Middle East Meltdown and US Foreign Policy.

Discussion in 'Politics' started by SouthAmerica, Jul 13, 2006.

  1. .

    July 13, 2006

    SouthAmerica: The cover story on the current issue of Time magazine “The End of Cowboy Diplomacy” – it does not tell the real story regarding what is wrong with American diplomacy around the world.

    A better cover story for Time magazine would be: “The End of Affirmative Action at the State Department Concluded With a Meltdown in US Foreign Policy Around The World” – After the latest fiascos, this time around, George W. Bush should hire a real Secretary of State. The time to play “Affirmative Action” with US diplomacy it is over.

    The United States foreign policy is in complete disarray – it does not matter in which part of the world you look at. From Asia, to South America, from Russia to the Middle East, from the Sudan to Somalia – US foreign policy looks like it is run by a bunch of incompetent amateurs. I wonder where James Baker or people of his caliber are when American foreign policy is going though a complete meltdown?

    I don’t know why George Bush Senior is not calling “Jr.” to tell him that it is time to wake up and bring the heavy guns – James Baker would be an acceptable choice right now – before the entire Middle East is engulfed in a gigantic Civil War.

    Today we have only “Idiots” running US foreign policy – we need people not only with diplomatic abilities, but also smart people with common sense.

    In the United Nations, the US Ambassador acts more like a Rottweiler towards the other nations than a diplomat.

    The United States needs very badly a new Secretary of State and a new US ambassador to the represent the US at the United Nations.

    In the meantime – we continue the meltdown in US foreign policy.

    The lights are on at the US State Department, but nobody is home.


    The article below is from A Folha de Sao Paulo of July 13, 2006 – a major Brazilian newspaper – and one of the front page stories mention that when Israel attacked Lebanon last night in Srifa, in the South of Lebanon – in one of the houses that were destroyed by the bombs they killed a family of four – the parents and two children – the four people had double citizenship – they were Lebanese and they also held a Brazilian citizenship.


    “Ataque de Israel mata família brasileira no sul do Líbano”
    A Folha de Sao Paulo

    O casal de libaneses naturalizado brasileiro Akil Merhei e Ahlam Jabir e seus dois filhos nascidos no Brasil-- um menino de oito anos e uma menina de quatro-- morreram na noite desta quarta-feira em um ataque aéreo de Israel contra Srifa, no sul do Líbano.

    A recente onda de violência entre Israel e Líbano, iniciada após a morte de oito soldados israelenses e o seqüestro de outros dois ontem, pelo grupo terrorista libanês Hizbollah, já deixou várias vítimas de ambos os lados: um morto e 90 feridos em Israel contra 47 mortos e 103 feridos no Líbano.

    Segundo o cônsul-geral do Brasil no Líbano, Michael Gepp, havia dez pessoas na casa onde o casal estava com as duas crianças no momento do ataque.

    Gepp disse que o casal era libanês e se naturalizou brasileiro depois de morar em São Paulo por alguns anos, onde os dois filhos nasceram. Ele não soube informar em que período o casal viveu no Brasil, já que não há registro de sua passagem pelo país no consulado.

    O cônsul informou ainda que as quatro vítimas possuíam dupla nacionalidade --brasileira e libanesa. Os restos mortais da família não serão repatriados e devem ser enterrados no Líbano.

    Segundo Gepp, o Consulado brasileiro no Líbano tem recebido muitas ligações de brasileiros preocupados com a tensão crescente na região. "Muitos se preocupam com a forma como deixarão o país, já que o aeroporto internacional de Beirute foi atacado por Israel", diz.

    No entanto, ele diz que o Consulado já toma providências para auxiliar aqueles que querem deixar o Líbano. "Se Deus quiser, não acontecerá nada a nenhum deles", diz.

    De acordo com o Itamaraty, não houve pedido de assistência consular por parte de parentes dos quatro brasileiros mortos, mas o Ministério acompanha o caso…..

  2. .

    July 14, 2006

    SouthAmerica: Below is an interesting piece from a British newspaper published on July 14, 2006 regarding Bush’s foreign policy and the Middle East Meltdown.

    But first, if you did watch the Jon Stewart Show last night you saw George W. Bush make a complete fool of himself in Germany during the press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel. He went on and on about some pig that he was going to have for dinner last night. By the expression on her face German Chancellor Angela Merkel was not amused by George’s remarks about the pig. The expression on her face was saying “This guy must be a real Moron” when George was making his silly remarks about the pig.

