SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Obama’s ‘Hawkish’ Foreign Policy? If Only It Were So.

POLITICS FEBRUARY 16, 2012

Obama’s ‘Hawkish’ Foreign Policy? If Only It Were So.

BY MARTIN PERETZ

A New Republic blogger last week pronounced the president’s foreign policy record “hawkish.” This is especially odd, given Barack Obama’s ongoing attempt at persuading himself and the world that he had altered the model of international relations so that it now worked by talk and suasion. This is probably how his enthusiasts—and young enthusiasts, especially—still experience him. Illusions die hard. But even Obama can no longer be wholly persuaded by this, his own fantasy. Still, as Fouad Ajami put it in The Wall Street Journal on the same day as TNR issued one of its own’s silly judgment:

For months, the administration pursued the mirage of a United Nations Security Council condemnation of Damascus, when there was no chance that Russia or China would go for it. The administration persisted even though a similar effort last October ended in failure. There was no need to court the Russians. We granted them the pride of being treated as a great power, and they played it for all it was worth at home and abroad. The time wasted on the courtship of Russia should have been put to use ‘scoping’ the ways the Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad could be brought down.

We have been there before: waiting in the face of rampant terror, exaggerating the power of regimes engaged in mass murder when deterrent power would have put an end to their barbarism. In the Obama world, the tendency to wait has become official policy. It is either boots on the ground or head in the sand. Where drones and Navy SEALS can’t do the trick, we leave the world untended.

And how do the finicky “progressives” rate drones and targeted assassinations as our prime instruments of war? I know what I think: They put into harm’s way fewer and fewer Americans, which is a very good thing. And more terrorists and what are romantically termed “guerillas” in harm’s way, also a very good thing. But the human rights watchers will certainly complain that the U.S. and other western countries have an intrinsic technological advantage with these modes of warfare. Non-traditional modes of warfare, which have had a certain emotional moral quality attached to them, “guerilla war,” for example, lose their advantages with the new military paradigm.

In any case, there are—what with the military’s desertion of Iraq and the impending withdrawal from the war in Afghanistan which candidate Obama described as worthy and workable—almost literally no U.S. boots anywhere. Oh, yes, there are armed American men and women in Yemen, and they are fighting Al Qaeda which the president had already diagnosed as near death. Alas, God did not hear Obama’s words.

Of course, it is not the president’s sagacity that is in judgment. It is his honesty, his honesty to himself, surely, but also his honesty to us. Ajami published in the last issue of TNR an essay about a novel first published in Beirut four years ago, titled In Praise of Hatred and written by Khaled Khalifa. It is about today’s bloodletting, yesterday’s sectarian political program, eternal loathing. And, to be sure, Syria’s ace-in-the-hole, its proximity to Israel, that it was the confrontation state. These insights laid out in a novel were not secrets. They were common knowledge. But Obama somehow believed that he could talk these truths out of their secure place in the world. So—can you imagine?—Russia would betray its last client in the region. Did Hillary Clinton really believe that she and Susan Rice would or could out-talk Moscow from casting a veto in the Security Council? Or persuade Beijing to quietly abstain when its only firm principle of foreign policy is to keep such international authority as there is in the world from intervening against the brutal exercise of power anywhere? No one truly credited this fable—though the press wondered or said it wondered how it would all turn out. This was the fable Obama’s two chefs had cooked up. After the fact, they feigned anger, a feigning especially common to the former first lady. But she knew she was faking it all along.

