Skip to comments.Bush welcomes UN Mideast resolution - Repost
Posted on 08/12/2006 11:53:55 AM PDT by ImpBill
Sat Aug 12, 9:55 AM ET
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) -
President Bush welcomed a U.N. resolution on Saturday aimed at stopping the fighting between Israel and Hizbollah, saying the guerrilla group and its sponsors Iran and Syria had brought an "unwanted" war to the region.
The fighting continued on Saturday, with the Israeli army saying it had started broadening its ground offensive in southern Lebanon.
The U.N. Security Council unanimously adopted a resolution on Friday calling for a "cessation of hostilities" in the war between Israel and Lebanon's Hizbollah militia that has killed about 1,000 Lebanese and 123 Israelis and displaced more than 1 million people.
In his statement, Bush again blamed Hizbollah for sparking the violence last month through an "unprovoked terrorist attack" on Israel.
The resolution, negotiated by the United States and France, envisions a phased withdrawal of Israeli troops from southern Lebanon when violence subsides and 15,000 Lebanese army troops along with the U.N. peacekeepers begin to deploy.
"These steps are designed to stop Hizbollah from acting as a state within a state, and put an end to Iran and Syria's efforts to hold the Lebanese people hostage to their own extremist agenda," Bush said in a statement from Crawford, Texas.
"This in turn will help to restore the sovereignty of Lebanon's democratic government and help ensure security for the people of Lebanon and Israel," he said.
"Hizbollah and its Iranian and Syrian sponsors have brought an unwanted war to the people of Lebanon and Israel, and millions have suffered as a result," Bush said.
"I now urge the international community to turn words into action and make every effort to bring lasting peace to the region."
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan has said that in the coming days he would "establish with both parties the exact date and time" for the truce to come into force.
The resolution calls for an embargo on the supply of arms to militias in Lebanon.
I neglected, shame on me, to post a link to the article. An Admin Moderator, without checking with me first, decided I had take the article from the Washington Post and posted a link to an entirely different article Washing ton Post article - Click here.
The articles don't even have the same text.
So my bad, and after repeated attempts to clarify the situation with the Admin Moderator and have him/her restore the thread to it's original form, to no avail, I have reposted and hopefully within the strictest adherence to the rules of posting.
I in no way wish the on thread discussion to revolve around the admin moderator and duties they perform. They, on balance, do an excellent job and perform a service that our benefactor, Jim Robinson, in no way could keep up with.
So, within your prerogative, please center the discussion on the topic and your thoughts there to.
My original comment was "Speechless! But the thought of the term, "All hat and no cattle", comes to mind!
Why should Israel listen to a UN resolution? Do any of the terrorist states abide by them?
Any thoughts on what is going on? Since GW doesn't talk to "us" ("We the people"> much any longer about what our objectives are in this War On Terror (misnomer) that should be War on Islmofacists of all stripes, what do you think his grand scheme is?
Two days ago we learned of a terror plot to blow up transatlantic flights from Europe to the US. Today there was a terrorist sympathizer rally in DC, cloaking itself in the flag of Lebanon, claiming to want Israel to stop killing innocent Lebanese. This was right next to the White House and followed by a procession of hundreds of the terrorist sympathizers steaming through the streets of DC with police protection. Now this latest abortion in the UN with the USA taking the lead in the procedure. What the F is going on?
I don't think Bush has some grand plan up his sleeve for the Mideast. But, he should've resisted calling for a "ceasefire."
Why didn't we grant Hitler a ceasefire? How about Saddam?
Here is a /sarcastic response I put on another similar thread.
It was concerning the phone call yesterday (1st one since the current war in Lebonan started) between President Bush and Ehud Olmert.
Olmert: Good morning Mr. President.
Olmert: Mr. President, we would like to continue our battle against the Islamofacists and destroy the Hezzies, and if that means taking the action to a protracted regional war with the gardens of terrorism all across the Middle East, want to know if America will stand with us, shoulder to shoulder?
Bush: (long pause)
Bush: (longer pause)
Bush: Well ........ (even longer pause)
Bush: Ya see, Ehud, it's like this ...... (much longer pause).
Bush: It's an election year, over here, ya know .....
Olmert: I understand Mr. President. We will take "the deal", even if we know it solves nothing.
Bush: Maybe next time Ehud. Gotta run now, cows need milking, thanks for the chat buddy.
In background, Bush to Condi: Well that went better than I expected, ya think?
Tune in after this watch is over and some American city is glowing in the dark.
Also, don't forget to tune in to Rush's program on Monday to listen to the spin about the "big win" for Israel thanks to our brilliant Secretary Rice and, of course, the President.
It's just as pointless the second time around. DOn't quit your day job.
Some folks around here seem to stand by and wait for a reason to pounce on Bush, and then they go silent when the real story emerges.
I seem to recall so many people here screaming about Bush's calming words which preceded the most aggressive Israeli military moves. The response from these fair-weather friends? Silence.
