Monday, December 29, 2008

Reality complicates Obama's policy in the Middle East

More idiotic reporting from AP; they titled this article "Gaza complicates Obama's policy in Mideast":

Israel's deadly air assault on the militant Islamic group will further complicate Obama's challenge to achieve a Middle East peace — something that eluded both the Bush and Clinton administrations.

Isn't it horrible that Israel's need to defend its citizens from indiscriminate death has clouded Obama's chances at achieving "Middle East Peace"? Yes, it's quite unfortunate that geopolitical realities have infringed on the president-elect's vane need for a superficial notch on his belt called "Middle East Peace"; a goal that he and other US presidents have insisted on pursuing, to the great detriment of Israeli security, regardless of what that it actually means for the people on the ground.

An "expert" offered this nebulous and vapid statement:

"I think Obama will be supportive of Israel, but will bring a little more skepticism to it," Alterman said. "I think Obama will start from premise that Israel is an ally, but that we have to look at this fresh."

Israel is either an ally, or it isn't. If Israel is an ally, the United States should not pressure it to give concessions to the same genocidal Islamic supremacists that the US rightfully bombs in Afghanistan and Iraq. There is nothing "fresh" to think about. Israel faces implacable theocratic foes who are committed to its utter destruction. Pick a side, period.

No comments: