July 12, 2006, The New Face of the Middle East
Is starting to look suspiciously like... the old face of the Middle East.
In a new development with respect to Iran and its recalcitrance to comply with various demands concerning its nuclear program, Russia and China agreed to get out of the way of a referral of Iran's non-compliance to the U.N. Security Council. In part, this relates to this weekend's G-8 summit in St. Petersburg, Russia, and in part, to the fact that the U.N. action will certainly not include any military action, but only the possibility of economic sanctions, or some kind of carrot and stick approach.
Which may not be nearly enough, if we are to believe this from the New Republic's Yossi Halevi (registration required for the full article) suggesting that Israel may well take it upon itself to attack Iran rather than permit Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, with the implication of doing so "sooner rather than later."
Of course, Israel already has its hands full, what with its ongoing assault on Gaza in retaliation for/an attempt to achieve the release of one kidnapped soldier there (today, bombing the Palestinian Authority's Foreign Ministry building there), and its plate seems to be full in the North, with Hizbollah having attacked Israel over the Lebanese border, killing a number of soldiers, and kidnapping two others, which drew an Israeli response of troop and tank movements and aerial assaults on power stations, bridges and roads in Southern Lebanon. Israel blamed the Lebanese government, of which Hizbollah is a participating political party, as well as Syria and Iran, which are believed (by everyone) to support Hizbollah, if not control it. For its part, Hizbollah purports to be trying to set up a prisoner exchange, which Israel promptly rejected. The week could find Israel back in both Gaza and Southern Lebanon... what's old is (deep sigh) new again?
And in Baghdad... people are leaving by the thousands to escape the escalating sectarian violence, which neither the nascent Iraqi government, nor the American forces present, seems to be able to control to anyone's satisfaction.
I guess once again it would appear that this sure looks like I picked a bad week to give up sniffing glue.
Comments
great analysis
Posted by jr at July 12, 2006 11:51 PM
How did you miss Poppy Bush showing up at Lay's funeral?
How did you miss Karl Rove being named as a Plame leak by that reporter guy?
Posted by Why No Comment? at July 13, 2006 1:42 PM
This is off-topic so I apologize for that, but I was wondering about your take on it, TD. CNN is reporting that McCain and others are going to legislate some new kind of court for trying terrorists, modeled on the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Leaving aside snarky things I have to say about how well the US has adhered to military codes since the Bush-thief and his co-conspirators took office, doesn't this make a bad statement by basically legitmizing terrorism as a military action and not as a civilian murder?
Posted by DBK at July 13, 2006 4:22 PM
JR-- Bless you.
WNC--Poppy Bush and Ken Lay went way back; what of it? We knew Rove was Cooper's source, and assumed he was Novak's; so we now know for sure? So what? Valerie Plame herself sued Cheney, Libby and Rove today... we'll see where that goes! And look for Fitzgerald to be appointed to the federal bench around 18 months from now, btw.
DBK: I'm not really up on the suggestions of McCain specifically, but this piece from CNN
hardly makes it look like there is agreement with the White House on what to do, which just wants the current (and now rejected by the Supreme Court) arrangement rubber stamped by Congress.
It appears that we'll get some clarity on that when Bush returns next week from the G-8 (where the subjects will doubtless be Iran and Israel and Lebanon).
There is a fair criticsm, by military experts who I have interviewed, that it is utterly ridiculous to equate OBL and AQ members with our soldiers; the problem is, Bush's overbroad default the other way forced the Supreme Court to act and blow the whistle.
But the fact is, Afghanistan was an armed conflict; Afghanistan is territory of a state that has signed the Geneva Convention (as have we); the people we are holding are a result of that armed conflict. We can't IGNORE the Geneva Conventions, either; we have to try people by some "regularly constituted" proceeding, lest the next country (as opposed to criminal gang) that captures our soldiers decides to change the rules and give THEM show trials, the way Bush wanted to with the Gitmo 10.
OTOH, the issue is just how much of a kangaroo court do we get to set up? That's all this was ever about: NOTHING stopped Bush from trying the detainees under the UCMJ... indeed, the UCMJ ALREADY PROVIDES FOR IT. Bush just thought that there was too much chance of acquittals, because by and large, our evidence isn't very good for various reasons (mostly having to do with the fact that most of the people we picked up didn't do anything, among others.) So... in the end, if they want to try them under the UCMJ, that's probably the best outcome... infinitely better than rubber-stamping the proteian kangaroo courts Bush envisioned, where coerced evidence and barring the defendant from the proceeding, among other outragees, were acceptable. It is a well-tested system of reliable justice. Even if we don't have enough evidence to convict some (or even all) of those accused. Because, after all, isn't THE REAL issue making sure we find the bastards who actually are guilty, rather than simply getting convictions to make Bush and Rumsfeld look good? How does that make any of us the least bit safer?
Posted by the talking dog at July 13, 2006 5:15 PM
Israeli Jets Strike Hezbollah Targets in Southern Beirut
this is quite something
Posted by rennert at July 13, 2006 11:33 PM
Oh, I been away for a while.
So what's new?
Israel at war with Lebanon?
Turmoil in the Middle East?
War with Iraq?
Bush President?
Clinton running?
Minga...this is like missing the first 90 minutes of a World Cup match. Nothing changed, nada, fuhgeddaboutit.
Posted by Billy Batts at July 14, 2006 3:13 PM
Hallo, nice site. Please also visit me. [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/soma]soma[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/thyrox]thyrox[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/tramadol]tramadol[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/ultracet]ultracet[/url],
[url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/ultram]ultram[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/uprima]uprima[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/valium]valium[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/viagra]viagra[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/vicodin]vicodin[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/vitamin]vitamin[/url], [url=http://www.phenea.vzz.net/vytorin]vytorin[/url].
Thanks for interest
Posted by pheneaaa at July 19, 2006 11:19 PM
Sorry for taking so long to get back on this, but thanks for your answer. I enjoy getting your views on all matters legal and they always repay inspection.
Posted by DBK at July 20, 2006 9:33 AM