Decision ‘08

What Is Condi Smoking?

Perhaps all of those calling for the head of Donald Rumsfeld should be focusing on removing Condi from the State Department. That’s my reaction upon reading this:

For the past month the United States has worked urgently to end the violence that Hezbollah and its sponsors have imposed on the people of Lebanon and Israel. At the same time, we have insisted that a truly effective cease-fire requires a decisive change from the status quo that produced this war. Last Friday we took an important step toward that goal with the unanimous passage of U.N. Resolution 1701. Now the difficult, critical task of implementation begins.

The agreement we reached has three essential components:

First, it puts in place a full cessation of hostilities. We also insisted on the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers. Hezbollah must immediately cease its attacks on Israel, and Israel must halt its offensive military operations in Lebanon, while reserving the right of any sovereign state to defend itself. This agreement went into effect on Monday, after the Israeli and Lebanese cabinets agreed to its conditions.

Second, this resolution will help the democratic government of Lebanon expand its sovereign authority. The international community is imposing an embargo on all weapons heading into Lebanon without the government’s consent. We are also enhancing UNIFIL, the current U.N. force in Lebanon. The new UNIFIL will have a robust mandate, better equipment and as many as 15,000 soldiers — a sevenfold increase from its current strength. Together with this new international force, the Lebanese Armed Forces will deploy to the south of the country to protect the Lebanese people and prevent armed groups such as Hezbollah from destabilizing the area. As this deployment occurs, Israel will withdraw behind the “Blue Line” and a permanent cease-fire will take hold.

Finally, this resolution clearly lays out the political principles to secure a lasting peace: no foreign forces, no weapons and no authority in Lebanon other than that of the sovereign Lebanese government. These principles represent a long-standing international consensus that has been affirmed and reaffirmed for decades — but never fully implemented. Now, for the first time, the international community has put its full weight behind a practical political framework to help the Lebanese government realize these principles, including the disarmament of all militias operating on its territory.

Oh, dear, oh dear, where shall we begin? Let’s take Condi’s three points in order.

(1) First, it puts in place a full cessation of hostilities. We also insisted on the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers. Hezbollah must immediately cease its attacks on Israel, and Israel must halt its offensive military operations in Lebanon, while reserving the right of any sovereign state to defend itself.

The full cessation of hostilities was not the goal of the United States and Israel - we could have had that without going to war. The soldiers have not been returned, nor will they be, unless Israel pays a king’s ransom of dozens or hundreds of prisoners they hold. The halting of Israel’s military operations is not a good outcome, not when Hezbollah remains entrenched in the south with no intention of moving. Israel was exercising its sovereign right to defend itself when it was stopped in its tracks by its inept leadership and this outrageous ceasefire.

(2) Second, this resolution will help the democratic government of Lebanon expand its sovereign authority. The international community is imposing an embargo on all weapons heading into Lebanon without the government’s consent. We are also enhancing UNIFIL, the current U.N. force in Lebanon. The new UNIFIL will have a robust mandate, better equipment and as many as 15,000 soldiers — a sevenfold increase from its current strength. Together with this new international force, the Lebanese Armed Forces will deploy to the south of the country to protect the Lebanese people and prevent armed groups such as Hezbollah from destabilizing the area.

Pure fantasy; Lebanon will not take on Hezbollah; they aren’t even pretending they will. Nor will the UN, as it has made abundantly clear. There will be no stoppage of weapons shipments to rearm Hezbollah, as Lebanon and the UN would then have to actually do something, and they don’t intend to do anything other than deploy troops and close their eyes to the continued prescence of Hezbollah in the south.

(3) Finally, this resolution clearly lays out the political principles to secure a lasting peace: no foreign forces, no weapons and no authority in Lebanon other than that of the sovereign Lebanese government. These principles represent a long-standing international consensus that has been affirmed and reaffirmed for decades — but never fully implemented. Now, for the first time, the international community has put its full weight behind a practical political framework to help the Lebanese government realize these principles, including the disarmament of all militias operating on its territory.

This is risible; it would be hilarious, if the subject were not so deadly serious. This directly contradicts the statements of Kofi Annan and the Lebanese government regarding their unwillingness to even try to disarm Hezbollah. The paragraph might as well have been written by Jimmy Carter, so divorced as it is from the situation that actually exists.

In Iraq, as badly as things are going, at least we’re fighting the good fight, as we are in Afghanistan; we’re taking casualties and we’re working hard at a better future. In Lebanon, we have ceded the ground to Hezbollah, in practice if not in intention, by putting all of our eggs in the basket of the UN and the Lebanese Army, two institutions that will have quite a contest in determining which is the more ineffectual.

