No Bush Doctrine For Israelis (This is very troubling, says Rush Limbaugh)

Rush Limbaugh ^ | June 10, 2003 | Rush Limbaugh

[TLBSHOW]

No Bush Doctrine For Israelis

June 10, 2003

It seems like the Bush Doctrine of preemptive action against terrorists has always excluded Palestinian terrorism, and Palestinian terrorism is every bit terrorism, just like Al-Qaeda is.

It seems slowly but surely that we are telling Israel they cannot do for themselves what we are doing for ourselves and still retain our support. This is very troubling to say. I would hope as much as anything to be wrong about this, however it does appear like the Bush administration is instructing Israel not to defend itself, as the article in the link below implies, and I can't for the life of me understand what the thinking would be.

I've always been amazed how this Israeli-Palestinian thing is its own little island, if you will, where all the rest of our foreign policy doesn't seem to apply. But then I always come back to the fact there's obviously a lot I don't know about, that none of us know about, going on behind the scenes. You can hear me tackle this subject with two callers below.

[thucydides]

The only rational explanation for all this is that Bush is trying to set up the new Palestinian Prime Minister as an anti-terror figure who is beset by Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al-Fatah, etc. This opens the door at some stage for Bush to go after the terrorists with a green light from the other arab states. It seems like a long shot. However, I simply don't believe Bush is falling into the Oslo peace process nonsense.

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

=========================

Newt Gingrich expressed similar sentiments on Sean Hannity this PM. Neo-cons all.

[SJackson]

The only rational explanation for all this is that Bush is trying to set up the new Palestinian Prime Minister as an anti-terror figure who is beset by Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al-Fatah, etc. This opens the door at some stage for Bush to go after the terrorists with a green light from the other arab states. It seems like a long shot. However, I simply don't believe Bush is falling into the Oslo peace process nonsense.

While I tend to agree with you, it's a position I can't factually defend, I can only trust GWB and Sharon. In a few months we'll know.

[Catspaw]

Newt expressed these sentiments, too? I wonder if the President will get the message.

[Russell Scott]

I believe the reason is that this is a promise President Bush made to the Middle East countries, Qutar, UAE, Saudia Arabia, Jordan, Eygpt, etc in exchange for support of the Iraq war. To these nations, this is the ultimate distraction, to keep their people from threatening or questioning their leadership. Just another reason why Christ's Kingdom on Earth as it is in Heaven is the ONLY answer for world peace and tranquility.

[Sparta]

I have a feeling the Christian right may make Bush pay at the polls for this next November.

[goldstategop]

This is a big blind spot in the Administration's policy next to their gimme for non-taxpayers with children. I think its political calculation, not conservative principle, that's driving Bush, Rove & company in these areas.

[Pukin Dog]

The only rational explanation for all this is that Bush is trying to set up the new Palestinian Prime Minister as an anti-terror figure who is beset by Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Al-Fatah, etc. This opens the door at some stage for Bush to go after the terrorists with a green light from the other arab states. It seems like a long shot. However, I simply don't believe Bush is falling into the Oslo peace process nonsense.

Bush wont have to go after the terrorists. Israel will do so instead during a Palestinian civil war.

[colorado tanker]

I believe the reason is that this is a promise President Bush made to the Middle East countries, Qutar, UAE, Saudia Arabia, Jordan, Eygpt, etc in exchange for support of the Iraq war.

I agree completely.

People should also focus on the fact that the road map requires the Palis to stop the terror campaign and soon. In the past, American governments have overlooked Pali breaches but still made the Israelis stick to the program. Haven't we learned yet that the President is different, that he means what he says?

[steve86]

I can only trust GWB and Sharon. In a few months we'll know.

I've come to the end of my rope with the generous presumptions that President Bush has some "secret rationale" or "classified evidence" and that these justify whatever action takes place. Not meaning to criticize your post but those dreams don't cut it for me anymore.

[gcruse]

State Department Spokesman Richard Boucher explains why blowing up Israelis different than blowing up Americans

DAILY PRESS BRIEFING

Richard Boucher, Spokesman

Washington, DC; September 27, 2001

...

