Posted on 05/27/2006 2:25:13 PM PDT by streetpreacher
This is a WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
Friday, May 26, 2006
3rd intifada coming thanks to Bush Posted: May 26, 2006 1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Patrick J. Buchanan © 2006 Creators Syndicate Inc.
When there is no solution, there is no problem, observed James Burnham, the former Trotskyite turned Cold War geostrategist.
Burnham's insight came again to mind as President Bush ended his meeting with Ehud Olmert by announcing that the Israeli prime minister had brought with him some "bold ideas" for peace.
And what bold ideas might that be?
Olmert wants Bush to remain steadfast in refusing to talk to the Hamas-dominated Palestinian Authority. He wants U.S. support for Israel's wall that is fencing in large slices of the West Bank and all of Jerusalem, forever denying the Palestinians a viable state. He wants U.S. recognition of Israeli-drawn lines as the final borders of Israel. And he wants America to remove the "existential threat" of Iran.
In the six months before he proceeds unilaterally with this Sharon-Olmert plan, he will be happy to talk with Mahmoud Abbas, the isolated Palestinian president he has called "powerless."
What is the Bush plan to advance our interests in the Middle East? There is none. For five years, the Bush policy has been to sign off on whatever Sharon put in front of him. And now that Bush is weak, he is not going to pick a fight he cannot win and, in candor, he does not want.
For Bush has signed on to the Sharon agenda. And if he had a policy that clashed with the Sharon-Olmert plan, political realities would prevent his pursuing it.
Consider: Suppose Bush declared that Ehud Olmert's proposed withdrawals from the West Bank were insufficient, that an official Palestinian presence in East Jerusalem was imperative, and that the United States needed to aid the Palestinians whom Israel is starving out and to talk in back channels to Hamas, even as we talked to Libya's Col. Gadhafi to convince him to give up terrorism and his weapons of mass destruction.
Bush's and America's stock might rise worldwide. But here in the United States, it would be another story altogether.
We would hear the cry of "Munich!" from neoconservatives, echoed by evangelical Christians and the religious right. "Bibi" Netanyahu would be a fixture on Fox News, which would be asking hourly if Bush had taken leave of his senses.
Republican congressmen would be force-bused to the next AIPAC convention to repudiate the Bush policy. Rep. Nancy Pelosi and Sen. Harry Reid, seeing an opening to win back Jewish votes lost to Bush, would introduce a resolution putting Congress behind Olmert, against Bush.
Then, as his father did on the loan guarantees for Israel that he briefly held up in 1991, Bush would capitulate.
Thus Israel will pursue the Sharon-Olmert plan to completion. There will be withdrawals from isolated settlements and outposts, but no negotiations with a Palestinian Authority to agree on permanent borders and two states.
The West Bank wall will soon encompass all of the suburbs of Jerusalem for miles around. Palestine will be divided into three parts: Gaza and two enclaves on the West Bank. There will be no Palestinian official presence in Jerusalem. No viable nation.
Meanwhile, America will be called upon for new sums of money to subsidize the Sharon-Olmert plan, even as we are prodded to do our duty and emasculate Iran.
As Olmert is the pilot setting the course, and Bush has signed on as crew to his "bold ideas," our destination is easy to foresee.
The United States alone will recognize Israel's new borders, and her annexations of the West Bank and Arab East Jerusalem as Israel's exclusive capital. Israel will ask for and the United States will accede to Israel's request that we commit ourselves militarily to defend Israel's new frontiers. No Arab government will recognize the new borders. America's Arab friends will be further estranged.
Every demagogue bidding for power in the Islamic world will, like Iran's Ahmadinejad, play the Palestinian card.
The suffering of the Palestinian people under the U.S.-Israeli sanctions regime will further radicalize them into hating us as they do Israel. The struggle between Hamas and Fatah over diminishing aid and resources will intensify, degenerating into civil war. Iran will move into the vacuum. Eventually, with aid cut off and no hope of negotiations, Hamas will revert to terror and the third intifada will begin.
