Israel: Bush-whacked?
By Jerry Gordon
The Debkafile report, ‘U.S. called the war shots’ and comments by colleague, Israpundit editor, Ted Belman, raise the question of whether Israel let itself be ‘bushwhacked’ into the debacle of a defeat in southern Lebanon against Islamofascism terror group Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy.
The micro-management of various stages of the conflict from reliance on the opening Kosovo-type air war to the ‘hokey pokey’ limited ground incursions of a less than 5 kilometer corridor in Southern Lebanon to a last minute dash to the Litani River have the appearances of ‘herky jerk’ decision making in Jerusalem by way of the Bush Administration in Washington, DC.
Behind this if you believe half of what Debkafile and Belman are opining were the ‘master puppeteers’ in Washington: Bush and Condi Rice.
I didn’t know that President Bush and Secretary of State Condi Rice were ‘expert military strategists.’ Bush’s principal military experience was flying F-102 fighter aircraft of the Texas Air National Guard during the Viet Nam war and as some wags would have it: ‘defending Texas from Oklahoma’ or was it vice versa? Dr. Rice is an accomplished tyro concert pianist and acolyte of former National Security Advisor, General Brent Scowcroft under Bush senior-a purported Soviet era ‘expert.’ How that qualified her for being an expert on the Middle East is another matter. It must be her OJT- on the job training in both the NSC and State Department under the junior Bush.
Rice was ironically a graduate student of former Secretary of State, Madeleine Albright’s late father, Dr. Joseph Korbel the apostate Jew and former Czech diplomat and Professor of International Relations at the University of Denver.
Brent Scowcroft is a self acknowledged devotee of international political theorist and academic the late Professor Leo Strauss of the University of Chicago -an alleged pragmatic ‘realist’. Scowcroft , lest we forget was an aide to the ‘arch deacon’ of real politic-Dr. Kissinger during the Nixon era and had his own experience with Israel micro-management during the Yom Kippur War of October, 1973. Scowcroft has an ally who has reappeared in his current guise as a part time counselor to the President, James Baker, III, former Secretary of State and limited partner in the Carlyle Group -a Washington, DC merchant bank with heavy Saudi and Gulf Emirate investment participation. Based on Baker’s role in the 1991 Madrid Peace conference – the prelude to the infamous Oslo Accords of President Clinton - he espouses views that are inimical to Israel’s interests. After all, wasn’t he alleged to have said pragmatically during Bush senior’s failed 1992 re-election campaign: “f__k the Jews, they don’t vote for us, anyway.”
If I read between the lines of the Debkafile report and Belman’s comments there may have been the following plausible skein of discussions between Bush, Rice and Olmert and Tzpi Livni and General Halutz.
‘Sure we want you to go in and bust’em’ to ‘no we don’t want you to topple the weak Lebanese government of Prime Minister Siniora’. This is the sad case of democracy failing as it has in another demonstration of ‘liberty’ in the Middle East, sectarian strife torn, Iraq. All the while the thesis goes, Bush and Rice purported ‘pulled the strings’ on Olmert and his cabinet in Jerusalem.
What we have here is the blind leading the halt and the lame in seeking an effective, coherent and cohesive policy in a very fluid Middle East and gutting Israel’s security against what former Israeli Ambassador Lubrani, whom I interviewed last week called: ‘Iran’s southern flank” – Lebanon.
As a result Israel under the ineffective, incompetent Olmert government paid the price of its lack of intelligence and resolve. IDF reservists of the Alexandroni Brigade rightfully raised real rhubarb about ZAHAL and the Olmert government’s failure to destroy Hezbollah and in effect witlessly ‘snatched defeat from the jaws of victory.’