    When they opened the floor for the reporters to ask questions – a report asked Bush a question about the escalating conflict on the Middle East between Israel and Lebanon.

    Instead of saying something intelligent for a change – George W. Bush told the report: “I thought you were going to ask me a question about the pig.”

    George W. Bush is becoming an international embarrassment for the American people – we have a complete "Jackass" representing the United States around the world.


    Here is a clip from a newspaper article regarding George’s meeting with the German Chancellor Merkel on July 13, 2006:

    BERLIN, July 13 - U.S. President George W. Bush and German Chancellor Angela Merkel held talks on Thursday amid an escalating conflict in the Middle East between Israel and Lebanon.

    Bush, on a brief stopover to Germany's northern port city of Stralsund, Merkel's constituency, en route to Russia for the Group of Eight (G8)summit, accused Hezbollah of jeopardizing peace in the Middle East.

    Israel has a right to defend itself, the president told reporters in a joint press conference.

    Bush's remarks followed Israel's intensified attacks against Lebanon in response to a cross-border raid by Hezbollah guerrillas on Wednesday during which two Israeli soldiers were captured.

    "My attitude is this: there are a group of terrorists who want to stop the advance of peace," he said. …


    “Bush's indifference drives conflict”
    Simon Tisdall
    Friday July 14, 2006
    The Guardian - UK

    Israel's assault on Lebanon, following Hizbullah's cross-border raid on Wednesday and weeks of unremitting bloodshed in Gaza, brought demands yesterday for international action to contain the crisis and mediate an end to the fighting. But the US, with its unmatched influence over Israel and as self-appointed guardian of the Middle East peace process, appeared reluctant to intervene.

    Lebanon's appeal for the UN security council to step in is supported by most Arab governments and by France, Lebanon's former colonial master and the current security council president.

    But the council has been vainly trying for a fortnight to agree a resolution on Gaza, with the US threatening to use its veto in defence of Israel. A consensus on the more complicated, fast-moving crisis now engulfing Lebanon is thus unlikely.

    Other international bodies with pretensions to global peacemaking, such as Nato and the EU - part of the Middle East "quartet" - are currently reduced to the role of concerned bystanders. Russia says it will table the issue at this weekend's St Petersburg G8 summit. But that may only serve to underscore international divisions.

    George Bush's administration warned yesterday of the dangers of destabilising Lebanon. But it otherwise made no serious attempt to curb Israel's offensive. Its spokesmen stuck instead to their favoured hands-off formula: "We are urging restraint on both sides [while] recognising Israel's right to defend itself," said a senior US official accompanying the president in Germany.

    Mr Bush was vaguer when asked what he intended to do to prevent the violence spiralling out of control. "My attitude is this: there are a group of terrorists who want to stop the advance of peace. Those of us who are peace living (sic) must work together to help the agents of peace," he said.

    Mr Bush's non-committal statements were widely interpreted as unqualified support for Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert's effort not only to free captured Israeli soldiers but also inflict as much damage as possible on Hizbullah and Hamas in the process.

    That in turn will strengthen regional perceptions that this US administration, unlike those of Bill Clinton and George Bush Sr, is unable or unwilling to play the honest broker.

    Analysts suggest there is another reason for Washington's diffidence: US influence and standing in the region is at a historic low ebb, partly because of Iraq. "The worsening conflict in the Middle East is a blatant reflection of the weakness of the American partner," Yossi Beilin, a former Israeli cabinet minister, told Haaretz newspaper.

    The US had been reduced to "pretty much sitting on the sidelines," said Dennis Ross, a former Clinton peace envoy. "We're preoccupied in Iraq, we're obviously preoccupied with Iran, and now we're concerned about North Korea. And in the middle of it all we have a crisis in the Middle East that we're just not engaged with," he told the Los Angeles Times.

    US leverage with many of the regional protagonists is poor or non-existent. The US has effectively cut diplomatic relations with Syria and encouraged talk of regime change in Damascus. It regards Palestine's elected Hamas government, like Hizbullah's political wing, as a wholly terrorist grouping and refuses to deal with either.

    And its confrontation with Iran, whose hostile hand US officials claim to see at work throughout the region, hit new depths this week when the US spearheaded a move to refer Tehran's nuclear programme to the UN for possible punitive sanctions.

    Even traditionally pro-western governments such as Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, no friends to Hizbullah or Hamas, have been alienated by the US "war on terror" and hectoring pro-democracy policies since 9/11, as has much Arab and Muslim opinion.

