Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by AlBDamned, Jul 24, 2006.
NY Times Link
"An unusual request and a possible sign of a long campaign..."
So the US is sending Rice to discuss a cease fire, while sending bombs. Right...
Sad isn't it. Meanwhile, Iran are also supporting Syria, to support Hezzbollah.
And the UN are up in arms about the whole thing.
Did someone say escalation? Anybody? George, are you there?
This will be spun by the ME press the same way that Iran arming Hezbollah is spun here: as proof of the evil intent of the supplying power, and a further reason for armed resistance against said supplying power and their proxies.
Are they going to be sending the bunker busting tactical nukes that have been so controversial?
unless condi is the field operative for the targeting...
I wonder if we have to change that form again.
Not to belabor the obvious, but I am more concerned about the speed of Israels' missle delivery to Lebanon. And vice-versa.
While I don't think the supplies of missiles from Iran and Syria means that Hezbollah gets its marching orders from either source, it is an important relationship to take notice of when trying to resolve this conflict. As in perhaps Sec. of State Rice might want to talk to both countries.
Likewise, I think it is a mistake to dismiss the report the US has sped up the delivery of the weapons most used by the IAF to conduct the air campaign that has killed hundreds of Lebanese and is destroying the nation's infrastructure. This is very real evidence that the Bush administration supports the IDF's actions as they unfold to growing international criticism. If you were sitting in Beirut, how could anyone not view this as anything other than the active participation of the US in the bombing of your country? I'm sure the participants in the Cedar revolution weren't counting on support like this from Bush.
Exactly. In this country we condemn Iran and Syria for arming Hezbollah and accuse them of being complicit for doing so.
And in other countries they comdemn the US for arming Israel and accuse us of being complicit for doing so.
And the merry-go-round spins on...
So, mac, if it isn't the motive of the US administration to support this bombing campaign or take sides, it might be a good thing to take into account how it is perceived from the Arab viewpoint when deciding to speed up the resupply efforts that makes this carnage possible?
That doctrine of Pre-emption gets a lot more complicated when a country other than the US decides to use it, and an ally no-less...
The US has painted itself into a corner, however unintentionally.
Oh for sure. Not understanding how your opponent views things is a major mistake that Americans tend to make quite often. We tend to view things from a very self-centered reference point.
For example, I doubt most Americans think Iran has much reason to fear the US government desiring to overthrow the Iranian government.
Then we agree on this. My own view is that the Bush Administration sees the Israeli action as a complement to their own in the ME. Bush likes to view the world in the stark black and white, or good vs. evil terms that simplify things down to soundbites. In this case, it is the good Israelis using their superior firepower to show the bad guys who is boss. Much like the neo-con preoccupation with the use of force by the US to remind everyone who is the only remaining superpower in the world, this accomplishes many things beyond striking back at Hezbollah's provocation. Teheran and Damascus must now think they might be next to suffer Beirut's fate - from either Israeli or US sources.
Or both - if Iran jumps in, US will be in it thick within a few days (or hours).