Caroline Glick, a columnist for the Jerusalem Post, recognized the president’s words as an ongoing “rhetorical storm.” This characterization certainly did apply to his Syria policy, which allowed the gentle Dr. Assad to kill five, six, seven thousand people, by now probably more and since the Arab League has stopped counting very probably many more. Commentators have not adequately examined what’s animating the League’s rhetorical frenzy. It’s the fact that the victims of Assad’s butchery are primarily Sunni. The League itself is made up almost entirely of Sunni regimes, Iraq now excepted and Bahrain, Sunni royalty ruling over an insurgent massive Shia majority of 70 percent. You get why that particular insurrection is so volatile. Shia victory would bring a 33-island Iranian satellite archipelago into a sea of Sunnis. Sunni or no Sunni, the League is a political fraud or, to be polite, an empty shell. If only the press covered Arab politics the way it does Israeli politics the reader would know how empty and how bloated the alliance’s doings are. It can do nothing and does nothing except rant. A symptomatic act is that it sent in to rant its former secretary-general Amr Moussa who is running for president of Egypt, good luck to him. He was also foreign minister in Cairo where he tried continuously to sabotage the peace treaty with Israel. He is called a moderate. While you wait for the Arab League to do something in Syria you might read Neil MacFarquhar—read him every day!—to confirm that there is a bloodbath.

Every faction in Syria’s exceptionally sanguinary politics counts Israel as enemy. Yet the security of the Jewish state is not especially at stake in today’s bloody civil war, although it was during the time of Obama’s high infatuation with Assad. Washington’s quid pro quo for Damascus was the Golan Heights which would have lifted the dictator in every Arab’s estimation: in his own country, for sure, in Lebanon, in Iraq, in Iran, across the wide swath of the region clamoring for revenge against the West. You may have noticed nonetheless that the Golan is hardly an issue in this bloodletting, the local Druze probably blessing the day that the Zionists extended their rule to what would have by now been a drenched battlefield. If this very uncivil war continues much longer don’t be surprised when Syrian refugees arrive for protection and succor in Israel. Turkey has already professed readiness for rescue, and anything Recep Tayyip Erdogan proposes finds favor with Obama who seems never able to admit to a misjudgment in character, not even after the prime minister’s orchestrated hysteria over the aid flotilla, “aid,” my foot. In any event, Kurds beware! Erdogan has Ottomanistic fantasies.

Now, Ms. Glick, with whom I sometimes (but not so often) disagree, is more interested in Iran than in Syria. Who isn’t? And it is with Tehran that Obama has architected the greatest foreign policy disaster of his administration. She says it clearly: “Since Obama was elected the U.S. has devoted most of its energies not to preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, but to pressuring Israel not to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.” Maybe this is a bit exaggerated. But not much. Let me step back a minute. I have just returned from three weeks in Israel and I saw my share of important people and also highly informed but less important people. Nobody is itching to bomb Iran ... but many know that it may have to come to that. On the other hand, Dennis Ross, who should have been running Israel’s negotiations with the Palestinians (instead of that fool, George Mitchell, anointed by Hillary), has put the kibosh on Israeli strikes against Iran. Not that he could actually stop them. But there is, at least for the long immediate moment, an understanding—a tentative understanding—that sanctions may be working. We’ll see what we will see ... up to a point.

But if this conjecture—no, it’s more than a conjecture—is accurate it confirms (and not just inferentially) Glick’s assessment. For the dominant dynamic of the past two years was that America would restrain Israel’s defensive offense which was essentially pressing for more and more sanctions. The background orchestration of this dynamic was that Israel was going bonkers in its demands. Yet, the fact is that talking was going nowhere and sanctions were going nowhere, as well. Now, we don’t know precisely what is happening in Dr. Sivana’s laboratory and we can’t assume that Captain Obama will in the end outfox him. But, finally, Iran seems to be hurting ... maybe its people hurting so much that they and the world would have been better off had Israel actually struck strategically and let it all rest for a while. No, I am not playing dice with the universe. My writing might not even influence you.

So the fact is that it was the president who was playing dice with the universe. For almost two years, he persuaded the Iranians of nothing. Two years lost in the struggle to get Iran to forgo nuclear weapons. However and at last, we do know today that some Iranian businesses are wounded. What the real consequences of this wounding will be is still unknown. Even Prime Minister Netanyahu conceded in mid-January to The Australian that new sanctions were having some effect. But hold your enthusiasm. It has taken us a very long time to interfere with the ordinary practices of Tehran banks. As I write on Wednesday afternoon, for example, the Society for Worldwide Interbanking Financial Transactions, better known as SWIFT and owned by major central banks, is still refusing to cut Iran off the gravy train. Or the milk line, if you will. The European Union is threatening to force SWIFT’s hand. One EU official assured, “Yes, it’s a done deal ... should be confirmed by late February, early March.” We’ll see. But we will not know til summer how much oil Iran will be able to sell into the markets. Iran, however, has not let on that it is intimidated or even, for that matter, a bit scared. And maybe it isn’t.