Western Europe, its Muslim populations growing in numbers and militancy, will neither recognize Israel's borders nor endorse U.S. policy. Europe is not going to side with 5 million Israelis, whom they believe to be in the wrong, against 300 million Arabs, who will be 500 million at mid-century.
Rightly, Americans say we will not let Israel be destroyed. But why must we acquiesce in Israel's annexations of Arab land? Why must we remain silent to her deprivations of the Palestinians?
These questions will puzzle the historians who investigate the astonishing and swift end to U.S. hegemony in the 21st century. Related offer:
Definitive work on Mideast available only here!
HOT OFFERS!
Pat Buchanan's newest book, "Where the Right Went Wrong," reveals why America is being led to disaster ... and how to save our country.
"Death of the West" warns of cataclysmic shifts in world power.
If you'd rather order by phone, call WND's toll-free customer service line at 1-800-4WND-COM (1-800-496-3266).
Pat Buchanan was twice a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination and the Reform Partys candidate in 2000. He is also a founder and editor of The American Conservative. Now a political analyst for MSNBC and a syndicated columnist, he served three presidents in the White House, was a founding panelist of three national TV shows, and is the author of seven books.
|
|
An enemy of Israel is Pat's friend, no matter who that enemy is or what they stand for.
There goes Pat....at least he doesn't even try to "couch" his anti-semitism.
I also hear his in thing of running for POTUS again...this could be a plank in his platform.
Small tent party...LOL
I imagine a lot of anti-war conservatives wish Pat would stop taking their side.
He says that as if it would satisfy the palis and something would be gained other than demands for further acquiescence. What a shortsighted fool. On second thought, I think he knows exactly what would happen.
Buchanan seems to have the good old Megalomaniac complex, IMO.
Of course, if his lordship was the ruler of the U.S., and by extension the world (as he seems to see it), there would be Peace In Our Time!
What a Maroon!
He wants U.S. support for Israel's wall that is fencing in large slices of the West Bank and all of Jerusalem, forever denying the Palestinians a viable state.
The Palestinians themselves have denied a viable Palestinian
state over and over again for the chance at the destruction
of Israel and it's Jewish population.
Viable State? Let them move to Jordan, or Egypt or Saud.
Jeruselum is the capital of All Israel and nothing else.
And then he says that he hates the damn jews and Hitler was right and.. and...
You just know where people are coming from when the term
"American Hegemony" creeps into their lexicon.
Bush does not negotiate with terrorists.
(Denny Crane: "Every one should carry a gun strapped to their waist. We need more - not less guns.")
Buchanan?... you must be joking.
There are times when I agree with Pat Buchanan, but not this time. He keeps saying "no Arab nations will recognize Israel's borders" if they build the wall, but of course no Arab nations will ever recognize the existance of Israel. He claims Israel is "starving out" the poor Palestinians when in fact Israel and the EU have supported them for so many years. It is not Israel's fault if Palestinians cannot learn to feed themselves or develop an economy. The whole Palestinian culture is one of victimization and occupation so they never learn to grow crops, make goods, look around them. What would Pat have as a viable Palestinian state? Perhaps from the river Jordan to the sea.
Stoopid Pres. Bush shouldn't be President! He stole the election from Pat jess like he did from Al Gore. Instead of stoopid Bush, people need a genius like Pat to rule over them and he will solve all the world's problems by blaming the Joos for them. Oops! I mean blaming the neocons (hope no one heard the previous remark). /sarcasm
Key point right there. Besides, to be entirely consistent as a paleoconservative with a traditionalist foreign policy (which I wholeheartedly subscribe to), he should be advocating "no role" for the U.S. in the middle east with Israel or the Arab states.
I think if left alone, Israel could not only take care of themselves but would clean house if need be. Arab countries would be put on notice that no longer will America be tying Israel's hands when it comes to dealing with terrorism or existential threats.
America has done more harm than good concerning Israel as of late. If it weren't for our pressure, Israel would have never surrendered any of her land.
I am not in favor of the US trying to micromanage Israeli affairs, or to force compliance with some "road map". That map leads to a bad place.
My sentiments are not fair and balanced; I am a Zionist. I would no sooner give Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians than to give Aztlan to the Mexicans.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.