You hit it on the head. Way ahead of you; when I heard about the acceptance of 1701, I wrote a scathing email to Ms. Rice demanding, among other things, that she resign. She’s sold her soul to the careerist “negotiate-no-matter-what” traitors at Foggy Bottom. We have a right to expect better. I’m neither Israeli nor Jewish, but it takes neither to understand the importance of that country to America’s own security in the world.

She’s shown the world that America does NOT stand by her allies, and can be relied upon to kowtow to U.N. opinion rather than to stand up and do the right thing regardless of what the losers at Turtle Bay think. Ms. Rice MUST go. It became clear to me that 1701 was all about her when she ‘elbowed’ Bolton out of the way to sign it herself. She MUST go; she has failed her president and her country.

And Olmert! That one MUST go. As Charles Krauthammer said a couple of weeks ago, ‘he’s a small man in a big job’. He also is more interested in his ‘legacy’ as the Israeli Prime Minister to draw the final Israeli border than in standing against evil becuase it’s the right thing to do. He’s delivered Israel her first military defeat, and in so doing, has left her even more naked in the face of those who would destroy her.

I am utterly disgusted with them all, from President Bush to Condi Rice to Olmert, and as usual, it’s the grunts on the line that bear the consequences of their folly.

The 1701 resolution is a wonderful deal for the Israelis. It is wonderful based on the absolute certainty that the other parties aren’t going to do anything like the resolution calls for, which means that, not only is Israel excused from ceasing fire, the excuse is UN-authorized. It isn’t a matter of lining up ambiguities and saying they justify a limited cross-border action.

It’s pointing out quite clearly that the other guys are doing what the UN says they shouldn’t and so Israel is in no way restrained by the agreement and no less a moral authority than the UN says so.

You may recall Bush’s ultimatum to Afghanistan–hand over al Q . It was clear the Afghans wouldn’t do it because they couldn’t. Still, it was a justifiable demand, considering 9-11. The Afghan government failed to comply. Presto, we’re justified.

Then there was Iraq. Several last-minute demands. One is show us the weapons and the other was for SH & Co. to get out of town. They couldn’t do either, which was obvious, but, considering the situation, they should have. Presto, the war’s on.

This time, Hezbollah and Lebanon and Syria and Iran are all supposed to do things (the UN says so) there isn’t a chance they’ll do. Presto. Israel’s hands are untied. The point is that there isn’t anything illegitimate about the requirements laid on the Hez side. Perfectly natural.

But nobody, including the US, expects them to do it. They don’t expect so, themselves. Like 1559. And the UN isn’t going to do it. So it won’t get done and the Israelis are justifiably free to do what needs to be done. Says so right in the agreement. Contract law says if one side breaks the contract, the other side is no longer bound.

So all the pants-wetters got the precious UN action, and the Israelis got their free hand.

In the meantime, the admin is trying to sell this by moving the goalposts. But they do so knowing the bad guys are going past the goal posts, anyway. So, even with having been given some slack after the fact, the bad guys are breaking the agreement. I fiugre eventually there’ll be an administration shrug and an admission, “There’s no hope with these guys, especially all the chances they got, so the Israelis will do what they have to do.”

Best cover the Israelis have had in a long time.

I see this as a deep game. I hope.

You know, I assume many on this blog were not fond of Madeleine Albright’s performance as Secretary of State – and for good reason. Albright was ineffective and capitulated to the UN among other enemies (including Islamic Fascists). So how is Condi Rice’s recent performance any different than what Madeleine Not-At-Albright ‘accomplished’ during her tenure?

Though absolutely thrilled when Rice was confirmed as Secretary of State, I have to say I am not at all impressed with her current imitation of Albright. I don’t think many of us expected or wanted to relive even a fraction of that era and have it compounded with a post-9/11 world.

Therefore, it is necessary for Rice to step down before the very real threats we face become insurmountable. My young niece and godchild do not deserve to pay for the woeful negligence, ineptitude and irresponsibility coming from those at The Top who wish to appease dictators, fascists and the stupid UN.

Anymore when I read or hear Rice’s latest statements, I am patient, albeit unnerved, until the end hoping to hear her say, ‘PSYCHE!’

Guess all one can do is sit around, hope and wait to see if Condi comes around at some point…

…NOT!

Israel agreed to the terms so why won’t you? Any other Administration would have been pressuring Isreal into an early cease fire. I think the impatience that you have in this war on terror reveals your inability to accept the fact that this is going to be a very long war. There will be no easy or quik victory. This could go on for decades just like the Cold War. We need to pick our battles carefully and not jump into every little skirmish.

Thanks Steve, from a fellow Ohioan!

There was no proof that Chamberlain had sold out the world and condemned millions of people to die because Britain failed to act. Athe time he came home and declared “Peace in our time” there was no proof. But we have our proof now, don’t we. The proof you seek in Condi’s case will be a mushroom cloud. Read the Herman article Tammy references in another post.

