Tough Choice For Incurious George

Unless you've been living in a cave, it should be very clear to you that the Mideast peace process is dead.  Israel has blockaded Lebanon, and isn't ruling out a ground invasion of their northern neighbor.  Let's not kid ourselves that this just another facet of the "struggle against global extremism", or even just another happy fun episode in the expensive daytime drama "War on Terrorz".   This has become war, and rightly should be called such.  In my own opinion, Israel has not over-reached their rights to self preservation ... yet.  Europe apparently disagrees.

The problem is one of control ...  self restraint, that is.  The intent of Israel's offensive appears to be appropriate; contain the threat, reduce the threat and eliminate the threat.  But we all know what the road to hell is paved with.  The rumblings of war are already spreading.  Israel is staring with an angry eye at Syria and Iran.  Evidence is being offered that Hizbollah aggression hides Iran's weapons of terror; and by evidence I mean the same sort as was offered to prove the WMDs that Saddam so obviously had.  The American right is already pushing the Iranian connection, full force.

Before I go any farther, let me clarify:  I don't really give a crap what Israel does to defend itself or not.  I don't fear terrorists who want to push the Joooooos into the sea.  It really isn't my problem.  Israel is more than capable of defending itself;  we (America) have seen to that, as have they with hard effort and bitter lessons learned.  But we did do one thing.  We taught the world that if you're strong enough and play dirty with the truth, you can get others to support you against what you fear, regardless of how it hurts them.  You really have to wonder if that's what is happening right now.

Let's be clear; America is caught in the middle of this war.  At the risk of becoming Captain obvious, our troops are caught right between Iran and the enemies which border Israel.  If you don't think so, then I have to ask why it is so important that Iran be seen as pulling the trigger on this conflict?  Why now?

Rock: hard-place.  And George W. Bush is right in the middle.  So what is his response?  Not much, so far.  Is there actually any proof that Syria and Iran are behind these acts of war that have spawned such a response from Israel?  No, not yet.  But our choice to get involved in a broadening conflict may already be out of George's hands.  Again stating the obvious, if Israel escalates this into a regional war, our soldiers are already caught up in it.  Thanks to poor decisions made by this administration, we have already defacto agreed to whatever action Israel takes, and will be obligated to enforce that agreement, if only for defense of our own interests in the region.  This is a no-lose scenario for Israel.  American military power could perhaps make it a no-lose scenario for the US.  I won't bother to link to the paste-eating koolaid-drinking death-mavens who desire this escalation and capitulation of national will.  They may get their wish, but it won't be because the American people chose this path for our nation.

I will point out a few facts, though.  Our military is already over-stretched.  Our budget is already over-spent.  The majority of Americans don't favor more engagement in the Middle East.  The simple truth is, if Americans were offered the choice of attacking Syria and Iran, most would say "No".  We may not get that choice.

So, what does incurious George do?  He has parlayed war into electoral gains, and that appears to be his playbook ... control through manipulated fear.  What we stand on the brink of, is another nation manipulating our fear into a war not of our choosing.  Does our President stand with Israel, as he boldly said he would?  Or does he stand with his party's will to keep control and dominance in an election year, by placating those who have no wish to be the bankrupt world police?  Tough choice.  I'm certain I couldn't make it, but then I didn't make this bed ... he did.  It will be interesting to see if he has the intellect and will to find a noble manner in which to lay in it.

Comments

[The Blue Barn]

Bush wants this to escalate and blame Iran, so Israel will bomb them and get rid of their Nuclear programs.

There is no evidence that Iran has anything to do with this.

This is Israels fault. Their continued occupation of Arab territories.

Essentially Iran has won, we have taken out the only enemies of Iran, Afghanistan and Iraq. Now Iran has the Shites in Iraq. Iran has won. This might create a terroist highway from Iran to Lebbanon. Right through Iraq. And hey why not take a couple of Americans on the way. George knows nothing about foreign policy, Clinton would be in there trying to mediate.

[I'm gonna have to stop in Portland and get a job to pay for gas on the way home.]