The Bush administration has no such grand strategy in place for the region. The war in Iraq was a misadventure from the beginning, it was ‘a sand trap’ The triumvirate Bush – Cheney - Rumsfeld decreed that the way to do this was war on the cheap through a strategic concept known vaguely as “force light” – air, high tech and Special Forces will do the trick. What we had in retrospect was insufficient and less than overwhelming force. As a result of the ‘lightening’ war that toppled the Saddam Hussein regime, the U.S. lead coalition failed to seal the borders, protect the line of communications and oil producing sectors and did not crush the Ba’athist Sunni insurgency. To compound difficulties, the strategy gave rise to the Hezbollah wannabe militias of murderous Sheik Muqtada al-Sadr who now controls the Shia death squads in the Iraqi Ministry of Interior who wreak havoc every night. Like Nasrallah in Lebanon al Sadr holds parliamentary seats and cabinet posts in the al Maliki government in Baghdad. The erupting Shia sectarian strife is a prelude to Iraq dissolving and southern Iraq becoming a de facto Shia satrapy of Iran.
The Kurds up north are the only allies in the artificial country of Iraq. The Kurds have to be supported. It would be at the price of possibly isolating the fretful Islamist government in Turkey. But it is a vital necessity. Deploying U.S. forces in northern Iraq would ‘inoculate’ the Kurds from being enticed by the likes of Iranian terrorist President Ahmadinejad who lusts after establishing a land corridor to the Mediterranean to make the Shia alliance with Hezbollah - controlled Lebanon and minority Alawite – controlled Syria a geo-political reality. This is the defacto regional mini axis of evil . The Sunni ruled states in the Middle East are in a dither about what to do against this threat to their flagging hegemony. The U.S. under Bush and Condi Rice don’t have a clue as evidenced by their actions there and in the debacle in southern Lebanon for Israel and the free world.
The debacle for Israel in southern Lebanon is the product of flagging U.S. policy interests in the Middle East in the midst of a rancorous mid term Congressional election where the Bush Administration wants to shore up its image as tough on national security issues. Without that resonating in the American body polity, they will doubtless lose seats in both the House and Senate. That is behind Bush’s pronouncements in his press conference on August 21st centered on fighting terror groups abroad prevents them from coming here (if he only knew!). Then there is the tattered canard about preserving the fig leaf of support for ‘democracy’ in largely Shia Iraq. This is a non sequitur given that Shiism espouses a virulent form of political Islam that precludes ‘competitive’ institutions like a parliamentary democracy.
So Rice and Bush were the supposed errant master puppeteers who pulled the strings on feckless Olmert? Give me a break. The Kadima cabinet did itself in by responding every which way but straight up. It lacked a rod of iron in its proverbial backbone to defend Israel’s security interests.
The result was the debacle of the 34 day mini-war in Lebanon. Sheik Nasrallah and Iran virtually control a weak Lebanese coalition government headed by what my friend Andy Bostom called a ’secular Sunni Dhimmi’, P.M. Fuad Siniora.
Iran makes the U.S. and Israel dance to its war drum of feigned ‘nuclear enrichment’ while co-opting Russia, China and the Euros with bags of money, arms, and oil deals. All the while drugging and impoverishing the citizens of Iran. Condi desperate to preserve the failing Lebanese regime then twists the arm of ‘puppet’ Israel once more to open a dialogue with whom, Syria, Iran’s toady ally. Sounds like Munich 1938-style appeasement to me.
If this speculative scenario has the merest scintilla of truth there is at least one group of Americans, Christians United for Israel (CUFI) representing 50 to 70 million charismatic and Baptist Christians who would be incensed with the Bush administration antics and raise ‘holy heck’ with the White House. A White House desperate to burnish its malformed reputation as the party most Americans feel ‘comfortable’ with when it comes to national security and the war against : ‘terrorists and radical elements’ as Bush spun a new euphemism during his Monday press conference
Thus did Bush’s espousing ‘Islamofascism’ as a threat in the region have a half life of a week. After the Oval Office got tons of adverse snail and email from Saudi and Arab front groups and their PC Multiculturalists allies driving Secretary of State Condi Rice and Karen Hughes, Bush’s former White House communications director, now the Undersecretary for Public Diplomacy to distraction, the argot changed, watering down the impact.
In the process Bush did the country and the free world a disservice. ‘The statre within a state in Lebanon led by Shia Islamofascist Sheik Nasrallah is de facto the government in Lebanon.
