Seriously. There are some so-called Israeli experts who want the terrorists to win. I mean, what other conclusion can you draw if you are a member of the KOOLAID KIDS KLUB (hereafter the “KKK”), when you see a story like this one?
U.S. policies have made Israel less safe, experts say
By DION NISSENBAUM
McClatchy NewspapersJERUSALEM – After years of supporting the Bush administration’s policy in the Middle East, a growing number of Israelis are openly criticizing the United States for creating more, not less, danger for Israel.
Israeli experts contend that American policies have destabilized Iraq, emboldened anti-Western forces from Iran to Lebanon and paved the way for militant Islamists to gain control of the Palestinian Authority.
“The threats to Middle East security and stability worsened in 2006,” experts at Tel Aviv University’s Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies recently warned. “The American failure in Iraq has hurt the standing of the U.S. in the Middle East.”
Perhaps most strikingly, in their annual evaluation of the situation, the Israeli analysts concluded that it was better for the United States to get out of Iraq than to add troops, as President Bush is proposing.
Let me reiterate that point. Israel’s own national defense experts (regarding their national security, not ours) have concluded it would be better for the United States to withdraw from Iraq (the, uh, Liberal-Commie-Islamofascist-Weasel-Dhimmicrat Plan as the KKK might put it) than to “surge” more troops into Baghdad and Anbar province as President Bush proposes. They actually seem to believe that Bush’s policies have endangered Israel’s security. Hard to believe, isn’t it? I wonder what gave them that impression?
(cont.)
… [A] growing number of Israeli experts now believe that U.S. policy has backfired. The threat from Saddam’s army has been replaced by the dangers of a volatile civil war that threatens to spill over Iraq’s borders. By ousting both Saddam and the Taliban, the United States eliminated two major counterbalances to Iran, which now enjoys growing power and influence.
“When the United States removed Saddam Hussein from power, people were happy here because he represented a major threat,” said Eytan Gilboa, a political science professor at Bar-Ilan University. “But that elevated the Iranian threat, and Iran is the most dangerous country in the world.”
Gee, eliminating Saddam’s miniscule threat to Israel, and tying up America’s military in a quagmire of an occupation in a country that has ethnic and sectarian divides up the wazoo, is now acknowledged as a bad idea. Invading a country dominated by a Shi’a majority (the same religious sect that predominates in Iran) and then creating a new government, police force and army that is infiltrated and dominated by Shi’a political parties and militias with ties to Iran, such as the one led by Muqtada al-Sadr, is now viewed as having led to a very bad result for Israel. Having America’s military, economic and diplomatic power steadily eroded by Bush’s fool’s mission to get Saddam Hussein and make him pay, is now seen in hindsight as a disaster for Israel.
I could have told them that several years ago. Hell, there were bloggers all over the left side of the “internets” who were telling anyone who would listen that Bush’s adventurism in Iraq was a bad idea that would have very bad consequences for the US and its principal allies in the region, including (and most especially) Israel. President Bush the Elder and Colin Powell and Brent Snowcraft, forgawdsakes, could have told them that (and did at one point or the other). Unfortunately, no one in charge of this grand scheme to remake the Middle East (i.e., Bush the Younger, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and the rest of the PNAC cheerleaders) seems to have listened to them. So, I’m not really surprised that Israeli defense experts now believe putting more American troops into Iraq is a bad idea, nor am I surprised that they are conceding that it might be better for Israel’s security if America re-deployed its forces in the Middle East to better counter Iran.
I bet the KKK boys and gals will be, though.
Read the whole article please. Quite interesting.
Oh, and I offcially declare a copyright on the term KOOLAID KIDS KLUB here and now. Anyone wanting to use it to make big bucks better be willing to show me the money.
However, anyone my make fair use of it, should you wish to do so.
(Ahh visions of license fees dance in my head …)
I’m sure Israel going to smackdown Hezbollah in Lebanon last summer wasn’t a contribution to the madness.
Fantacists. All of them.
