh, STFU. I know the difference, it was a simple transposition, idiot.

[ajacksonian]

Isn't Mr. Baker so nice to ask the Iranians for input? Such a sweet fellow! This ISG is really so mired in the Cold War and 'pragmatism' that they have forgotten that rational diplomacy requires that *both* sides be rational... which Iran has proven not to be, multiple times not only in the past year but for 27. Remember it was the 'pragmatists' that didn't want to do anything about Iran... and the 'pragmatists' that wanted the US to pull out after the Marine Barracks Bombing in Beirut... and these wonderful 'pragmatists' that now think that Iran and Syria want some stability in the Middle East.

Perhaps these 'pragmatists' could answer: which part of Hezbollah is aimed at stability? Indeed, why do Iran and Syria fund terrorists in Iraq and regionally, with Iran extending its reach with Hezbollah all the way to Venezuela, Brasil and Argentina? Are they, perhaps, seeking greater global stability and we should just 'surrender now'? It was these 'pragmatists' that put a price on liberty and freedom that they are unwilling to pay. And so the first that can draw more blood and kill more than *that* can BUY them.

As for this wonderful idea that there if there were a solution they would have 'pulled the trigger on it', well that does seem like they really are not thinking too clearly as the solution is rather plain: the path to stabilize Iraq runs right through Damascus: http://ajacksonian.blogspot.com/2006/10/plan-to-stabilize-iraq.html

That is part of the overall concept to bring Peace to the Middle East and requires that we forget 20th century pragmatism and start treating enemies as enemies, allies as allies and setting Goals to make things better and forget this quixotic quest for *perfect* or the stasis of 'pragmatism' that got us INTO this mess in the first place: http://ajacksonian.blogspot.com/2006/07/peace-in-middle-east-checklist.html

To paraphrase Churchill: When marching through Hell, don't STOP.

[Cindi]

immensely stupid decisions as Bush made in last five years.

Posted by: Nikolay | Sunday, November 12, 2006 at 03:22 PM

WTF IS A NIKOLAY?

Chrit I could go on forever with that one. lmao