In America's Best Interests ?

[Fischkoepfin 1]

No, This is Not 'Our War'

by Patrick J. Buchanan

Posted Jul 21, 2006

My country has been "torn to shreds," said Fouad Siniora, the prime minister of Lebanon, as the death toll among his people passed 300 civilian dead, 1,000 wounded, with half a million homeless.

Israel must pay for the "barbaric destruction," said Siniora.

To the contrary, says columnist Lawrence Kudlow, "Israel is doing the Lord's work."

On American TV, former Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu says the ruination of Lebanon is Hezbollah's doing. But is it Hezbollah that is using U.S.-built F-16s, with precision-guided bombs, and 155-mm artillery pieces to wreak death and devastation on Lebanon?

No, Israel is doing this, with the blessing and without a peep of protest from President Bush. And we wonder why they hate us.

"Today, we are all Israelis!" brayed Ken Mehlman of the Republican National Committee to a gathering of Christians United for Israel.

One wonders if these Christians care about what is happening to our Christian brethren in Lebanon and Gaza, who have had all power cut off by Israeli air strikes, an outlawed form of collective punishment, that has left them with no sanitation, rotting food, impure water and days without light or electricity in the horrible heat of July.

When summer power outrages occur in America, it means a rising rate of death among our sick and elderly, and women and infants. One can only imagine what a hell it must be today in Gaza City and Beirut.

But all this carnage and destruction has only piqued the blood lust of the hairy-chested warriors at The Weekly Standard. In a signed editorial, "It's Our War," William Kristol calls for America to play her rightful role in this war by "countering this act of aggression by Iran with a military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait?"

"Why wait?" Well, one reason is that the United States has not been attacked. A second is a small thing called the Constitution. Where does George W. Bush get the authority to launch a war on Iran? When did Congress declare war or authorize a war on Iran?

Answer: It never did. But these neoconservatives care no more about the Constitution than they cared about the truth when they lied into war in Iraq.

"Why wait?" How about thinking of the fate of those 25,000 Americans in Lebanon if we launch an unprovoked war on Iran. How many would wind up dead or hostages of Hezbollah, if Iran gave the order to retaliate for the slaughter of their citizens by U.S. bombs? What would happen to the 130,000 U.S. troops in Iraq, if Shi'ites and Iranian "volunteers" joined forces to exact revenge on our soldiers?

What about America? Richard Armitage, who did four tours in Nam and knows a bit about war, says that, in its ability to attack Western targets, al Qaeda is the B team, Hezbollah the A Team. If Bush bombs Iran, what prevents Hezbollah from launching retaliatory attacks inside the United States?

None of this is written in defense of Hamas, Hezbollah or Iran.

But none of them has attacked our country, nor has Syria, whom Bush I made an ally in the Gulf War, and to whom the most decorated soldier in Israeli history, Ehud Barak, offered 99 percent of the Golan Heights. If Nixon, Bush I and Clinton could deal with Hafez al-Assad, a tougher customer than son Bashar, what is the matter with George W. Bush?

The last superpower is impotent in this war because we have allowed Israel to dictate to whom we may and may not talk. Thus, Bush winds up cussing in frustration in St. Petersburg that somebody should tell the Syrians to stop it. Why not pick up the phone, Mr. President?

What is Kristol's moral and legal ground for a war on Iran? It is the "Iranian act of aggression" against Israel, and that Iran is on the road to nuclear weapons, and we can't have that.

But there is no evidence Iran has any tighter control over Hezbollah than we have over Israel, whose response to the capture of two soldiers had all the spontaneity of the Schlieffen Plan. And, again, Hezbollah attacked Israel, not us. And there is no solid proof Iran is in violation of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, which it has signed, but Israel refuses to sign.

If Iran's nuclear program justifies war, why cannot the neocons make that case in the constitutional way, instead of prodding Bush to launch a Pearl Harbor attack? Do they fear they have no credibility left after pushing Bush into this bloody quagmire in Iraq that has cost almost 2,600 dead and 18,000 wounded Americans?