Responding to something-john: “I have never seen a woman turn on some one so quickly.”

Well, I’ve never seen a Secretary of State take such a turn-about so quickly either. One minute she is saying all the right things, saying that we will take this or that action, and we will never allow blah-blah. Then the next minute, she is allowing those things to happen with no response, she’s calling terrorists a militia (and the subsequent legitimacy that brings), and saying “Gosh, I HOPE everything turns out OK.” That’s weak knees, boy. That is realizing that you can talk tough, but when it comes time to throw the punch you just don’t have it in you. We’re not paying her to hope, we’re paying her to do.

For my own take on this, my theory is that Bush has folded to Saudi pressure. Believe me, I have been a huge supporter of GWB and the War on Terror. But here is what happened: We almost turned the corner on the Middle East; with Israel, we almost started getting to the root cause of the problem over there (Iran’s mad mullahs.) Take them out, and the problems in Iraq go away and Israel makes peace with her neighbors. And the Arabs got scared, because the despots over there like things just the way they are. Without the US and Israel as an enemy, and with democracy spreading, the Muslims would have to turn their anger on somebody, and it would be the despots who get rich while their people suffer.

My theory is that somebody threatened $200/barrel oil, somebody who could deliver on that threat, and the administration folded. Either that, or the White House just plain wet their pants.

Apparently Condi Rice didn’t care about the details of UN resolution 1701 or whether or not it actually accomplished anything, as long as she could get everyone to sign. In other words; “Don’t worry about the fine print, just sign on the dotted line.”.

When I heard Tony Snow say that 1701 was a “Victory for Diplomacy”, I was reminded of Neville Chamberlain’s “Peace For Our Time” speech.
At least Chamberlain got a piece of paper to wave around at the Airport. Condi Rice didn’t even have a piece of paper that she could wave around.

While I’m not happy with the way the battle ended (notice I didn’t say war because it ain’t over yet) we need to realize that it is Israel who dropped the ball. The Bush Admin is reeling from this because they never imagined that Israel would balk when given the green light.

And I think it is VERY unfair to say she doesn’t know what she’s doing, compare her to Chamberlain and say she is single handedly ending the war on terror. There is absolutely no proof that any of those things are true.

I think we all just need to take a deep breath and let this thing play out. The bottom line is that unless the US is ready to launch an attack on Iran, there’s not much we can do until the government of Israel gets it head straight. Rice stated she did not want to go back to the status quo. I believed her then and I believe her now. But again, it is Israel who has push us back to that position, not Bush or Rice.

It’s very easy for us to “quarterback” from our Pc’s when we really ahve no idea what may be happening behind the scenes (and I’ve done it before too, so I’m pointing the finger at myself also).

I am curious about one thing though. Why do you want Rumsfield to resign? You didn’t give a reason.

Remember that Russia and China had threatened to abstain in that vote? (Remember the aside between Condi and a Russian official during the G-8 Summit?) Condi Rice is the reason the Resolution was passed unanimously.

We need Condi Rice’s temperament and resolve to deal with Russia and other Middle East shadow players. (After all — no SoS has successfully or effectively dealt with them previously! And Russia may very well be the darkest shadow of all ….)

I, too, was disappointed in the Resolution wording, the lack of a stronger UN role and a failure to demand the disarmament of Hezbollah. I’ve had no expectation that Lebanon could disarm the Hezzies without Hezbollah’s cooperation — even if Lebanon wanted to.

With Lebanon totally wimping out, approx. 16 nations have now either reduced and/or reassessed their peace-keeping roles in Southern Lebanon. Does anyone actually think Condi have averted these reactions? Come on — armchair quarterback the collective results if you wish, but give the woman credit for what she has actually achieved! And how many times did she refer to this resolution as “the first phase” of the ME peace process??

In spite of my disappointment(s) — I’m certainly not giving up on Condi Rice as being instrumental in bringing about a more united global front against terrorism and subsequent Israeli-Hezbollah/Lebanese resolutions.

By the way — It was a Lebanese official who first referred to Hezbollah as a militia. Possibly Condi was diplomatically (or sarcastically?) reflecting his reference. After all, Lebanon will allow Hezzies to keep their arms — in that context, those scum-bags are a militia!

Now more than ever, we need a person of insight and intellect — not another bull in the global china shop — to garner support for the battle(s) ahead. If Lebanon allows Hezbollah to take control militarily and politically, don’t be surprised if there is a civil uprising before the Hezzies regroup to attack Israel again.

Fortunately for Israel and other allied “peace-keeping” interests, the US will send a flight of surveillance planes to monitor the Lebanese and Syrian borders. Even France’s 200 (as opposed to the 2000+ originally promised) troops should feel [a tad more] secure.

Replace Condi Rice? If she leaves — there also goes the [global] neighborhood ….