The media watch Israel very carefully. No, that’s not exactly right: They scrutinize Israel. But I also don’t mean that they scrutinize Israel scrupulously. On the other hand, they certainly don’t watch its enemies nearly as vigilantly as they do the Jewish state and Jews and Zionists. We were alerted to the fact long ago in an unaccountably confessional admission by Thomas Friedman in his long-ago book, From Beirut to Jerusalem, that his colleagues didn’t always tell readers the real truth about the Arab world because they were afraid for their lives.

Still, I was stunned when I saw no place else but in The Jerusalem Post a story about Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s strategic counselor, Alireza Forghani, having written an essay on “the legal and religious justification for the annihilation of Israel and the Jewish people.” According to the Post story:

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's strategist provided the legal and religious justification for the annihilation of Israel and the Jewish people, in a document published on conservative Farsi website Alef. Reports of the document began to circulate the internet this week.

The document, written by strategy specialist Alireza Forghani, outlined the reasons why, "In the name of Allah, Iran must attack Israel by 2014.

Claiming to only represent the personal opinion of its author, and not the Iranian government, the doctrine was published on a website believed to have close ties with the Ayatollah.

Forghani called the Jewish state a "cancerous tumor for the Middle East" and reminded his readers that "All our troubles are due to Israel!

"Every Muslim is obliged to equip himself against Israel," he urged, reasoning that if the Muslim world does not attack Israel in the near future, "the opportunity could be lost and it may not be possible to stop them."

(You can read the rest of the story at The Jerusalem Post.)

Forghani is not a nobody. He was governor of Kish Province, aside from being a tactician and strategist for the Supreme Leader. His incendiary essay has been analyzed by the intellectually reliable think tank MEMRI in its “Inquiry and Analysis 793,” published on February 7. Read it all; it’s a hair-raising experience. Some newspapers in Europe published accounts of the incendiary document. The New York Times, “the paper of record,” did not mention it. But if you’d read the Times in those days, the Holocaust also hadn’t happened.

Maybe the Times was expressing its regret for neglecting to inform its readers about Forghani. In any event, a story by Rick Gladstone in Wednesday’s Times reported that Iran was about to announce new progress in uranium enrichment.

Don’t get me wrong. Israel may have abjured striking Iran for now. But not for too long.

Martin Peretz is editor-in-chief emeritus of The New Republic.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 77 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

77 comments

Martin Peretz excellent piece, as always, thank you. And I love you. True defender of Israel. True defender of the Jews. In our small world of bloggers we have to fight the islamo fascists, the anti-Israel gang of leftists neo-fascists and the self hatred Jews. It is a difficult task, it is an evil alliance. An added difficulty comes from a slow moving passive president Obama. His advisor Erdogan provides the Syrian guidance. Provides the Iranian guidance. Obama/Clinton have obediently followed Er

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 2:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Marty said that there has been "military desertion" in Iraq. Iraq is now supposedly a democratic, sovereign nation. During negotiations with American officials, the Iraqis refused to grant the American the right of extraterritoriality. And who can blame them after the Marines slaughtered so many innocent civilians in Hadthia? Being a Vietnam veteran, it reminded me a great deal of the massacre at My Lai. And the military didn't "desert" Iraq. They take their orders from the Commander-in-Chief, and then they follow them. So Marty, watch it. This loose cannon routine promote only ill will. Vietnam veterans went through enough of that kind of bullshit from ideologues from the right and the left as they debated after the fall of Saigon who lost the Vietnam War. Stop using the armed forces as a whipping boy in your column.