This whole thing scares the crap out of me. "I told you so" never ends up feeling as satisfying as you thought it would when an entire mid-east quagmire, and $5 gallons of gas are involved does it? It certainly doesn't for me anyways.
I don't really understand your definition of the term "no-lose" in this post, but maybe I'm just reading it wrong. I would think "no-win", especially when one takes the longview, is more appropriate.
And Bluebarn, without starting one of these unsightly blog-fights, and despite my loathe for Bush's foreign policy makers, I think your simplifying a situation that is more complex than 20 history textbooks could break down.

[Mike]

Not factoring in the sophomoric analysis from "Blue Barn," which in true allegiance to the socialist-wing of the Democratic Party which blames Israel for all the ills in the region, I might point out that there is actually evidence that Iran is supplying materiel to Hezbollah, which I doubt I need to remind you is a Syrian based internationaly recognized terrorist organization.

Iran supplied Hezbollah with solid-fuel, Zelzal-2 missiles with a 200-km range, but these are not very accurate, since they do not have a self-guidance system.

The Zelzal-2 missiles, intended to strike broad targets such as communities and cities, are equipped with explosive warheads weighing up to 600 kilograms. The missiles are a later version of the Zelzal-1 missiles, which Iran first displayed in September 2005 at a military parade in Tehran, together with six Shihab-3 missiles.

One of these Iranian missiles landed near Haifa today and killed a grandmother and her grandchild.

You say that, " Evidence is being offered that Hizbollah aggression hides Iran's weapons of terror; and by evidence I mean the same sort as was offered to prove the WMDs that Saddam so obviously had. The American right is already pushing the Iranian connection, full force."

Is there not clear and overwhelming EVIDENCE that Iranian missiles are being used by Syrian controlled Hezbollah to attack Israel. Is there not clear and overwhelming EVIDENCE that Hezbollah uses Syria as its protectorate?

I have no problem agreeing that the war in Iraq was manufactured over the supposed existence of WMD's but I'm afraid that if you and others can't see that the current Hezbollah/Syrian/Iranian operation in southern Lebanon (in which, I might add, a majority of Lebanese public opinion is in favor of Israel's actions) has nothing to do with the greater issue of the "palestinian" people but rather has everything to do with Iran's ambitions in the region.

I guess one's perspective would change if they had to spend the night, or part of the day, in a bomb shelter.

[Wulfgar]

Mike, I was refering far more to perception then I was to facts as they lay. Of course Iran will support Hamas and Hizbollah (Hezbollah? sp.) The claims are that Iran has orchestrated this war. The question at hand is what does America do, knowing that it's troops are already over taxed and in the line of fire; should this war escalate?

[Coffee John]

We blow them all to pieces. No problem. Two aircraft carriers could do it. And we have a lot more assets than that in the area. Stick to what you know--Bozeman pinhead politics.

[Mike]

I'm not sure what America can do. We've burned most of our bridges with other nations in the region r/t our fiasco in Iraq, and unless Israel is directly threatened with invasion, which it's neighbors simply aren't capable of, or some kind of tactical nuclear weapon, which one or more countried in the region may possess, I think the general policy of the U.S., at least at this point is to stay the hell out of the way.

Unless there is a profound escalation by Hezbollah I think Israel will be able to handle the situation despite the outpouring of world sympathy towards the "poor Arab souls."

Now, having said that I believe that Israel needs to finish the job she started. Damascus CAN and MUST be a target if Israeli intentions of crushing Hezbollah are to be believed. Frankly I believe Bu$h would rather have Israel do the dirty work in Syria, and if Iran wanted to get directly involved I'm sure the U.S. would watch Israel's back. Assad needs to know that continuing to support and provide safe haven for Hezbollah means he can never go out in public or leave his ever again. As for the Hezbollah cleric, stick a fork in him, he's done. Mossad might have to take out a bunch of civilians to get him but the job will be done.

Submarine based cruise missiles targeted at Tehran and Damascus with a diplomatic back-channel, probably the Saudi's, to let them know the US will use them if they attack Israel. Now, I havent't been to either Damascus or Tehran in a long time but from what I remember it wouldn't take that much American firepower to reduce at least Damascus to rubble. Tehran might be a different story but don't doubt for a minute that if Iran wants to ratchet this up a notch or two that plans aren't already in place to deal with it.

Remember, Iraq is a disaster because we're attempting nation building but we're fairly competent with carpet bombing and tactical weapons to destroy any chance at retaliation, which would be our raison d' etre for getting involved in the first place.

[Mark]

Mike - I heard a rumor that the US is supplying arms to Israel at the clip of $6 billion per year. When you've come up with an analysis of why it is OK for one outside party to arm its ally to the teeth, but wrong for anyone to give the Palestinians a dime, postal me please. I'm all ears - I'm waiting for the sophomore to strike.

[Gee Guy]

I will ignore the Barn's comments because they are beyond naive. (We're going to 'mediate' again?)

Wulfgar, I heard a very interesting and informed discussion today about the "over-taxed" argument. This fellow (a former general and current intelligence analyst) says we might be a little light on "boots on the ground," but that our Navy and Air Force are ready, willing and very able.

That being said, I think for now we have Israel's back. We watch. If they need our help, they get it. And they should, but won't, get it in absolutely overwhelming force. They'll get mamby-pampy political war, whether from Bush or his successor.

[Gee Guy]

Mark-here's a hint. Israel handed over Gaza in an attempt at good faith. They got rockets in return.

Not everything is relative.

[The Blue Barn]

Wrong. Gee Guy. Israel is directly responsible for the escalation of this thing. Israel wants to destroy the Palstinians. What no one is reporting is that this thing was started by Israel KIDNAPPING CIVILIAN PALSTINIANS, which is a war crime by thew way! And the continued bombing of Gaza. I suggest JuanCole.com for you Gee Guy.

There is no doubt Iran and Syria support Hezbollah, but there is no direct evidence that Iran or Syria have anything to do with THIS incident.

Bush wants the world to think that Iran and Syria is behind this.

But what is behind this is Israels continued occupation of Arab territories.

Let me remind you that Lebbanon has no control over Hezbollah. So, why would Israel blow up Lebbanon infrastructure and kill innocent people!!??

My first post was just thoughts I wasn't analyzing the situation.

The only thing I stand by though, is Iran has won.

[Shane M]

Blue Barn,

You know, I like you because you have passion. But, IF you are going to make statements as bold as

this thing was started by Israel KIDNAPPING CIVILIAN PALSTINIANS

then you need to provide a source. We can not refute or confirm a claim if we dont know where it comes from.

On this issue, I also agree that Isreal has a right to defend itself. It is a fact that the current administration has not put the effort into this process that was needed, and it is also true that 'see I told you so' doesn't feel so good right now.

What is really naive is to consider that this is an issue that starts and finishes with the Palestinians or even with the current state of Isreal. This is a struggle between Arabs and Jews that has a history much older than our young country. To really understand how deep this goes would take a lot more space than we have here.

If we ignore how deep it really goes we will be slitting our own throat. Look at what one mans simplistic view of culture has done. Bush thought that the Iraqi's would welcome us as liberators and the boys would be home in a matter of months. He even said later that no one could have forsaw the sunni-shiite conflicts. I predicted them because of the fact that my wife has a background in Arabic history. She said it from the start. Any first year student in the subject could have told him about it. It is not new, it is old.

[The Blue Barn]

Few readers will be aware that on June 24, the day before the "kidnapping", Israeli commandos had entered the Gaza Strip and captured two Palestinians claimed by Israel to be members of Hamas. (See our Guest Media Alert by Jonathan Cook, 'Kidnapped by Israel'; http://www.medialens.org/alerts/06/060630_kidnapped_by_israel.php).

That was found here, http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=10549 .

[The Blue Barn]

Few readers will be aware that on June 24, the day before the "kidnapping", Israeli commandos had entered the Gaza Strip and captured two Palestinians claimed by Israel to be members of Hamas. (See our Guest Media Alert by Jonathan Cook, 'Kidnapped by Israel'; http://www.medialens.org/alerts/06/060630_kidnapped_by_israel.php ).

That was found here, http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfmItemID=10549 .

[Mark]

Gee Guy - someone pinch me - I thought I just heard the dumbest-ass answer I had ever heard in a debate about the Israeli(US)/Palestinian conflict, then along comes you. You going for the record, numnuts?

[Gee Guy]

Ouch. It's hard to recover from the famous "you're stupid" argument.

[Mike]

Blue Barn. You're asked for proof and respond with an article highlighting the arrest of members of a internationally recognized terrorist organization, Hamas, who were/are certainly not civilians in the conventional sense? Do you even know the difference between Hamas and Hezbollah?

