October 26, 2005

WHAT WAS DON REGAN FEEDING THESE GUYS?:

Condi Rice And Syrian
Regime Change
(Paul Craig Roberts, 26 October, 2005, ICH)

Someone should tell Condi Rice that the gig is up. With the Bush administration dissolving in illegalities committed by key officials in their attempts to protect the lies that they used to justify the US invasion of Iraq, the secretary of state is trying to ramp up war against Syria.

Grasping a UN report that uses unreliable witnesses to implicate Syria in the assassination of a former Lebanese government official, Condi Rice told the BBC on October 23 that Syria's crime cannot be "left lying on the table. This really has to be dealt with."

This is amazing for many reasons. Here is the person in charge of US diplomacy acting as if she is the secretary of war unsheathing military force. Whoever heard of an American diplomat wanting to start a war because a former Middle Eastern government official was assassinated?


Mr. Roberts is another of those former Reaganauts who's been driven over the edge by George W. Bush. At the point where you're apologizing for Assad and demanding that Syria not be democratized you've estranged yourself pretty badly from the Gipper's legacy.

Posted by Orrin Judd at October 26, 2005 4:59 PM
Comments

robert's view is pretty consistent with the gipper's legacy in lebanon.

Posted by: ward churchill at October 26, 2005 5:30 PM

Reagan intervened in Lebanon to try and preserve a liberal state.

Posted by: oj at October 26, 2005 5:35 PM

It looks like we're already at war with Syria, just haven't made it official. Hopefully it'll be over before we have to.

Posted by: jdkelly at October 26, 2005 5:42 PM

I thought this was a quote from DU or Kos.

"It looks like we're already at war with Syria, just haven't made it official. "

More like Syria is at war with our ally Iraq, and it's time to remind a few thugs why you don't make war on our allies.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at October 26, 2005 5:53 PM

Whoever heard of an American diplomat wanting to start a war because a former Middle Eastern government official was assassinated?

How different is this than the start of WWI? An assassinations of other nations' leaders aren't exactly a unique new causus belli.

Posted by: Timothy at October 26, 2005 5:59 PM

We've been at war with Syria since 9-11. Assad won't outlast W.

Posted by: oj at October 26, 2005 6:08 PM

Timothy:

We're dealing here with the sort of people who don't think Saddam's attempted assassination of GHW Bush, what, a month after leaving office?, was a causus belli either.

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at October 26, 2005 7:37 PM

Raoul, Had the same thought about DU and Kos.

Whether we or Iraq are at war with Syria, the result is likely the same, and even if Iraq doesn't remain an ally, we did the right thing by going there, for both of us.


Posted by: jdkelly at October 26, 2005 7:50 PM

Maybe I should clarify that I was refering to the Roberts article as sounding like it was deranged, not your comment.

If an opponent is going to give us an excuse to clean up their act for them, why shouldn't we take the opportunity? Does Roberts really think the world is a better place with these thugs in power? (Another DU parallel...)

He's just another example that intellectuals may or may not make fools of themselves within their narrow specialties, but are almost guaranteed to do so when they go outside them. Paul, stick to economics...

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at October 26, 2005 8:13 PM

Roberts was a pretty good economist.

He's been writing on other issues for years now, and has proved himself a real nitwit.

Krugman Syndrome?

Posted by: kevin whited at October 26, 2005 9:19 PM

And I thought all these guys wanted a 'tough' Secy. of State, as opposed to wimps like Warren Christopher, Madeline Albright, or even Colin Powell.

Posted by: jim hamlen at October 26, 2005 10:27 PM

secretary of state is trying to ramp up war against Syria.

Anyone who's ever read Frank J. knows this was just a matter of time!

Posted by: Kirk Parker at October 27, 2005 1:06 AM

Heck, the Gipper had the dreadnoughts lobbing shells at the Syrians back in the 80's.

Posted by: Mikey at October 27, 2005 9:48 AM

just like clinton and afghanistan (re: lobbing ineffectually)

Posted by: anon at October 28, 2005 4:49 PM
« SUFFER NOT: | Main | SIZE MATTERS: »