Know who your friends are

The coward Beinart squawks


Pander and Run

By Peter Beinart
Friday, July 28, 2006; A25

After years of struggling to define their own approach to post-Sept. 11 foreign policy, Democrats seem finally to have hit on one. It's called pandering. In those rare cases when George W. Bush shows genuine sensitivity to America's allies and propounds a broader, more enlightened view of the national interest, Democrats will make him pay. It's jingoism with a liberal face.

The latest example came this week when Democratic senators and House members demanded that Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki either retract his criticisms of Israel or forfeit his chance to address Congress. Great idea. Maliki -- who runs a government propped up by U.S. troops -- is desperate to show Iraqis that he is not Washington's puppet. And the United States desperately needs him to succeed because, unless he gains political credibility at home, his government will have no hope of surviving on its own.

Maliki took a small step in that direction this week when he articulated a view of the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict quite different from that of the Bush administration. His views were hardly surprising: Iraq is not only a majority-Arab country; it is a majority-Shiite Arab country. And in a democracy, leaders usually reflect public opinion. Maliki's forthright disagreement with the United States was a sign of political strength, one the Bush administration wisely indulged.

But not congressional Democrats. House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid demanded that Maliki eat his words or be disinvited from addressing Congress. "Your failure to condemn Hezbollah's aggression and recognize Israel's right to defend itself raise serious questions about whether Iraq under your leadership can play a constructive role in resolving the current crisis and bringing stability to the Middle East," wrote Reid and fellow Democratic Sens. Richard J. Durbin and Charles E. Schumer on July 24.

How, exactly, publicly humiliating Maliki and making him look like an American and Israeli stooge would enhance his "leadership" was never explained in the missive. But of course Reid's letter wasn't really about strengthening the Iraqi government at all; that's George W. Bush's problem. It was about appearing more pro-Israel than the White House and thus pandering to Jewish voters.

So, the Democrats should have remained silent on the fact that the US's puppet was really an Hezbollah-supporting Jew Hater?

I guess according ot PNAC-bitch Beinart, that's what Congress should have done.

"Shhhhh, don't tell anyone he's asshole buddies with Nasrallah"

Maliki worked for Hezbollah in the 1980's, when they killed 241 Marines. Remember them? The most Marines killed in a single operation since WWII?

See, Beinart want the war he will not fight in to succeed at all costs, even if we install a rabidly Jew hating goverment in Baghdad, and make no mistake, Iraqis detest Jews. Maliki was doing what he needed to do to survive. But the Dems pointed out who we were supporting, people who would love to see the last Jew turn out the lights and sail away.

Of course it is ridiculous to expect him to denounce Hezbollah and live. If he did, he would die in the Green Zone at the hand of his own people.

But remember, he is backed by Sadr and his Mahdi Army, the people who killed Casey Sheehan and other First Cav troopers in a firefight in 2004.

So PNAC-bitch Beinart, the coward who will not fight, wants us to ignore the kind of people we support in Iraq.

Oh, and guess what they call US troops in Iraq?

The Jews.