Pirro Weighs in on Lebanon
Last week, NY Attorney General candidate Jeanine Pirro weighed in on the turmoil in Lebanon, stating that "the root of this problem is Hezbollah. Hezbollah is as much an enemy of the Lebanese people as it is of the Israeli people." OK, but then she went on to say that "at the end of the day, [Israeli attacks on Lebanon] will benefit Lebanon."
Uh, really?
This would be yet more typical Republican claptrap, except it's made interesting by the fact that she herself is Lebanese-American (this, by the way, is the first time I've ever heard her allude to her ancestry publicly).
And if you're curious, check out this list of famous Arab-Americans, which contains a lot of surprises (Nina Van Horn is half Egyptian? Fabulous).
Uh, really?
This would be yet more typical Republican claptrap, except it's made interesting by the fact that she herself is Lebanese-American (this, by the way, is the first time I've ever heard her allude to her ancestry publicly).
And if you're curious, check out this list of famous Arab-Americans, which contains a lot of surprises (Nina Van Horn is half Egyptian? Fabulous).
posted by Solomon Grundy @ 12:25 PM
9 Comments:
At 2:17 PM,
Solomon Grundy said…
Ah, like a certain Lebanese-Syrian gay that we know. Still, it's surprising that any Lebanese person is supportive of this bombing, even of the south. I mean, that quote was from about a week ago, but still, no mention of a ceasefire or anything about the imbalance of the military action.
Last Sunday on This Week with George Stephanopoulos, the normally anodyne Madeleine Albright was fuming about the Bush administration's bungling of the situation. She basically called Condi and the rest incompetent and wondered why Condi didn't immediately fly to the region (Albright called it "a turning point"). I always think Albright represents the kind of traditional, mainstream diplomatic community, and I got the impression that that community is disgusted by the Bushie mishandling of this whole thing.
At 2:28 PM,
Antid Oto said…
You want to be really alarmed? Read this Juan Cole post on how it doesn't appear Bush understands even the most basic elements of what's going on--such as who's fighting whom and why.
At 2:32 PM,
Antid Oto said…
By the way, the particular half-Lebanese Christian you're referring to was rather pro-Hezbollah last time I talked to him about it, though he may not feel the same way now that they're launching rockets at civilians.
At 2:35 PM,
Solomon Grundy said…
He's pro anything that will get him laid.
At 2:44 PM,
Antid Oto said…
I officially declare that unfair and untrue.
At 3:47 PM,
Solomon Grundy said…
Just read the Cole that you linked to. Interesting. It's kind of long, so here are some key passages.
This war has nothing to do with captured Israeli soldiers. It is a long-planned war to increase Israel's ascendency over Hizbullah and its patrons.
...
The Right in Israel is determined to permanently subjugate the Palestinians and forestall the emergence of a Palestinian state. This course of action requires the constant exercise of main force against the Palestinians, who resist it, as well as threats against Arab or Muslim neighbors who might be tempted to help the Palestinians.
...
That this war was pre-planned was obvious to me from the moment it began. The Israeli military proceeded methodically and systematically to destroy Lebanon's infrastructure, and clearly had been casing targets for some time. The vast majority of these targets were unrelated to Hizbullah.
...
Iran is hostile to US corporate investment in the oil-rich Gulf,, and so is a big obstacle to American profit-making in the region. Rumsfeld is worried about Iran's admission as an observer to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which is to say, that he is worried about a budding Chinese-Islamic axis that might lock up petroleum reserves and block US investments.
...
The Bush administration's perceived economic and geopolitical interests thus overlap strongly with Israel's perceived security interests, with both benefitting from an Israeli destruction of Hizbullah. It is not impossible that the US Pentagon urged the Israelis on in this endeavor. They certainly knew about and approved of the plan.
What is scary is that Cheney and Rumsfeld don't appear to have let W. in on the whole thing.
...
Because of their fetish for states, the Neoconservatives of the Bush administration are unable to see that the Levant and points east are now the province of militia-parties that dominate localities and wield asymmetrical paramilitary force in such a way as to stymie states, whether local host states, local adversaries, or imperial Powers. [A long list of various factions] are all arguably as significant actors as states, and often more significant.
...
By its assault on Middle Eastern states, whether it takes the form of military confrontation or of "pressure" to "democratize," Neoconservatism in Washington and Tel Aviv has increased the power and saliency of militia rule throughout the region.
...
The chief outcome of the "war on terror" has been the proliferation of asymmetrical challengers. Israel's assault on the very fabric of the Lebanese state seems likely to weaken or collapse it and further that proliferation. Since asymmetrical challengers often turn to terrorism as a tactic, the "war on terror" has been, at the level of political society below that of high politics and the state, the most efficient engine for the production of terrorism in history.
At 4:08 PM,
Antid Oto said…
For fuck's sake. Do we really have to watch the Democrats play "more pro-Israel-than-thou" until we go to war with Iran?
At 4:25 PM,
Solomon Grundy said…
Come on, Antid Oto. Which side are you on when it comes to the war on terror?
At 4:36 PM,
Solomon Grundy said…
By the way, who's your favorite closeted Arab-American? And I don't mean you-know-who. I mean closeted about being Arab.
I think mine is 80s sensation Tiffany.
Post a Comment
<< Home