And the Democrats? As my cousin Vinny in Brooklyn would artfully put it: FERGETABOUTIT!! They are betwixt and between ‘bring the boys home, now’ versus ‘set up a schedule’ for retreat from the Middle East. You only have to look at how Democratic leaders have ‘rallied around’ tyro U.S. Senate Candidate in Connecticut, Ned Lamont, the one trick pony, anti-Iraq War candidate. After three term Democratic Senator Joe Lieberman was defeated in a primary battle on August 8th in the nutmeg state. The Fools!
Give me Canadian Progressive Conservative PM Stephen Harper and his Parliamentary Secretaries like Jason Kenney any time. At least they know an Islamofascist when they see one. But then Harper comes from Canada’s prarie provinces akin in attitudes and views to what i call ‘bubbaland’ in the heartland of the U.S. They know how to call a spade a spade when it comes to errant Liberal and NDP parliamentarians who travel to Lebanon to meet with the ‘devil:’ Hezbollah.
So has Israel been ‘bushwhacked?’ You be the judge.
Sic Gloria Transit Bush land and Israel agonistes!
Right on, Jerry
Comment by Ted Belman
— August 22, 2006 @ 9:52 pm
Was Israel ‘Bush’-Whacked?…
The Debkafile report, ‘U.S. called the war shots’ and comments by Israpundit editor, Ted Belman raise the question of whether Israel let itself be ‘bushwhacked’ into the debacle of a defeat in southern Lebanon against Islamofascism terror group Hez…
Trackback by Hyscience
— August 22, 2006 @ 10:02 pm
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Politics/9116.htm
Israeli Insider paints an entirely different picture and one that seems more in tune with the bits and pieces actually filtering through the media. Debka is totally schizophrenic in their articles–throughout this latest war one day it would be a doom and gloom piece about how badly Israel was getting its ass kicked and the next day about how much ass they were kicking. I very much doubt Bush and Condi the Puppeteers hypothesis and subscribe to the vastly more probable Olmert the dove second guessing his generals. The US gave Israel the green light–all the talking heads in the media were name dropping Syria and Iran left and right and talking about the need for a major ground offensive in the first week or so of the conflict (well, all the conservative ones anyway). The window was open and Olmert crumbled, that simple. Never send a dove to do the job of a hawk. Bush, at the least, and possibly even Condi, wanted the Hizzy gang crushed, Syria crushed, and Iran on the ropes for the knockout. Olmert screwed Israel and America (and everyone else who wants to live in a world free from Islamic rule). If anything, it seems more likely to me that the US allowed that disgrace of a UN Resolution to pass once it became clear Olmert didn’t have the balls to finish the job because they knew that his political life in Israel would be over when the resolution passed. Now Olmert likely gets the boot, a hawk comes into power, and Israel and the US can finish the job.
So the only bushwhacking going on is the whack job Olmert, and every liberal government does to themselves and their people when confronted with terror.
Comment by Rg73
— August 22, 2006 @ 10:18 pm
OBVIOUSLY THE ISRAEL INSIDER ARTICLE TELLS A VERY DIFFERENT STORY THAN DOES DEBKA. The question is, did Olmert act on his own to hold the IDF back or was he following orders.
Comment by Ted Belman
— August 22, 2006 @ 10:42 pm
Rg73 & Ted
I’m not sure how to reconcile the debka report with the Israelinsider report. I doubt the US “orders” Israel, however, it would be fair to say the US has significant influence. Hopefully these questions will be able to be answered.
In any event, given the type of military campaign with precision bombing followed by ground troops there was no way an enemy as powerful and well dug in as Hezbollah could be defeated in only 34 days. To do this, even under ideal circumstances, would have taken at least three months and probably longer. Of course, if Israel wanted to do a Dresden type attack, Hezbollah could be defeated much faster but neither Israel nor the US want to do this. When the next round occurrs, we will need to be prepared to go much longer than a month.
Comment by B.Poster
— August 22, 2006 @ 11:08 pm
Rg73
Oh how I hope you are right!! Unfortunately I’m not that confident that Bush has either the courage or the competence you seem to attribute to him. The bottom line is, short of nuking Lebanon or hittting it like Dresden was hit during WWII, there is simply no way an enemy as powerful as Hezbollah can be defeated in only about a month. I think American and Israeli leadership failed at all levels.
