Bush and Lebanon: More Ignorant Meddling, More Unintended Consequences

[bigtree]

Quick Syrian Pullout From Lebanon Carries Substantial Risks, Including Security Vacuum

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=545471

BEIRUT, Lebanon Mar 2, 2005 — A speedy Syrian withdrawal from Lebanon may fulfill the dreams of many Lebanese, but lifting the tight lid Syria has kept on its smaller neighbor carries risks: a security vacuum and possible return to sectarian disputes that long bedeviled this country.

>>>>In 1976, the first year of a 15-year civil war, Syrian forces crossed into Lebanon to save Christians from possible defeat at the hands of Muslim and Palestinian-backed leftist forces.

And in 1987, Muslim leaders asked that Syrian troops move into Muslim west Beirut to stop militia street fighting. That July, Syria's top general here intervened after Lebanese troops killed six Shiite Muslims to prevent a riot from spreading into fighting between Shiites and the army.

"If Syria leaves Lebanon uncomfortable, will our situation be stable?" asked the pro-Syria interior minister, Suleiman Franjieh. If Syria withdraws, "it could say it is not responsible for security in this country, and tomorrow every party begins to do what it wants and we know the Lebanese if they do what they want in politics. Within a week we will tear each other up."

Once again our delusional Commander Bush is meddling in affairs that he obviously knows nothing about. As in Iraq, these are regional factions that were, for better or worse, kept in check because of the heavy hand of the Syrians, who were initially invited in to save the hides of the Christians there from the same parties that were supported by the forces which supposedly threatened Israel. What does Bush actually want to achieve in Lebanon? Nothing but glory, and ego-driven bluster is once again substituted for astute management.

"If Syria withdraws. . . within a week we will tear each other up."

[beam me up scottie]

1. I heard him beating his chest on NPR, what a fucking imbecile.

Who died and made him Captain Democracy? He acts like he just invented it.
I can't stand it.

[CAG]

2. Show him a blank map of the middle east

and he wouldn't even be able to get half the countries right. He may be quite possibly the dumbest leader of the free world ever.

[beam me up scottie]

3. Don't forget he thought Africa was a country...

what am I saying? he probably still does.

[Wright Patman]

23. The "free world" is now Europe

The U.S. is the new "evil empire."

[bigtree]

4. This is about nothing but Bush glory or at worse Bush wants to destabilize

Lebanon so that we can have an excuse to invade.

Syria is a secular nation run by Batthists, much like Iraq was. They hate Muslim extremists. Ex-Prime Minister Omar Karami- whose followers targeted a rival politician's office in his hometown of Tripoli on Monday, leaving one person dead- asked last week who would disarm Shiite Hezbollah guerillas if Syria leaves. We're talking about Hezbollah guerillas. The same folks who threaten Israel. Folks who are apparently responsible for the same type of violence that we are condemming in the incident that happened in Tel Aviv the other day.

There may be a legitimate popular uprising in Lebanon. I won't try to judge. But Syria is not as out of line with this administration's policy of objection to Hezbollah as is the anti-Syrian opposition who is friendly with the Hezbollah leadership.

What is the logic behind all of Bush's bluster? They're nothing but lying phonies in this administration who can't see ahead of themselves for licking their own asses.

[beam me up scottie]

6. I haven't heard any of the "evidence" jar jar mclellan has

that puts the perpetrators of the Tel Aviv bombing in Syria.
And I really wonder just who was responsible for killing Hariri.

[bigtree]

8. That would seem to be just another a trumped up attempt make it look like

the country needs our interference; an excuse to interfere militarily.

[theboss]

5. When did Democrats become the "stability above all else" party

I feel like I am through the looking glass here all of a sudden.

Let me get this straight: I am supposed to be against a local, popular uprising against a foreign occupier because it would be..dangerous? Well - and I can't believe I am using a cliche - freedom does have a price.

It's the Lebanese's country. If they want to try it without Syria, that's their choice. God bless them; I hope it works.

[bigtree]

7. And, without making that choice or judgement, I make the point that

Bush, who has been bleating about attacks on Israel, whose own administration regularly denounces Hezbollah, is clamoring to remove the one faction (Syria) that kept the peace in Lebanon, in '87 at the request of the Muslim faction there. What interest does Bush or his administration have in a Lebanon without Syrian control beyond some ignorant personal glory or meddling destabilization?

I think the neonuts in this administration's plan all along has been to create a crisis there so that we can ride in on our military high horse. I won't make a judgement here whether I think it would be better for Syria to leave. Folks definitely have a right to self-determination and non-interference by the U.S. and others. But, this administration is not standing neutral in this. There are factions in Lebanon that are not aligned with the Muslims, with the Shi'ites, who were to some extent, kept at bay by the introduction of Syria's 70,000 some troops. Basically keeping the peace. To invite civil war by encouraging the dissolution of that Syrian contingent would seem to be the most irresponsible choice at this point.

Bush's insincere, ignorant bluster only heightens the conflict, and is certainly contradictory to his administration's stated objectives in that region, and our commitments to the security of Israel.

[beam me up scottie]

9. Not to mention Syria would make a much easier target for

our crippled military than taking on Iran. Although it might backfire on him, after what we did to Iraq, other Arab countries might not be so willing to just sit on the sidelines this time.

[bigtree]

10. It just makes no sense

Bush would cripple or crush the secular Syrian, Batthist rule and ride the backs of the Muslims? to Israel's border? How would that work? What about Jordan? What must they be thinking about their own autonomy?

There is no critical thinking in this administration. Just raw, naked greed and lust for power. Bush stands naked behind herds of sheep when he moves in that region and for the life of me, I can't find any logic in his actions, not even when I take into account his administration's own stated intentions.

[beam me up scottie]

11. I strained the old grey matter over that one today too.

I thought that the idiot-sitters would have kept the muzzle on him to prevent just such outbursts. Are they that myopic? It must be because of the greed, this administration is made up of corporate cronies and their whores, understanding the delicacies of diplomacy was never a prerequisite for the job.
Even so, what the hell are they doing? I have no more family members to send to the middle east as cannon fodder.
Draft anyone?

[beam me up scottie]

12. Check out the article from this new thread.

snip
"Al Hariri's assassination provides the raison d'être for
severing ties with Syria and for transforming Lebanon into a US
vassal."
snip
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x110223

[bigtree]

14. So Bush intends to run over all factions in Syria? Suicide Mission.

You're right. I have no more family members to send to the middle east as cannon fodder, either.

Interesting how the author of that article surmises that the crowds are staged though. The oil pipeline and the water prospects seem likely enough, but to assume that that course will succeed seems even more ludicrous than the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

I don't have to ask though whether Bush and this administration are that stupid.

[Vladimir]

22. Not against the uprising, no

but its also misguided to give political backing to an uprising which:

a) May or may not represent Lebanese popular opinion

b) Could plunge the country into civil war

No one is saying that Bush should give aid to Syria, or tell the protestors to go home. Sections of Lebanese society have wanted Syria out since the late seventies - if they prevail (by whatever means), I will certainly not be shedding any tears over the demise of monsieur Assad. But if Bush's backing for them pushes Syria into a corner and plunges Lebanon into another civil war, that blood will be on our hands, again.

Sometimes, the best opinion to have on revolts and uprisings in the third world is no opinion at all.

[chlamor]

13. Water and Oil Pipeline and...

1) WATER:From 'Ending Syria's Occupation of Lebanon: The U.S. Role', a report of a group chaired by Daniel Pipes and Ziad Abdelnour, in which is buried one of the real reasons for the current events in Lebanon and Syria:

"The Middle East faces the looming problem of water shortages because of both the area's hot and arid climate and its huge population growth. Aside from Turkey (which controls the sources of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers) and Iraq (through which those two rivers flow), the only Middle Eastern country blessed with a substantial supply of fresh water is Lebanon. Its high mountain ranges capture and retain impressive amounts of snow and moisture for several months, much of which eventually feeds subterranean aquifers and artesian wells. The landscape is dotted with springs, small streams, rivulets, and several sizable rivers like the Litani. Between 80 and 90 percent of Lebanon's flowing water, though, is lost for that which is not absorbed into underground storage, ends up in the sea. Assuming all of Lebanon's future water needs can be met using half of this wasted amount, harnessing and distributing the remaining half to neighboring countries like Israel, Syria, and Jordan would be a significant step in alleviating the impending regional water shortage."


2)OIL: Proposed pipeline between Baghdad and Israel runs through Syria and Lebanon

3)Hashish: Grown in southern part of Lebanon-lucrative

The franchised post-modern coup is in progress. It has been branded the "Cedar" revolution. Brought to you by the usual suspects.

[bigtree]

15. ,

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sweetheart]

17. YES! and welcome to DU Herr Shadenfreude

The occupation(s) must end, and i support getting foreign invaders
out of other lands. Syria is no friend of democracy, and as much as
i loathe bush and his cabal, Syria has to recognize that a new age is
upon us, where their actions in violence-support are no longer
recognized.

Self determination! Let the Lebanese people make their own call. This
is not abusurd.

I concur as well with bigtree, in that we should support people in
their self determination... that this "stability" talk IS the problem.

Good news from Lebannon and Egypt. Better news would be equal rights
for women in iran, saudi arabia and afganistan.

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[newyawker99]

25. Hi schadenfreude1!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[DistressedAmerican]

18. It Is All In The Bible!

[Disturbed]

20. The U.S. plan is to...

attack Syria and force a regime change that favors the U.S. and also move into Lebenon to keep the three factions there from continuing their Civil War?

[Avalux]

24. No

the plan is to completely destabalize the Middle East so there will be a confrontation with Israel and of course then the US will have the grounds to obliterate everyone. The oil will remain.

[Avalux]

21. It's all about CHAOS

democracy is the code word for chaos in bushco speak.

[bigtree]

26. Reagan had our troops go to Lebanon as 'peacekeepers'

But he insisted on threatening the Syrians, warning them to stay out of Lebanon. Remember, under the War Powers Act, Congress had to approve the deployment, much like in Iraq, and it gave Reagan the authority.

240+ soldiers were killed in a barracks bombing (by Syrian backed Muslims(?), The Reagan White House blamed Shi’ite fanatics, backed up by the Syrians and set out to punish the neighboring Muslim communities and encampments. Then he withdrew under pressure from the same Congress that gave him permission.

Statement by President Reagan on the Deployment of Marines in Lebanon
(February 7, 1984)

The bloodshed we have witnessed in Lebanon over the last several days only demonstrates once again the length to which the forces of violence and intimidation are prepared to go to prevent a peaceful reconcilliation process from taking place. If a moderate government is overthrown because it had the courage to turn in the direction of peace, what hope can there be that other moderates in the region will risk committing themselves to a similar course?

Yielding to violence and terrorism today may seem to provide temporary relief, but such a course is sure to lead to a more dangerous and less manageable future crisis. Even before the latest outbreak of violence we had been considering ways of reconcentrating our forces and the nature of our support in order to take the initiative away from the terrorists.

Far from deterring us from this course, recent events only confirm the importance of the decisive new steps I want to outline for you now.

Thus, after consultation with our M.N.F. partners and President Gemayel and at his request, we are prepared to do the following:

First to enhance the safety of American and other M.N.F. personnel in Lebanon, I have authorized U.S. naval forces, under the existing mandate of the M.N.F., to provide naval gunfire and air support against any units firing into greater Beirut from parts of Lebanon controlled by Syria as well as against any units directly attacking American or M.N.F. personnel and facilities. Those who conduct these attacks will no longer have sanctuary from which to bombard Beirut at will. We will stand firm to deter those who seek to influence Lebanon's future by intimidation.

Second, when the Government of Lebanon is able to reconstitute itself into a broadly based representative government, we will vigorously accelerate the training, equipping and support of the Lebanese armed forces on whom the primary responsibility rests for maintaining stability in Lebanon. We will speed up delivery of equipment, we will improve the flow of information to help counter hostile bombardments and we will intensify training in counterterrorism to help the Lebanese confront the terrorist threat that poses such danger to Lebanon, to Americans in Lebanon and, indeed, to peace in the Middle East.

Third, in conjunction with these steps, I have asked Secretary of Defense Weinberger to present to me a plan for redeployment of the Marines from Beirut airport to their ships offshore. This redeployment will begin shortly and proceed in stages. U.S. military personnel will remain on the ground in Lebanon for training and equipping the Lebanese Army and protecting the remaining personnel. These are traditional functions that U.S. personnel perform in many friendly countries. Our naval and Marine forces offshore will stand ready, as before, to provide support for the protection of American and other M.N.F. personnel in Lebanon and thereby help assure security in the Beirut area as I have described.

These measures, I believe, will strengthen our ability to do the job we set out to do and to sustain our efforts over the long term. They are consistent with the compromise joint resolution worked out last October with the Congress with respect to our participation in the multinational force.


Talk about a mess. These factions, Christian and Muslim were at each other's throats and peace was not served by our intervention there. Israel was though. That's what fueled the anti-American sentiment that in turn fueled the attacks on our troops.

We should stay the hell out because no matter what we do we will always be seen as aiding one side, Israel, against whatever resistance, Palestinian, Muslim, whoever sponsors that resistance. Sometimes the folks who are supposed to be allied with us fuel attacks on our troops just to draw us further into the mix of conflict.

But Bush and his cabal don't care, of course, one wit about peace in the region. As Sparosnare points out, all they want is chaos so that they can move our troops into the vacumn and reestablish a base of influence that would ultimately serve our own interests there. Greed, Power, and influence. Isreal would be our only partner in this and opposing parties would naturally react with more violence against us.

It's high time that Congress demand that Bush spell out his intentions before he gets us embroiled in another Beruit. His blustering is madness and can only bring about disaster and more bloodshed.