Shoot, STC got there first 7/05:
“Conclusions, there are multiple sources from both inside the administration and probably Miller herself. Chalabi is mobbed-up like the Mossad, it would be within his ablility to gain such information and to give it to Miller (was he still friends with the Koolaid Kids Klub at the time?)”
Mr D, I do believe you get more cash if you have a logo of the “KIDS”.
Yes, where is dude abides when I need him?
Maybe a group of these, ‘Kids”
Hey — That’s perfect!
Much obliged Knukclehead (no slur intended, of course:).
StevenD, The only slur is in the spelling of my name. It sounds too much like the “moron`s way of saying “nookuler”.
I`ll send you a larger file if you want & I can put in more than one “Kid” in different colors, with “Bring It On” or whatever.
There is just no way this insanity of an preemptive war on Iraqi could have had any other outcome other than destablization of the entire Mid East, given the unstable condition it was all in to start with.
I am now of the mind that is exactly the goal sought by the NeoCon Cabal that has been pulling Bushes ego-maniacal-messianic-strings from the very beginning.
The Iraqis have a plan but it requires our cooperation. What is required from us is a rational regime and that means this one must be removed.
But sustained chaos has sure been profitable for ExxonMobil.
Israel has always been heavily involved in the Iraq invasion, to
include pre-war planning, especially with the Kurds.
http://www.opendemocracy.net/conflict/article_2000.jsp
This is an excerpt from a 8/7/2004 article by Paul Rogers
Behind the daily instability in Iraq lie significant longer-term
processes that may impact on the political agenda. The increasing
involvement of Israel in Iraq is one of these.
The recent attention on this issue has highlighted the development of
closer links between the US military and the Israeli Defence Forces
(IDF), especially the Americans’ procurement of specialist Israeli
equipment developed for use against the Palestinians, and the IDF’s
sharing their experience of urban warfare.
In pursuing these links, US military planners believed that any
relevant experience or equipment that might limit US casualties was
greatly welcome. They did not appreciate that news of Israeli
involvement would have a cumulative impact in Iraq and the wider
region – confirming the widely-held view that the US occupation of
Iraq was part of an overall Israeli-American policy to redraw the
political map of the Middle East.
It is now apparent, with the confirmation that the Israelis are
directly training Kurdish military forces in north-east Iraq that
Israel’s influence in the region is extensive. The view from Israel
is that the US occupation of Iraq is likely to lead to long-term
disorder and it is in Israel’s strategic interest to improve the
security position of the Iraqi Kurds.
From an Israeli strategic calculation, this move serves four
purposes. First, a militarily strong Kurdish entity will resist any
threat posed either by any Iraqi civil war or by paramilitary
violence from Ba’athist or al-Qaida forces. The Iraqi Kurds have
effective militias and could readily solicit Israeli support in the
event of their abandonment by the United States.
Second, Israel’s intimacy with Iraq’s Kurds allows it proximate
influence in an area bordering the one country it regards as an even
greater threat than Iraq – Iran. Israel remains concerned at Iran’s
nuclear ambitions and would readily pre-empt them if the United
States showed any reluctance to do so. The distance of Iran from
Israel makes such pre-emption very difficult to undertake; the use of
air bases in Kurdish Iraq would overcome that limitation.
Third, Israeli involvement with the Iraqi Kurds gives it the
opportunity to cultivate its presence within Kurdish communities in
Syria and Iran. In Syria, the Sharon administration would welcome any
aid to Kurdish anti-Assad elements, while links with Kurdish Iran
could provide Israel with improved intelligence on Iran’s nuclear
plans.
Fourth, a long-held Israeli dream is to create an economic link
between oil-rich Kurdish Iraq and Israel itself, with the ultimate
aim of a Mosul-Haifa oil pipeline through pliant Jordan.
Thus, from an Israeli perspective recent developments in Iraq are
positive, especially as they show little sign of facilitating
Israel’s real worry: a strong independent federal democracy in Iraq.
This is also good news for the pro-Israeli neo-conservative elements
in Washington.