There is so much going on right now, but no one here seems to want to study the situation. I doubt most of the Bush bashers who've been in sleeper mode since the "he's selling our ports to foreigners!" silliness have ever met someone from the Middle East, let alone read any books about it.
We criticize the media for revealing secret negotiations and plans, and then we piss and moan when Bush doesn't reveal his secret negotiations and plans. So let's just look at the obvious--Bush and Bolton have been trying to "end" this since day one...supposedly. I guess there's been no military progress since then, right?
What, exactly, is Bush supposed to do when Israel is led by someone who is rapidly losing the faith of his own military? Do you expect Bush to commandeer the Israeli military?
People need to WATCH and LISTEN. That so many of them would rather post silly Bushbashing crap like this instead indicates quite a bit. Perhaps some of these folks have seen that since the UK plane plot was revealed, their "send a message in November/Democrat aid" campaign is fizzling out.
But maybe asking folks to stop bitching about Bush and actually taking the time to read something besides AP and Washington Post and Yahoo "news" before coming to a conclusion is too much to ask.
You're forgetting about our open(porus)borders.
It will be interesting to see how MahaRushie covers this.
And I certainly am not going to even attempt to refute your baseless suppositions that I am unread and untraveled. For frankly it would do no good. We just both seem to have tunnel vision, only in different tunnels.
Oh yes, I DOn't have a "day job" to quit, nor a night one, so I CAn't nor WOn't quit. And before you jump to any other clueless suppositions, I am not taking a dime of your money to live upon without working. Have a great day and thanks for your contributions to the thread.
More DC, hezbollah, syrian, lebanese, UN baloney.
Given the facts of the past few years (NAFTA, CAFTA, USSC Kelo/Sodomy, Illegal Immigration Amnesty Bills, you frikkin' name it, this is no longer "our" country. Vote for any candidate from any party, your choice, and nothing will change. Nothing. Nothing will change until this country goes through a great purge.
Actually, the purge is happening right now, except WE are being purged by our own government.
To fail to see the marxist success in this country is to be blind.
Enjoy your "tax cuts".
Very frustrating and leads me to the conclusion that playing golf on the first Tuesday in November might just prove to be quite a bit more fulfilling, even if I shoot a lousy game.
I can't begin to express the consternation I am feeling over the title of this thread and some of the responses from the kool aid crowd.
The disastrous (for Israel) result that we are now looking at is shared blame between the Leftist dominated Israel government and the U.S. NeoCon ambitions for the Middle East.
While the U.S. does quietly continue to supply Israel militarily, the public pronouncements made by SECSTATE have been humiliating and damaging to Israel's image, and have angered Israelis against the U.S. Smiling sedateness does not make a poison pill any more palatable.
The best way to view this realistically is to not be too defensive about the U.S. position, which does not mean we are out to bash Bush. How far do we go in playing the game of diplomacy before we compromise our own principles (and interests), especially in the WOT ... and, how much territory and symbolic sovereignty does Israel give up before she ceases to exist?
Sorry, but whatever has gone on behind the scenes, we have been a party to the public humiliation of Israel.
The "grand scheme" is the democratization of the Middle East, in which the side-by-side states of Israel and Palestine play a part.
Loosen your corset and change your Depends, granny.
Your criticism of Laura Bush sounds like something out of a Lou Sheldon newsletter.
I thought cattiness ended at menopause, but, I guess not.
Take some Metamucil, rub some Ben-Gay on your chest, put on your flannels and hit the sack!!
Ohlmert was begging for a ceasefire. He was getting his ass kicked, and will likely be run out of town by the end of the month.
Israel has humiliated itself with its indecisiveness.
Okay, back to the UN Resolution, see this commentary by Caroline Glick, if you have not already.
The UN resolution does not strengthen the US hand in future Security Council deliberations regarding Iran's illicit nuclear weapons program because the states that object to any action against Iran - Russia and China - will continue with their refusal to sign on to any substantive action.
Indeed, Russia's behavior regarding the situation in Lebanon, including the fact that a large percentage of Hizbullah's arsenal of advanced anti-tank missiles was sold by Russia to Syria and Iran, exposes that Moscow's role in the current conflict has been similar to the position taken by the Soviet Union in earlier Middle East wars.
Furthermore, because the resolution strengthens the UN as the arbiter of peace and security in the region, the diplomatic price the US will be forced to pay if it decides to go outside the UN to contend with the Iranian threat has been vastly increased.
Bush has never cared about "diplomatic price". Glick has been singularly gloomy in all her predictions, and she has never been either a Sharon or Ohlmert fan.
So, I read her commentaries in that context.
The US will act in its own best interests regardless of what Russia and China think. That is the truth of the matter.
I think Israel, on the whole, is more "European" than we expect and they put importance on the opinion of the "world community" that we do not. This squishiness has led to the placement of Kadima rather than Likud into power. Presently, I am going to take the bickering and opinion going on within Israel with a grain or two of salt.