- rewiredhogdog

February 16, 2012 at 3:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Obama/Clinton have obediently followed Erdogan's guidance. Now reaching 8,000 slaughtered Syrians. The Syrian father Hafes al Assad was never held accountable after slaughtering 50,000 of his own people. Why should the son Bashar be treated any differently? Iran, Russia, China, the islamo -fascists, the leftists neo-fascists, the self hatred Jews , all are on the side of Bashar killing unarmed civilians. A loud silence of maximum evil. The alliance includes the passive slow moving American president and his secretary of state. Well they are Syrian Muslim brotherhood killed. And at one time MP was criticized for stating Muslim blood is cheap. Bashar is still in power now being aided by Iranian and Hizbollah, Shia ,how should be called a la New York Times, freedom fighters?

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 3:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Or combatants? Syrian army+Iranian/Hizbullah all Shia combatants slaughtering Sunni Muslim Brotherhood unarmed civilians. I guess freedom of religion does not exist in Syria. The Syrian foreign minister says all those pictures showing tanks firing at civilians are false, lies, just lies. Nobody knows.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 3:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"The New York Times, “the paper of record,” did not mention it" Yea, big surprise. When its chief Jerusalem correspondent openly and publicly displays her affection for the likes of abuNimah and extolls the virtues of an anti-Zionist book: http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/91408/somebody-tell-jodi-rudoren-to-stop-tweeting/ "On top of that, Rudoren’s tweets in the past 24 hours haven’t been innocuous. Tweeting at Ali Abunimah, the editor of the frankly anti-Israel Electronic Intifada Website, that she’s “heard good things”—of someone who advocates boycott, divestment, and sanctions of Israel and a one-state solution—is rightly making supporters of Israel suspicious of her objectivity and of where she stands. Ditto retweeting an article titled “Palestine: Love in the Time of Apartheid.” Even tweeting praise for Peter Beinart’s forthcoming book suggests, at least, that she favors one narrative of the conflict over the others. The most charitable reading says Rudoren possesses an astounding lack of sense of the profile of the post to which she has been appointed; of how she is going to be perceived; and of the fact that she is betraying her opinions before she has even started reporting. Only a fool would expect a reporter to have no opinions, but we expect them to zip their opinions up in favor of objectivity and to come to new stories with an open mind; Rudoren is already damaging her readers’ trust. And it’s a totally unforced error! Nobody’s telling her to tweet! (Right?) She is voluntarily doing this. In this reading, she is one more Gen-Xer, in the Anthony Weiner mold, totally clueless about Twitter. And the less charitable, perfectly plausible reading, is that she is slanted toward anti-Zionism. The Times needs to clean up this mess, and it starts by telling her to—for the love of God—stop tweeting."

- noga1

February 16, 2012 at 5:43am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I am curious why Mr. Peretz did not comment on the attack in India on the Israeli Diplomat. This was a very provocative act. Maybe Ahmidnejad has the 'Hawkish' Foreign Policy? And if you remember correctly, the Administration let everyone know they were not involved in the Iranian Nuclear Scientist hit, leaving the Israelis high and dry. Why not a little more clarification on this violent act in India. If that Diplomat were in New York City he wouldn't get a parking ticket, but in India they can put a bomb on his car?

- CRS9TNR

February 16, 2012 at 6:49am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

When Dr. Peretz writes: "Every faction in Syria’s exceptionally sanguinary politics counts Israel as enemy." I am not sure how the Druse on the Golan and Syria's Kurds are included - keep thinking those two factions really just want this Sunni-Shi'a schism to stay away from Druse and Kurdish communities. thanks noga, for the insight as to why the NYT is now even more biassed in their "news" coverage of Israel with Ethan Bronner's departure. As to who is "hawkish" and who is not? oy. wrong word focus. Must be tough for Dr. Peretz to spend three weeks in Israel, and then survey the American political landscape.