    The Bush administration alone can rein in Israel. Its reluctance to do so may mean there is no quick end to the fighting - and even less chance that Washington will be trusted in the longer term to forge a just and lasting regional settlement.

  3. Same ol' song.

    What ever will you do when a new President is elected? What will you write about?
  4. It's kind of ironic that the so-called international community which passionately hates and despises the US now all of a sudden needs the US and expects the US to interfere and prevent the escalation of violence in the middle-east.

    Well, those other nations in the UN act more like Rottweilers towards Israel but that does not seem to bother you a bit. Russia lectures Israel on war crimes and Sudan on human rights. LOL I don't disagree with your assessment of this administration and its foreign policy though.
  5. Friday July 14, 7:36 PM
    Vatican condemns Israel for attacks on Lebanon
    VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - The Vatican on Friday strongly deplored Israel's strikes on Lebanon, saying they were "an attack" on a sovereign and free nation.

    Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Angelo Sodano said Pope Benedict and his aides were very worried that the developments in the Middle East risked degenerating into "a conflict with international repercussions."

    "In particular, the Holy See deplores right now the attack on Lebanon, a free and sovereign nation, and assures its closeness to these people who already have suffered so much to defend their independence," he told Vatican Radio.

    Israel struck Beirut airport again on Friday and bombed Lebanese roads, power supplies and communication networks in a widening campaign after Hizbollah guerrillas seized two Israeli soldiers and killed eight.

    Sodano said the Vatican condemned both "terroristic attacks" and military reprisals.

    Hizbollah, which wants to trade its captives for prisoners held in Israel, has showered rockets across the frontier in its fiercest bombardment since 1996 when Israel launched a 17-day blitz against southern Lebanon and Hizbollah.

    But Sodano reserved his harshest words for Israel.

    "The right of defence on the part of a state does not exempt it from its responsibility to respect international law, particularly regarding the safeguarding of civilian populations," he said.
  6. Why does the Pope hate America?
  7. .

    Ivanovich: What ever will you do when a new President is elected? What will you write about?


    July 14, 2006

    SouthAmerica: I never wrote anything bashing Bill Clinton and his administration. As a matter of fact no prior American president bothered me the way that this one does it. I did disagree with the policies of prior presidents including Carter, Reagan, George Bush Sr. and so on, but I never felt so disgusted about any US president (Republican or Democrat) until this Jackass got into power.

    If the US elects another president such as Bill Clinton then you will not see any postings from me about the US president. But if the American people elect another “Jackass” such as George W. Bush – then I will continue bashing the new idiot who becomes US president.

    It is that simple.

  8. What's not to hate?
  9. .

    Quote from southamerica:

    "In the United Nations, the US Ambassador acts more like a Rottweiler towards the other nations than a diplomat."

    Dddooo: Well, those other nations in the UN act more like Rottweilers towards Israel but that does not seem to bother you a bit.


    July 14, 2006

    SouthAmerica: When I posted the above quote yesterday I could not change it a half hour later because the software does not allow you to make changes after a short period of time. I posted the same info on other message boards and this is how the corrected posting should read: “In the United Nations, the US Ambassador acts more like a Rottweiler towards the other nations instead of being a diplomat.”

    If a return to peace in the Middle East depends on the diplomatic abilities of John Bolton (the Rottweiler) at the United Nations - then the world is in real trouble; the beginning of WW III is a better bet.

    You are right about your remark. I am not worried about Israel. They are big boys and they can take care of themselves. If they have a war engulfing the entire Middle East I would not be surprised to see Israel winning the war against the entire Arab world. They did it once and they can do it again.

    Israel has very powerful nuclear weapons and they probably have the best army in the world. Why should I worry about Israel? They are big boys and they have the capabilities to protect their country and their people.

    But the same is not true about the Palestinian people - And they are the ones who need the protection of the UN and of the rest of the world.

  10. You whine and bitch and complain every time the US interferes in an international conflict, now when the US does not interfere you're accusing it of doing nothing. You are not worried about Israel because they have powerful weapons and the best army but every time israel uses 1/100 of its military power you bitch, whine, scream bloody murder and run to the UN. Your views are intellectually dishonest.

    Oh but that part is easy, tell them to release the hostages and stop shelling Israeli towns and they can have their Lebanon and Gaza back, no one wants those shitholes populated by those assholes anyway.
    #10     Jul 14, 2006