How exactly do you continue to blame Israel for "escalating his thing" when the issue over the Palestinians and Hezbollah are two entirely different subjects. The Pali's are NOT shiite Muslims, Hezbollah (Syria and Iran) are. What is so difficult to understand. Hezbollah is a terrorist organization working as proxy for the Iranians and Syrians. If they didn't have the approval, as well as the arms supplie from Iran what do you think they would be capable of? Honestly, I could at least respect the passion of your opinion if you presented an argument based on some kind of background knowledge rather than talking points from somewhere else. It's fairly fucking obvious you know NOTHING about the POV you're attempting to defend...and that's pathetic on more levels than you can possibly imagine.

[The Blue Barn]

No, the Israelies THOUGHT they were Hamas. They were not they were civilians. Israel has continued its attacks against the Gaza and been basically slowly murdering them. Hezbollah got sick and tired of this after Israel bombed an power plant in Gaza. These groups are different, but both hate Israel.

Israel has been looking for any excuse to bomb people since Janurary when Hamas got elected to send a message to other Arab countries.

Mike why do you support Israel so much?

[Wulfgar]

Blue Barn, Mike has consistently posted a number of fact-filled articles concerning his support for Israel. Follow the link on his comments. You would do well to read them.

[Mark]

Just one little statistic to put things in perspective: In 1982, when the Israelis invaded and bombed Lebanon, they killed more civilians than Palestinians have killed Israelis in all the years since 1948. It helps to know who is doing the killing, who is the terrorist organization, who is stealing land, who is building walls in other peoples' territory, who refuses to negotiate, who flies F16's and bulldozes houses and fruit groves with American-built Caterpillar tractors, who shoots innocent youth for throwing rocks, sometimes even for sport, who bulldozed and killed an American observer, who is bent on territorial expansion and will not stop until all of its opponents are walled in little compounds and forced to live a meager existence while Israelis, who could not survive without American arms, live a luxurious lives in control of all the best land and most of the water.

It helps to know these things, but Americans, living in a bubble, don’t know these things. People who try to point out these things are instantly vilified by AIPAC – Dershowitz comes a-callin’. Merely pointing out these things makes one a Holocaust Denier.

[Wulfgar]

Mark, that puts things in A perspective, and yet your intent seems to be that it puts things in THE perspective. I'm sure you see the difference.

The fact remains that a broadening conflict, regardless of history, puts America into a position of forced agressive policy against the enemies of Israel. You may find that unfair. I, for one, don't much care. What I do care about is extracating our soldiers and military from a fight that we didn't choose. Acknowledging Israel's "crimes" doesn't do a damned thing to lend a helpful perspective for getting us out of a widening mess.

[Mike]

Blue Barn. Final lesson, O.K.? Palestinians, Gaza, power plant,Hamas versus Hezbollah. Two seperate and unrelated issues that you are either not intelligent enough to differentiate or don't care to. Either way, it's your load. And BTW, you wanted more evidence that Iran and Syria were involved in the Hezbollah conflict? How about the FACT that it was an Iranian laser guided land to sea missile that was fired against an Israeli warship off the coast of Beirut AND members of the Revolutionary Guard (of Iran) that did the firing.

Mark provides no perspective whatsoever.I will not provide a response to Bozeman CPA Mark Tokarski who is simply your garden variety anti-Semite/Jew-hater.

[Steve T.]

Anyone who question's Israel's policies is an anti-semite.

Sounds like a logical, nuanced, well thought out position to me.

[Mike]

No Steve, anyone who holds Israel to a different standard than they hold any other nation on earth to is an anti-Semite. Anyone who claims Israeli soldiers kill Pali's "for sport"and that Israeli's live "luxurious lives" while the poor Pali's have their homes and "fruit groves" bulldozed by the Joooz is an anti-Semite. There is a continuum in the debate from simple ignorance (Blue Barn, et al) to outright anti-Semitism.

[Steve T.]

I do believe the military policies of a nation are being questioned, not the worth of an entire race of people.

It's just an easy cop-out for you to claim racism to everyone who disagrees with your favorite country's actions.

That's simply ridiculous.

[Steve T.]

"anyone who holds Israel to a different standard than they hold any other nation on earth to is an anti-Semite."

Then I guess most people in this country are guilty of anti-Semitism. Remember, Israelis who kill Palestinian civilians are not terrorists. Ever.