Iran, Syria, Lebanon and Hezbollah will make sure there is another round to this. For the next round, American and Israeli leaders will need to show more back bone. Having the back bone to stick this out to a successful conclusion will probably have a serious economic cost and it will not be easy but doing the right thing never is easy.
Comment by B.Poster
— August 22, 2006 @ 11:14 pm
B. Poster,
The hizzies could be defeated in a month.
Take Bekaa - their supply base. Syria comes in due to the threat to their weak economy of the loss of smuggling profits.
Then Hizbollah has to make it on what can be smuggled from Iran by sea routes. i.e. they get strangled.
Comment by M. Simon
— August 23, 2006 @ 2:21 am
Many Right wing politicians in Israel confirm that the US did not want Siniora to fall and that Rice and Burns both pressured Olmert not to start sending in the troops towards the Litani, prior to the UNSC resolution.
The only country which stands beside Israel, being the US, the Israeli government is forced to bend to their wishes.
The other question to which no one has found an answer is, why did Rice accept the contents of resolution 1701, which is so full of gaps, that it does not bring the 2 soldiers back and also does not give the authority to the Lebanese and UN forces to disarm Hezbollah. Without such a step the next war is on the horizon.
Comment by imre
— August 23, 2006 @ 2:39 am
Regarding the two captured soldiers mentioned in comment eight, no cease-fire would have been possible if it had been conditioned on their prior return. Remember the agreement is between the UN, Israel and Lebanon - not Hizb’Allah. Someone wanted a cease-fire, so the soldiers were sacrificed. Since Olmert had to know that his position would be substantially weakened by permitting such an outcome, it was probably Rice who insisted upon leaving the prisoners out of the resolution - unless Olmert is such a cad that ending the conflict was more important than these men. It could have been Annan, Rice and Olmert - the most likely scenario. We need more evidence.
Regarding Debka.com, this site makes its reputation on being accurate. I do not see it as “entertainment” since its sources would dry up in a hurry if it sensationalized its reporting, as would its “important” reading audience. Such is my feeling, but I too need more evidence. Using declarative sentences does not guarantee accuracy. We live in an era of “manufactured consent.” Perhaps, “Israeli sources” decided that saving Olmert was more important than cuddling with Bush and Rice. Naw, couldn’t be.
More evidence!
Comment by jerry
— August 23, 2006 @ 3:51 am
There is no question that Bush set down guidelines like don’t weaken Siniori. He said it himself. He also gave cover for everything Israel was doing. Thus he must have had a part in determining what Israel did.
Comment by Ted Belman
— August 23, 2006 @ 4:01 am
M. Simon,
You could be right. I’m just not optimisitc that Hezbollah could be defeated in only a month. Barring a nuclear attack or a Dreseden type bombing campaign I think it would take three months minimum and probably longer.
American and Israeli leaders should have been prepared to go on for longer than one month. Five years after 911 and after an Iraq situation that has proven far more difficult than anyone thought it is hard to believe we would still be underestimating our enemies but it seems we still are. For the next round, hopefully American and Israeli leaders will find their spine.
Comment by B.Poster
— August 23, 2006 @ 9:00 am
Ted & Jerry
I’m becoming increasingly concerned about this “Democracy” thing that the Bush administration is pushing. This does us no good if people if people vote for Islamic extremists. The mere fact that people vote does not matter. What matters is how they vote. So far the results are not encouraging.
It is clear that American and Israeli security hinge largely on reforming the middle east while acting to check Russia and China. Democracy might work. So far no one has come up with a better idea, however, it needs to be properly implemented. So far two BIG mistakes have been made. These are as follows: 1.)When the US invaded Iraq, it failed to secure its borders. This allowed the “insurgents” to get supplies and it allowed Iran to gain a foothold in the now liberated Iraq. 2.) When the US pushed for elections in Iraq, Lebanon, and the “Palestinian” territories, Islamic extremists were allowed into the political process. Islamic extremists are incompatible with liberty. As such, they have no place in a democratic process. A better approach might be to support an interim dictator who can gradually move these people towards a democratic process.