No, Kenny boy, we are not "all Israelis." Some of us still think of ourselves as Americans, first, last, and always

And, no, Mr. Kristol, this is not "our war." It's your war.

It's a sad day when I somewhat agree with Pat B.

[I'm Gone 60]

It's a sad day when I somewhat agree with Pat B.

A sign that you are growing and maturing. LOL Buchanan is about the ONLY political commentator that doesn't slant things to make Israel always look like the good guy and Arabs the evil ones.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

It's a sad day when I somewhat agree with Pat B.

A sign that you are growing and maturing. LOL Buchanan is about the ONLY political commentator that doesn't slant things to make Israel always look like the good guy and Arabs the evil ones.

Thanks, MD; glad to hear you're happy with my progress but this is about the only issue we agree on. I do actually think there are other political commentators out there who have seen the light, but they would not be politically conservative otherwise.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

The Christian Right (Bush is one of 'em), believe that the Jews are the Chosen people and therefore will ALWAYS be supportive and noncritical no matter how Israel behaves. That's an important reality to accept when talking about the crisis. In their eyes, Israel will never be on the wrong side of morality when it comes to violence because these narrow minded Christians have taken out of context, biblical statements about the Jews.

Putting that aside however, I can sympathize with Israel's decision to dismantle hezbollah. But Israel and the U.S. has to look soberly into the causes and effects of why there is so much hatred toward's Israel and it's ally, the U.S..

Edited July 22, 2006 by Steven_and_Jinky

[dalegg 143]

The Christian Right (Bush is one of 'em), believe that the Jews are the Chosen people and therefore will ALWAYS be supportive and noncritical no matter how Israel behaves. That's an important reality to accept when talking about the crisis. In their eyes, Israel will never be on the wrong side of morality when it comes to violence because these narrow minded Christians have taken out of context, biblical statements about the Jews.

Not Mel Gibson.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

The Christian Right (Bush is one of 'em), believe that the Jews are the Chosen people and therefore will ALWAYS be supportive and noncritical no matter how Israel behaves. That's an important reality to accept when talking about the crisis. In their eyes, Israel will never be on the wrong side of morality when it comes to violence because these narrow minded Christians have taken out of context, biblical statements about the Jews.

Not Mel Gibson.

Mel is not one of the Christian Right (Protestant dispensationalists.) He is a Traditional Catholic.

[dalegg 143]

The Christian Right (Bush is one of 'em), believe that the Jews are the Chosen people and therefore will ALWAYS be supportive and noncritical no matter how Israel behaves. That's an important reality to accept when talking about the crisis. In their eyes, Israel will never be on the wrong side of morality when it comes to violence because these narrow minded Christians have taken out of context, biblical statements about the Jews.

Not Mel Gibson.

Mel is not one of the Christian Right (Protestant dispensationalists.) He is a Traditional Catholic.

Well this just doesn't make any damn sense. How come the Christian Right consider the Jews to be the Chosen People when their religion doesn't accept the most fundamental part of Christianity?

[Fischkoepfin 1]

The Christian Right (Bush is one of 'em), believe that the Jews are the Chosen people and therefore will ALWAYS be supportive and noncritical no matter how Israel behaves. That's an important reality to accept when talking about the crisis. In their eyes, Israel will never be on the wrong side of morality when it comes to violence because these narrow minded Christians have taken out of context, biblical statements about the Jews.

Not Mel Gibson.

Mel is not one of the Christian Right (Protestant dispensationalists.) He is a Traditional Catholic.

Well this just doesn't make any damn sense. How come the Christian Right consider the Jews to be the Chosen People when their religion doesn't accept the most fundamental part of Christianity?

Because they base their politics concerning Israel on the book of Revelation. Before the saved Christians can ascend to heaven, God's chosen people, aka the Jews, will be converted following the destruction of Israel.

