« Hezbollah's Warrior Society | Main | Lamenting a Hez Victory »

July 29, 2006


Ken Hagler

What amazes me is how obvious the Busheviks are being about wanting into the war. When I first read about the notion of US troops going into southern Lebanon as "peacekeepers," my first thought was, "Who do they think they're kidding?"

Josh Koenig

The savvy response for us citizens stateside must then be to make it politically unacceptable to deploy US Forces as peacekeepers (or anything else) in Lebanon. I'm sure a position could be drafted along the lines of "we won't participate in anything less than a truely multinational coalition, where our forces make up no more than 50% of the total personnel..." or the like.

I'm skeptical that anything can rein in the Bush administration, but with an election coming up there might be enough lobbying power to juice congress into blocking any such attempt. They'd need to allocate funds for any major deployment.

Steve Kimbrough

I'm prepared to believe that you've discerned the desires and even intentions of the Bush/Cheney administration. Questions remain, however. First, what substantial country would be so foolish as to commit its troops to a US-led expedition in Lebanon? Even the Brits are balking, it seems. Second, what are the strategic counter-measures available to these substantial countries (Brazil, India, France, Germany, China, Russia...)? At the very least, they can stay out and watch the US overextend itself. Or perhaps like the Shiites and Sunnis, they will be driven to make common cause together. If even a substantial number participate the economic costs to the US can be made unbearable, I would think. Even if it cost these countries economically, they might well reason that it's cheaper than fighting a hot war with the US, or for the US. It seems to me that Bush has a weak hand and the danger is he will grossly overplay it.

Josh Koenig

On the other hand, it would appear the IDF is backing out.


Perhaps we all just dodged a bullet. (knock on wood)

Bob Morris

Yes, except that the Israeli tail doesn't wag the US dog. They are the client state, not the US.

In my view, the Bushies clearly want to invade Iran. That's why the recent capture of the two soldiers (something both sides have been doing for years) was used as the pretext for invading Lebanon.

Ali T

I quite agree with Josh's comment. I believe the current war against Hizbollah has been carefully planned to ultimately attack Iran. I think the plan is to weaken Hizbollah as Iran's arm first, and then either create a situation where Iran would make the mistake of getting involved or Israel/US would make it look like Iran is directly involved in the attacks. In either case, "retaliation" and therefore attacking Iran's nuclear plants would be justified. So, I guess I'm trying to argue that the final goal is to destroy Iran's nuclear facilities with some sort of excuse to avoid criticisms from the international community.


Sorry, I meant I agree with Bob's comment.

John Robb



John Robb

Which will get us this:


The comments to this entry are closed.