Succeeding in Iraq also requires defending its territorial integrity and stabilizing the region in the face of extremist challenges. This begins with addressing Iran and Syria. These two regimes are allowing terrorists and insurgents to use their territory to move in and out of Iraq. Iran is providing material support for attacks on American troops. We will disrupt the attacks on our forces. We'll interrupt the flow of support from Iran and Syria. And we will seek out and destroy the networks providing advanced weaponry and training to our enemies in Iraq.
Did he really declare war on Iran and Syria last night? And if so, is there any more convincing evidence that rather than being chastened by the Baker/Hamilton Iraq Study Group, this lunatic has decided to once again say "Fuck you!" to his father by doing the exact OPPOSITE of what the ISG recommended for dealing with Iran and Syria? Bill Arkin of the Washington Post seems to think so:
If there's anything in the President Bush's remarks tonight that we didn't already know or didn't anticipate him saying militarily about Iraq, it is his evident willingness to go to war with Syria and Iran to seek peace.
Speaking about the two countries tonight, the president said that the United States wiill "seek out and destroy" those who are providing material support to our enemies.
It is only a threat. But it is a far cry from the diplomatic proposals floated just last month for making Syria and Iran part of the solution. Can the president really be saying that we are willing to risk war with the two countries, and even attack elements inside them, to achieve peace in Iraq?
Think about what a spoiled child does with toys. If he breaks one, he throws a tantrum, which can be stopped by dangling a shiny new toy in front of him. Then the broken one is forgotten. If Iraq cannot be salvaged, and it increasingly looks like it can't, this president will move on to another shiny new toy.
And who will stop him?
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire