As the war in Lebanon between Israeli forces and Hizbollah fighters intensifies, and the death toll mounts, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the Bush administration, appearances to the contrary, is not interested in peace, ceasefires or diplomatic solutions to the violence. Indeed, today, a group of prominent neocons, including Newt Gingrich, Richard Perle and members of Vice President Cheney’s office managed to get a story published by Insight Magazine (one of the Moonie Times’sister publications), in which they, figuratively speaking, take Condoleeza Rice to the woodshed for her failure to sufficiently support their dreams of further wars in the Middle East:
Conservative national security allies of President Bush are in revolt against Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, saying that she is incompetent and has reversed the administration’s national security and foreign policy agenda.
The conservatives, who include Newt Gingrich, Richard Perle and leading current and former members of the Pentagon and National Security Council, have urged the president to transfer Miss Rice out of the State Department and to an advisory role. They said Miss Rice, stemming from her lack of understanding of the Middle East, has misled the president on Iran and the Arab-Israeli conflict. […]
The criticism of Miss Rice has been intense and comes from a range of Republican loyalists, including current and former aides in the Defense Department and the office of Vice President Dick Cheney. They have warned that Iran has been exploiting Miss Rice’s inexperience and incompetence to accelerate its nuclear weapons program. They expect a collapse of her policy over the next few months. […]
A leading public critic of Miss Rice has been Richard Perle, a former chairman of the Pentagon’s Defense Policy Board and regarded as close to Mr. Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Mr. Perle, pointing to the effort by the State Department to undermine the Reagan administration’s policy toward the Soviet Union in the late 1980s, has accused Miss Rice of succumbing to a long-time State Department agenda of meaningless agreements meant to appease enemies of the United States. […]
Mr. Perle’s article was said to have reflected the views of many of Mr. Bush’s appointees in the White House, Defense Department and State Department. Mr. Perle maintains close contacts to U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control Robert Joseph, Deputy National Security Advisor Elliot Abrams and Mr. Cheney’s national security adviser, John Hannah.
(cont.)
There’s nothing worse than being labeled an appeaser in the Neocon playbook. They invariably prefer the unilateral use of American and Israeli military might as the proper prescription for conflicts in the Middle East, rather than diplomacy in conjunction with our European allies, NATO and the United Nations. From the tone of the Insight article, you can just see them salivating over the possible demise of Ms. Rice, and the resulting opportunity to inflict their own strategy for regime change through massive military assaults against Iran and/or Syria.
The Neocons, both in and out of the Bush administration, have a hunger for a wider regional “war on terror” that is undiminished by the complete and utter ruin of their policy in Iraq. Sadly, it now appears that events in Lebanon are playing out in ways which may allow them to achieve their goals of attacking Syria and/or Iran, sooner, rather than later:
TEHRAN, Iran (AP) — Surrounded by yellow Hezbollah flags, more than 60 Iranian volunteers set off Wednesday to join what they called a holy war against Israeli forces in Lebanon.
The group — ranging from teenagers to grandfathers — plans to join about 200 other volunteers on the way to the Turkish border, which they hope to cross Thursday. They plan to reach Lebanon via Syria on the weekend. […]
“We are just the first wave of Islamic warriors from Iran,” said Amir Jalilinejad, chairman of the Student Justice Movement, a nongovernment group that helped recruit the fighters. “More will come from here and other Muslim nations around the world. Hezbollah needs our help.”
Suffice it to say, Iranian volunteers marching off to fight the Israelis in Lebanon plays directly into the hands of the “Cheney Cabal” who must be thrilled that this is happening. This only provides them more ammunition to take to the President to push him to adopt an even harder line toward Hizbollah, Syria and Iran. Rice’s approach to diplomacy, limited as it is by any realistic proposal to stop the fighting in the near term, is hamstrung by her failure to obtain any support for her position among our European allies, who must be watching these events unfold in horror at America’s ineptitude, ignorance and arrogance.