Lebanon allowed Hezbollah to set up its operations in Lebanon. Lebanon’s leaders could not wait to get on tv praising Hezbollah. Lebanon is no friend of the US or Israel. I think the war with Lebanon should have ripped away this facade. Again, allowing Islamic extremists into a democratic political process was a mistake. We should not be trying to prop up this government. We should be looking to replace it, probably with a dictator who can move their people in the direction of a Democratic process. Even this option has risks. The dictator could betray us.
While it is clear that Bush did not want the Lebanese government to fall, he has also said that Israel acts in its own soverignty and another Bush administration has said the US does not tell Israel how to defend itself, however, I think it is fair to say the US has substantial influence over Israel.
The bottom line is, if Bush wanted to provide cover for an invasion of Lebanon to destroy Hezbollah and Israel wanted to do it, the Americans and the Israelis would have needed to be prepared to keep the invasion going for longer than a month.
Seeing this through to completion may have had tremendous economic costs for the US and in the short run it may have been increased the risks of terrorists attacks, however, it will only cost more later. Hopefully, for the next round, American and Israeli leaders will have the intestinal fortitude to see this through to completion.
Right now I’m ashamed of America’s leadership. It has been disgraceful. Hopefully, for the next round of this fight that this enemy will force on us, America’s leaders will have more intestinal fortitude to place doing what is right ahead of economic or political interests.
Comment by B.Poster
— August 23, 2006 @ 10:02 am
Jerry
Can you explain what you mean about Iran and “feigned” nuclear enrichment? Are you thinking that this is not for real? Probably you have something else in mind?
Comment by Felix Quigley
— August 23, 2006 @ 1:39 pm
The real problem is that there is no real war on terrorism. It was designed to placate the American masses.The US govt ruling elite and State dept are huge self-serving liars who commit war crimes just like the Former Yugoslavia! And which side did they take??????? At least the US public knows better but there govt has mimicked royalty for WAY TOO LONG!
Comment by t
— August 23, 2006 @ 3:00 pm
Felix:
What I meant by ‘feigned’ is that Iran probably already has purchased nuclear devices from rogue groups such as Pakistan, North Korea and even the Stans-formerly SSRs in the post evil empire days. Thus, Iran has invested billions in a nuclear development program as a diversion from their real nuclear terrorism dealings. When the Soviet Union broke up my hunch is that Iran’s Quds intelligence unit of the Revolutionary Guards agents made some deals with Russian and ’stans military groups who had the keys to suitcase size nucs or the makings of so-called dirty bombs. They probably got the infamous Dr. Khan -the developer of Pakistan’s Islamic bomb to get Iran the triggering devices and associated technology to enable these nuclear terror devices. There is speculation that the Boeing aircraft sent to North Korea for the infamous Taepodong Missile launches beside disgorging Iranian telemetry experts took back nuclear deivces in sealed lead wrapped cargo cocoons. The scary thought is whether Iran’s Revolutionary Guards also provided such nuclear terror devices to say Hezbollah in Lebanon. According to Ken Timmerman, the whole nuclear enrichment process actually began back in 1995, when the Russians offered Iran the technology in exchange, in part, for not supporting the Chechen rebels. You may recall that the former Soviet 40th Army was vanquished from Afghanistan by the Mujihadeen backed by the CIA and Saudis, thus giving us the gift of Osama bin Laden and al Qaeda. The Russians were desperate to prevent that from taking root in the Caucasus, so hence the deal struck with the Islamic Republic of Iran.
Fanatics with nuclear devices are very dangerous. That it why one should be professionally paranoid and not engage in wishful thinking that the Mad Mahdist nuclear bomb is ‘years away.’ I believe they have the capability now. But then it’s simply my belief, Felix.
Thanks.
Comment by Jerry Gordon
— August 23, 2006 @ 5:45 pm
[…] Read the rest of this post […]
Pingback by Israel/Lebanon Conflict / Israel: bushwhacked?
— August 26, 2006 @ 3:28 pm