QUESTION: To what extent does this campaign -- as you constantly review your Middle East policy, what -- how much influence does this campaign against terrorism have in that? What's the input? How does it weigh in here? See what I mean?

MR. BOUCHER: No, I don't.

QUESTION: It's obviously a factor --

MR. BOUCHER: We have talked about this on and off over the last few days. We recognize that there is an influence. Some have said it affects the atmosphere, the Palestinian/Israeli issues affect the atmosphere of cooperation. But, essentially, there are, on some planes, two different things. One is that there are violent people trying to destroy societies, ours, many others in the world. The world recognizes that and we are going to stop those people.

On the other hand, there are issues and violence and political issues that need to be resolved in the Middle East, Israelis and Palestinians. But we all recognize that the path to solve those is through negotiation and that we have devoted enormous efforts to getting back to that path of negotiation.

And we have called on the parties to do everything they can, particularly in the present circumstance, to make that possible.

I guess that's about as close as I can come to the kind of sophisticated analysis I'm sure you will want to do on your own. But they are clearly issues that are different, not only in geography but also, to some extent, in their nature.

--------------------------------------------
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis
Website: www.imra.org.il

[Robert_Paulson2]

Troubling stuff...

If true, this is very disturbing indeed.

I would vote against bush on this policy alone. I am not alone.
This undermines Israel's security... unless it is a "wink and nod" bluff on our part for islamic radicalism's consumption.

I cannot withold judgment on such policy vacuums... while jews burn to death, assaulted on their own land, in their own homes, and handcuffed by american threats.

It is worse than reno burning the davidians to death... MOSTLY who were children under 15...

very very troubling.

[onedoug]

I think Bush should tell the world there are 22 Arab states and one Jewish state, and that's the way it's going to be whether they, or anyone else likes it or not.

Enough with this other waste-of-time-and-energy nonsense.

[Right_in_Virginia]

I wonder if the President will get the message.

What message?

[LarryM]

There is a Bush doctrine, only that the doctrine is that of Daddy Bush, meaning that every Arab in sight must be appeased, especially those with oil.

[kesg]

At least on the surface, he is making excellent points. I'm hoping that more is going on beneath the surface -- it may be a case of saying one thing publicly (the wrong thing, IMO) and telling the Israelis something totally different in private.

[rmlew]

Actually it is even worse than what Rush and Sean Hannity were saying.

Since 1998, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad have effectively become one organization. They share networks, funding, and carry out attacks together. (Check ou tthe indictments of terrorist fundraisers in the US. Many funded both groups.) PIJ was set up by Egyptian Islamic Jihad, whose head is Ayman al-Zawahiri. http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Islamic_Jihad Al-Jihad/Islamic Jihad is a constitent group of Al Qaeda. Ayman al-Zawahiri ran the operational side of Al-Qaeda.

In effect, Israel cannot attack part of Al-Qaeda because it attacked Israel.

[Cachelot]

and telling the Israelis something totally different in private.

Diplomacy towards the PA: The art of saying "good doggy" while looking for a suitable rock.

[Lent]

>While I tend to agree with you, it's a position I can't factually defend, I can only trust GWB and Sharon. In a few months we'll know.

I'm seeing a lot of this nonsense about Bush just setting the Palestinians up for a fall. This is a lame defence for what is in fact reflective of the Arabist State Department policy which the U.S. has tiredly labored under for over 70 years. Taking over the same approach to this issue as the British Foreign Office did when it was in charge of the mandate. And it is no coincidence that you mentioned Newt Gingrich who has called for
reforms in the ARABIST State Department (see:http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:D6SghEpfLlcJ:washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20030424-66379508.htm+Arabist+State+Department&hl=en&ie=UTF-8.) It is the latter which is putting Bush in the all to familiar position of every U.S. leader since Roosevelt and Truman - trying to appease Arab nationalism. It just makes it easier to do when you're outnumbered multiplied millions to one; have no oil; and are Jews. If that's being too blunt I'm sorry.