No sale, Condi; I don’t buy it, and few others will, either…

32 Responses to “What Is Condi Smoking?”

1 Ryan Bonneville Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 1:36 pm
You missed one:

For the past month the United States has worked urgently to end the violence that Hezbollah and its sponsors have imposed on the people of Lebanon and Israel.

We need to get over the fantasy that Hezbollah (and Hamas) impose anything on the people of Lebanon (and Palestine). These aren’t simply terrorist organizations - they’re also major sources of funding for infrastructure and schools. By bombing the hell out of southern Lebanon and then just withdrawing under UN resolution, Israel is leaving a vacuum that Hezbollah will gladly fill. Our feckless foreign policy of shooting everything we can see and then standing around idly while Islamic extremists recruit more friends is downright sickening. Fire Rice and Rumsfeld? I say fire them all.
2 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 1:47 pm
No, you lost me there…Lebanon’s right to take funding from Hezbollah doesn’t override Israel’s right to defend herself. I care not a whit for any good deeds of Hezbollah when they are kidnapping Israeli soldiers and intentionally trying to kill as many Israeli civilians as possible with reckless rocket launches…
3 peter Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 1:49 pm
According to today’s Times, Hezbollah (with Iran’s money) is taking the lead in rebuilding Lebanon — in addition to being the only Arab power to stand up for Israel, they are positioning themselves to lead Lebanon into the future.

Why is it that wherever you look — Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, North Korea — we’re being out-maneuvered by the bad guys?
4 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 1:57 pm
peter, we’ve no doubt vastly different ideas about what and who is responsible (I’m guessing you’d put a big part of the blame on our decision to go to war in Iraq), but you’re right - the bad guys have had a very good summer…
5 Hasan Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 2:03 pm
Let me see if I understand you Mark. You are suggesting that Israel’s war on Lebanon should have continued because you think Israel could have won it just like the US is winning in Iraq? Oh boy. Osama and Hizbollah really like your view…
6 peter Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 2:59 pm
You guess correctly — but I would also ascribe blame to our unwillingness to engage in dialogue with Iran, Syria, and others — I don’t think that you can influence events by disengagement — we’ve negotiated with far worse leaders before (Stalin and Mao come to mind) with instances of success –
7 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 3:09 pm
Hasan, that’s not even close to what I said.
8 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 3:13 pm
If you care to read it again, you’ll see that I said at least we were still fighting to win in Iraq, rather than just giving up and walking away, as is the case here.

I won’t even dignify your Osama comment with a response, other than I could give a rat’s behind what that coward thinks, and it certainly doesn’t influence my opinions…
9 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 3:33 pm
Finally, Hasan, your ‘war on Lebanon’ comment is telling. As you well know, the war was with Hezbollah and not Lebanon. The fact that Lebanon refuses to take them on and disarm them, as was mandated by the UN Security Council, and the fact that they hide among the civilian populace of Lebanon, means that Lebanon is where the fight must occur…
10 Ryan Bonneville Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 3:41 pm
Mark, I’m not defending Hezbollah, nor am I talking about rights. I’m talking about simple facts. When we or our friends run around shooting things and then do precisely nothing to repair all the collateral damage we’ve done, it falls to groups like Hezbollah and Hamas to pick up the pieces. And they are more than happy to do it, because it means more followers for their crusades of death. If I live in southern Lebanon, Israel blows up my neighborhood and then runs off, and the only ones left to put everything back together are Hezbollah, who exactly do you think I’m going to be grateful toward?

As much as the right loves to talk about incentives, they couldn’t be more clueless about what’s going on in the Middle East.

Peter, the reason we’re being outmaneuvered by bad guys is because we’re being led by idiots. It’s just about that simple.
11 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 3:45 pm
Sorry to have to disagree with you again, but ‘we’re being led by idiots’ is not a constructive answer to the problem. You can criticize the way the war in Iraq was handled, and I’ll be right there with you, but it beats the complete inaction of the Clinton Administration/Jimmy Carter left…

After all, the conditions that led to 9/11 did not occur on the watch of the ‘idiots’ you refer to…
12 Hasan Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 3:46 pm
It sadens me to see you equating America’s wars with Israel’s… to the point where Israel’s aggression wars are America’s. The way I see it is Israel has hijacked America and inslaved it to pay for and even fight Israel’s wars (like Iraq). Remember that the main architect of the Iraq war is Paul Wolfowitz, a well renounded neocon Zionist.

That’s very sad considering how American values fundementally contradicts Israel’s historic objective of creating an Aparthied system of Jewish dominance. I think the Zionist experiment called Israel has failed. Lets help it reshape itself into an American model where rights are determined by citizenship not religious persuasion, instead of encouraging it on the path that it has taken since its inception to endless wars and killings.
13 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 3:51 pm
No comment…I’ll leave your words to stand for themselves…
14 Ryan Bonneville Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 3:59 pm
My constructive answer to the problem of idiots is to fire everyone and start over. I wrote about it further down, but the administration needs massive personnel replacements (start by ejecting the odious Rice, Rumsfeld, and Cheney Axis). Following that, we need even more massive outflows of cash, resources, and troops to the Middle East to get this thing under control. It isn’t just about killing bad guys; it’s also about projecting an image that we actually care about finishing our projects.
15 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 4:12 pm
Well, I agree with some of that, and I hope to post about it at length soon…
16 Hasan Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 5:23 pm
Ryan… if you want to change personnel and I presume policies too, then sending more troops defeats your goal and sends the wrong message to people in the region. Armies are not the way to talk.
17 Dmac Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 5:35 pm
“Why is it that wherever you look — Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, North Korea — we’re being out-maneuvered by the bad guys?”

Decades of mismanagement, and you could make up a laundry list of so - called “engagement” policies that did nothing but kick the proverbial can further down the road. Bush is responsible for the current mess, but to ignore the past history before his administration is to ignore countless acts of fecklessness on our part - talk means weakness to tyrannical regimes, and we’ve talked till our breath has turned blue in the past, with no tangible results.

“Armies are not the way to talk.”

Whatever you say, my little Jihadist. Please hurry up, your course in Skinhead 101 is about to begin, wouldn’t want you to miss it.
18 fatman Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 5:50 pm
Mark, if I were you, I’d check and see if “Hasan” is posting from the same IP as lil’ Mikey. Sure reads like he’s channelling him.

Ryan, If we (and Israel) don’t stick around and repair the collateral damage, then we’re letting Hezbollah, Hamas, the Iranians, whoever score a propaganda victory when they come in and clean up after us. If we do stay and engage in rebuilding, as we’re doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, then we’re accused of being Crusaders, imperialists, and (in Israel’s case) Zionist oppressors.

To hell with it. If we kill enough Islamofascists, then we’ll either convince them to stop trying to kill us or we’ll run out of Islampfascists to kill. Either way works for me.
19 Dmac Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 6:38 pm
“Hasan” is posting from the same IP as lil’ Mikey…’

Yeah, that’s exactly what I’ve been thinking as well, Fatman. Birds of a feather…

I still think we’d be having an entirely different discussion today if the bombers had succeeded - I was discussing the war with a neighbor who’s a second - generation Japanese, whose parents are still alive and living in Japan. His family feels that at some point, if things don’t improve in the ME, we should consider using the bomb (!). Unbelievable to hear, especially considering the source, but they felt that only this type of deterrent would work in convincing the fanatics to stop the killing, just as it finally convinced the fanatics in Japan to give up the war. I don’t think this action would work in any event, but at some point there will be folks who will tend to throw up their hands and want to bomb the countries back into the stone age, and let their God sort them out. He added that only then could we begin a rebuilding process that would be free and clear of interference. Yikes.
20 Dmac Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 6:46 pm
Here’s a survey taken last year that gives some background into Japan’s newly militarized mind - set, and it’s more aggressive stances in previously disengaged areas:

http://www.glocom.org/special_topics/social_trends/20050519_trends_s105/index.html

They’re cleary worried about China these days, but the societal taboos regarding armed intervention have been lifted during the current Prime Minister’s tenure.
21 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 7:05 pm
Actually, fatman and Dmac, though it will no doubt surprise you, Hasan and I are very good friends. Just goes to show you don’t have to share political views to have a decent friendship.

About the only thing we agree on in the Middle East is that the endless cycle of violence will lead to the ruin of everyone - what we disagree on is who is the primary instigator…
22 Dmac Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 8:19 pm
Well, my hat’s off to you - not sure how you can discuss this subject when Hasan thinks that Israel has a “historic objective of creating an Apartheid system of Jewish dominance.” The only time I usually hear this type of thinking is in the presence of some cabdrivers, who are all too eager to share their opinion of the “Zionist conspiracy.” I mean, woah.
23 Mark Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 9:22 pm
Our secret is simple - we usually avoid the subject (with each other, I mean)…
24 mason Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 10:23 pm
I’m with Fatman. Call me an American Imperialist Fascist Zionist Cowboy Diplomat or whatever you wish, but Fatman nailed it on the head; I hope that we can help as many of the fine individuals of Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas (among others) to meet the virgins that they pine for so fiercely as quickly as we can.
25 Jeff Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 10:45 pm
I am so sick to death of the continual assertion made by leftists that the US should mold its foreign policy based on the approval of others (governments, civilians, what have you). Uh, here’s a news flash: right and wrong is not determined by popular opinion. As I’ve said before, Rosa Parks did not look around for approval as she refused to leave her seat; and many black men in the south were lynched by consensus.