The only real question I have is whether it was Cheney and Rumsfeld’s strategy all along to encourage Israel to go on the offensive in Lebanon, both to undermine Rice’s position and to reinstate their own policy for a broader war in the region, or whether it is merely a “fortunate coincidence” (fortunate only for them, not for the rest of us) of which they have been more than happy to advantage so that they can push their own agenda for the Middle East? Reports that Israel has been planning this attack for over a year with the Pentagon’s knowledge and approval incline me to the former view. And the sudden employment of the phrase “World War III” by Gingrich and others strikes me as a premeditated and calculated use of rhetoric in order to ratchet up the fear level among the American public.
A while ago I predicted we were in for a wild ride this Summer in terms of a coordinated campaign by conservative supporters of President Bush to generate support for war with Iran, in part to bolster the Republican party’s prospects for the mid term elections this Fall. Yet even I didn’t anticipate the Bush administration letting Israel slip off it’s leash to attack both the Palestinians in Gaza and Hizbollah in Lebanon. Mea culpa.
I should have anticipated such murderous manipulation from the most immoral and deceitful administration in our history. If killing a few more Arabs (and Israelis) is what it takes to assure continued majorities in the House and Senate for Republicans, the Bush team is more than happy to oblige. The fact that this approach has already failed miserably in Iraq is of little consequence. Retaining their power, and implementing the folly of an expanded war in the Middle East is all that matters to them.
Great analysis. Even as a fan of Dr. Strangelove, I confess I just don’t get what these neocons are after. All out war in the Middle East with Iran and Syria? With Iraq split in a genocidal civil war?
Are they doing this just in hopes of winning the 06 elections and preventing investigations, and the 08 presidency? Do they seriously believe they can continue to foment war with Islam (which is what they’ll get if they keep going after every Islamicist in sight)and restrict the pain in the U.S., so that majority disapproval won’t mean anything?
If this continues, I don’t see any way it doesn’t go nuclear. Dr. Strangelove rides again.
Ideology (and faith in that ideology) have trumped reason. They know their approach is the right one, so all evidence to the contrary is ignored, brushed aside, made light of.
Speaking of which, I was just reading the Haaretz memo linked by Josh on TPM and accidentally clicked an ad put up by a group that asks the reader to ‘click on this site’ to get an automated prayer, which thousands of years of Hebrew experience has proven efficacious in defeating the enemy. My first thought was that it was a snark; but it was for real.
Magical thinking everywhere. I’m waiting for a new round of witch trials.
The problem with neocons isn’t that they don’t actually believe the idiocy they spout, the problem is that the do believe it. Their infantile analysis that “might makes right” has been refuted by history which in the long view demonstrates just the opposite. The Thrasymachus’s in the White House and on the Veep staff aren’t craven liars (well, okay, they’re that too). They’re fucking idiots who lack the political virtue of putting themselves in another’s shoes and seeing the world from his point of view. And then developing a foreign policy to diffuse that view.
The neocons running our government have been and continue to be outmaneuvered by the Iranians they look down their noses at. Let’s see. Three short years ago, Saddam Hussein was contained, had no WMD and no WMD program, had a decimated military and was no threat to Israel or the West. After three years of neocon nerfwad foreign policy, Iran controls Iraq and Lebanon through Shia proxies and now can exert enormoun pressure on Israel. This was the same Saddam Hussein that we supported when the Iranians tried to do to Iraq what George Bush has now done for them. Nice Job to the Dim Bulb in Chief running our country and the idiot puppeteers with their hands up his ass.
“Thus, Socrates, injustice on a sufficiently large scale is a stronger, freer, and a more masterful thing than justice, and, as I said in the beginning, it is the advantage of the stronger that is the just, while the unjust is what profits man’s self and is for his advantage.”
— Thrasymachus
That is the problem. This idea of a few dozen volunteers from Iran heading off to cross through Turkey to Syria to Lebanon hoping to pick up weapons along the way it not something that could really increase the problems that the IDF seem to have run into.