I know this is not very logical, but that's what the book of Revelation has to say about it (approximately).

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

Mel is not one of the Christian Right (Protestant dispensationalists.) He is a Traditional Catholic.

Well this just doesn't make any damn sense. How come the Christian Right consider the Jews to be the Chosen People when their religion doesn't accept the most fundamental part of Christianity?

Good question. Something to do with the Scofield Bible, methinks....

I defer to the honorable VJ religion authorities for further illumination.

[dalegg 143]

The Christian Right (Bush is one of 'em), believe that the Jews are the Chosen people and therefore will ALWAYS be supportive and noncritical no matter how Israel behaves. That's an important reality to accept when talking about the crisis. In their eyes, Israel will never be on the wrong side of morality when it comes to violence because these narrow minded Christians have taken out of context, biblical statements about the Jews.

Not Mel Gibson.

Mel is not one of the Christian Right (Protestant dispensationalists.) He is a Traditional Catholic.

Well this just doesn't make any damn sense. How come the Christian Right consider the Jews to be the Chosen People when their religion doesn't accept the most fundamental part of Christianity?

Because they base their politics concerning Israel on the book of Revelation. Before the saved Christians can ascend to heaven, God's chosen people, aka the Jews, will be converted following the destruction of Israel.

I know this is not very logical, but that's what the book of Revelation has to say about it (approximately).

I don't to split hairs, but does the Bible say it's the "Jews" or the "Israelites" that are the chosen people?

[Identity 0]

Why does the U.S. give money to Israel? What benefit do we receive in return?

In return the United States receives intelligence from Mossad (in this case the benefits received outweight the costs). In addition, Israel is of geostrategic importance, bordering the Eastern Mediterreanean, thus acting as a buffer to 'protect' the West from the Islamic menace.

[Fischkoepfin 1]

Why does the U.S. give money to Israel? What benefit do we receive in return?

In return the United States receives intelligence from Mossad (in this case the benefits received outweight the costs). In addition, Israel is of geostrategic importance, bordering the Eastern Mediterreanean, thus acting as a buffer to 'protect' the West from the Islamic menace.

Being a buffer is about the worst thing possible for any nation. Concerning the amount of money the US spends on Israel, I don't believe the intelligence received outweighs the cost for the US. Otherwise they would have been better informed in the past.

[I'm Gone 60]

The Christian Right (Bush is one of 'em), believe that the Jews are the Chosen people and therefore will ALWAYS be supportive and noncritical no matter how Israel behaves. That's an important reality to accept when talking about the crisis. In their eyes, Israel will never be on the wrong side of morality when it comes to violence because these narrow minded Christians have taken out of context, biblical statements about the Jews.

Any how are they repaid? By getting stabbed in the back with lawsuits to close down Christmas related things on government property.

[Identity 0]

Why does the U.S. give money to Israel? What benefit do we receive in return?

In return the United States receives intelligence from Mossad (in this case the benefits received outweight the costs). In addition, Israel is of geostrategic importance, bordering the Eastern Mediterreanean, thus acting as a buffer to 'protect' the West from the Islamic menace.

Being a buffer is about the worst thing possible for any nation. Concerning the amount of money the US spends on Israel, I don't believe the intelligence received outweighs the cost for the US. Otherwise they would have been better informed in the past.

However, with the most powerful military arsenal (including nuclear weapons) and capable armed forces in the region, they are the best buffer to have.

The U.S. Intelligence community receives a lot of intelligence from Mossad. It would be far more costly to the U.S. if they tried to obtain the intelligence themselves. Think of it as akin to an outsourcing agreement.

Who are we to say that they haven't been better informed? Some say that the U.S. Intelligence community 'allowed' Sept 11th.

[Identity 0]

For additional interesting reading, check out the latest edition (July/August 2006) of The Atlantic . Therein is a two-page spread paid for by your friendly neighborhood Jewish Lobby.

Edited July 23, 2006 by Identity