I don’t really give a rat’s A what the people of Lebanon think of the Israelis. So the good people of south Lebanon are returning to their bombed houses; tragic, but in their grief they no doubt forget that their Hizbollah heroes were firing rockets indiscriminately into Israel from their back yards. They are the ones who tacitly supported the terrorists, and they can lump it.

“Israel’s wars of aggression”? If you think that Israel is the aggressor here, it says much more about you than it does about the record of history. Go back in time to the day before the recent war started, and imagine the situation reversed: how long would we have to wait for Israel to launch a border raid, kill 8 Hizbollah soldiers and kidnap two? And then proceed to launch unguided missiles at random into Lebanon? All with no previous provocation.

How long would you have to wait? Longer than you or I will live.
26 Jeff Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 11:02 pm
And another thing, or two:

John Keegan is indeed great.

Condi’s speech: I’m not a Michael Savage fan, but I caught him for a minute or two on the radio this evening. He was (rightly) merciless on Rice’s speech, and said she “is in over her head”.

After today, I’m not so sure I don’t agree.
27 Jeff Says:
August 16th, 2006 at 11:29 pm
The Keegan point belongs to Mark’s other post. D’oh.
28 Hasan Says:
August 17th, 2006 at 10:05 am
You all crack me up.
Is it true that Israel’s historical object is to establish demographic Jewish majority state? Answer this question.

What I meant by “a system of apartheid of Jewish dominance” is the state of Israel, since that is its stated objective, and not as your sensitive minds might have lead you to believe that I am an Jewish hater or an anti-semite. I am a semite myself. You can call me an anti-zioinst any day, but you can not accuse me of being a Jew hater. That’s equivelant to equating anti-aparthied with anti-white. That’s simply rediculous.

What I am after is to see a solution where all Jews and non-Jews are living equally under the law in a state with a written constitution that have a bill of rights similar to ours here in the US. Period.
29 Mark Says:
August 17th, 2006 at 10:08 am
Well, why stop at Israel? Shouldn’t Iran and Syria have a similar progressive liberal state where all religions, including Jews, are welcome, with a written constitution and bill of rights similar to the U.S.?

For that matter, shouldn’t Iraq? Isn’t that what we’re fighting and dying for? Yet you oppose the Iraq War….hmmm….very strange….
30 Dmac Says:
August 17th, 2006 at 11:21 am
“Answer this question.”

How about if you answer whether the infamous “right of return” was just another attempt by the Palestinians to impose their demographically - advantaged population in the attempt to eventually take over Israel? That sounded an awful lot like a “system of apartheid of Palestinian dominance” to my ears.

“You can call me an anti-zioinst any day, but you can not accuse me of being a Jew hater.”

OK, you often sound quite a lot like a self - loathing Jewish man in your posts. Or is that just another wayward sentiment from my “sensitive mind?”
31 Dmac Says:
August 17th, 2006 at 11:55 am
Hasan, this one’s for you:

http://politicscentral.com/2006/08/15/the_uses_of_antisemitism_by_ne.php
32 Ellis Goldberg Says:
November 16th, 2007 at 4:55 am
A Nov. 15 2007 AP story indicates Chevron was fined $30M by the SEC for bribing Saddams’s thugs in the “oil for food” deal and that Chevron may face tax evasion charges later. The bribes were in the millions so someone pretty high up at Chevron had to sign off on the payments. Unfortunately the AP story did not mention Dr. Condoleezza Rice the Chevron board member and the chairman of the “Public Policy Committee” which is responsible for making sure this kind of activity does not happen.

The Chevron website says the committee’s purposes include “identifying, evaluating and monitoring social, political and environmental trends, issues and concerns”, “analyzing how public policy trends could impact business activities and performance. Dr. Rice never discussed the Iraqi bribes on the record (not in the minutes) at company meetings. That should not surprise anyone who is familiar with her lack of response to 911 warnings.

President Clinton put sanctions on Iraq. Actions by Chevron and Rice clearly violated those sanctions and amount to treason. I urge our new Attorney General Michael Mukasey and California Attorney General Jerry Brown determine who at Chevron authorized the millions in bribes.

Ellis Goldberg
Danville CA