But if we use this as an excuse to attack Iran what do we do if tens of thousands of trained and armed troops "volunteer" to help the Shia in Iraq fight us?
Imagine hostilities with Syria, the straight of Hormuz closed, and an Iranian-backed melt down in Iraq. We might suddenly find ourselves fighting just to extract our forces leaving our equipment and bases behind.
The is a big thing to risk to try to influence a few congressional elections and I think that at some point, notwithstanding our tradition of civilian control, there would be real resistance from the Pentagon. They are pledged to uphold the constitution and all that, but if they thought that the men under their command were being risked for no good reason they could make it very difficult for the politicians to take such a step.
I’m no fan of the State Department, but it’s interesting how it’s been a historic boogeyman for neo-fascists for decades, from Joe McCarthy through Gingrich through the present. I think they’d like nothing better than to abolish the damn thing and turn foreign policy over to the Pentagon and the “security” apparatus. Or, in the current neo-fascist mode, the Department of Zionism.
The neocon ideology actually has nothing positive to offer anyone unless there is war. Hence, like all megalomaniacs, they have no need for a foreign ministry,(State Dept.). The neocons are nothing without war.
Well I don’t know what to say so I’ll say everything. Why is it the NeoCons are always blaming an African-American for W’s problems..first it was Colin and now Condi..not that I feel sorry for her. And my next comment..Condi see what happens when your an African-American your neocon buddies think your only in that position of power because of Affirmative Action…now isn’t that #$%E$%^ upped.
So what if it is by design?
Reality will corrent the NeoCons lunacy. It is hard to say what level of bloodshed will be visited on which party.
This has all the makings of a Khartoum moment.
There is only one solution to this mess. Mr. Bush is the one whom the NeoCons rely on to execute their failed-state plans, the U.S. being the ‘failed state’ at the endpoint of their stupidity, so we need to impeach his dumb ass.
Maybe so what, but in terms of technology and global economics, it’s not the 19th century. If there is design here, it would necessarily involve widening warfare to an extent with ruinous consequences globally. War with Syria and/or Iran, giving India the greenlight for 50 nuclear bombs a year on the border of Pakistan, which will likely try to match them…$5 a gallon gasoline would be the least of it. I repeat: I don’t see a wider war in the Middle East of this magnitude having any other result than nuclear war somewhere. Not with people who apparently haven’t a clue what that means. If these neocons act on their agenda, and this is their agenda, their ultimate defeat will be an empty victory.
I submit that a ‘wider war in the region’ would have consequences no one could foresee.
It is not a development to be wished for unless…
You are barking mad as it has been conclusively demonstrated the NeoCons and Bush in are.
Impeachment is the solution.
From the first excerpt: (Neocons) have warned that Iran has been exploiting Miss Rice’s inexperience and incompetence to accelerate its nuclear weapons program.
This sounds like the plot of a comic book, build a machine that runs on Condi’s inexperience and rule the world. How does Rice’s obvious incompetence help the Iranian engineers and scientists accelerate their work? If they had that capacity to work faster, I’m assuming Iran would have nuclear weapons already.
It was whoever outed Valrie Plame that helped those Iranian engineers. Because she was working on tracking “Nuclear” parts going to Iran.
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/MSNBC_confirms_Raw_Story_report_Outed_0501.html
Of course there could be a conspiracy theory that the neocons wanted Iran to have some nuclear parts…as an excuse for military action.
I always thought that all this -fighting them abroad- is really about -fighting us at home-. While we are all scratching our heads in despair about WW3 this is happening at home completely under the radar.
“Miss” Rice?
While I deeply dislike Ms. Rice, or better yet, Secretary of State Rice, and while the Times is not remotely progressive, it’s also not the 1950’s.
And actually it would be more proper to refer to her as Dr. Rice than either “Miss” or “Ms”. As much as I may deplore her role in perpetrating Bu$hCo’s madness, her Ph.D. is legit and should be acknowledged by our mass media types.
Ah, sorry, you are quite correct. I had forgotten about her degree.