- K2K

February 16, 2012 at 9:25am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is a curious piece of work. Generally speaking, I find it hard to grasp how the president can be made to take the blame for TNR's characterization of his foreign policy. If he can't be, Marty's whole essay is rendered moot. I mean, it's one thing if Marty were to describe his commentary as a glittering convergence of George Orwell's moral candor and Edmund Wilson's irony, but it would be quite another for me to jeer at him for such embarrassing hyperbole if he never made that claim himself. Once again, it looks like a tortured gymnastic exercise that only has one object in mind: to create an opening to bellyache at the president for (a) not engaging in provocative rhetoric and (b) thinking before engaging in military action.

- ironyroad

February 16, 2012 at 9:50am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

this article is all over the place that it seems Marty just spouted his train of thoughts into his computers Dragon speak and then hit send. I am surprised East Timor is not mentioned in the article as he just rambles on about everything else. As to Iran, sanctions are working and Iran is now so desperate that they are going to claim that they are applying sanctions themselves by not selling their oil. As to Syria, I do not have the faintest idea what the solution should be or how we could affect it without getting knee deep in blood. As to Turkey, Marty is delusional if he thinks we can do anything positive to change it. At worst we can drive them over the edge. As to Iraq, Bush negotiated the treaty that US troops would be out by 2012 since that was the end of the Sofa agreement. I suppose Obama should have disregarded a binding treaty to stay in a country he pledged to get out of....why exactly? And the article also throws in Russia, China, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, yada yada. How dare Obama not remake thousands of years of history!!! I guess the night nurse at the nursing home forgot to give Marty his meds.

- blackton

February 16, 2012 at 10:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"In any case, there are—what with the military’s desertion of Iraq and the impending withdrawal from the war in Afghanistan which candidate Obama described as worthy and workable—almost literally no U.S. boots anywhere." We DESERTED Iraq? Huh. Wow. My memory is WAY off. Anyway, don't fret, Marty. There may be many fewer Americans today dying for causes you think are so important than in recent years, but wait just a little while. The proverbial winds do seem to be blowing in that direction in a number of locations, despite the best efforts of those of us who know what the fuck we're talking about urging patience, restraint, diplomacy, or asking at the very least for other countries who actually have a direct security interest to step up and do their part.

- Tristan

February 16, 2012 at 10:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So here are the options for the appeasement of Marty. The US bombs Iran, the US invades Syria, the US re-occupies Iraq and stops pressuring Israel about it's 'manifest destiny' settlers' developments. Apparently the only reason for US foreign policy and its military's existence is to narrowly focus solely on Israel's security and the surrounding Arab threats. I've read the ongoing discussions among the commenters here and the question of how much and how soon the US should intervene against Iran for Israel has never been answered but according to Marty, it was to be two years ago. Why so late Marty? Shouldn't it have been after the fall of the Shah? It's one thing to criticize US foreign policy in the M.E. because its not moving diligently in the negotiations realm but quite another to assert that negotiations have no place and instead direct military action is the only course of action. And we saw how effective that was under Bush Jr. which has effectively left a vacuum after hundreds of thousands of deaths, trillions of dollars spent and Israel is no safer for the effort. Except at least we had 'boots on the ground' for Marty. Seconding irony's comment about Marty simply using his essay as yet another bellyach session about how Obama hasn't used the 'boot' of the military to step on the necks of every threat against Israel that Marty sees in the world.

- singlspeed

February 16, 2012 at 10:59am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This article is like a bad parody of TNR.

- WandreyCer

February 16, 2012 at 11:13am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Irony. All turgidity boiled aside Marty states that informed naivete is is oxy and moronic. I have generous degrees of sympathy with this view in that expectation of reciprocal courtesy and good faith is doomed to be met with hotter contempt within the context of ME/Israel-West. Personally I think Obama did one hell of a job given the set of circumstances domestically. He was tuned to the market and its realities. I wish that he would bring the same kind of wired sensitivity to his ME disposition. Tacit apologies is a fruitless and ultimately more dangerous endeavor.

- jacko

February 16, 2012 at 11:15am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In the first part of this piece, Peretz takes half a dozen paragraphs to say something--I’m not sure what--about Syria. Aside from a compulsive anti-Obama tirade, there is virtually nothing there. Apparently he thinks we should simply jettison the UNSC procedures and send in drone strikes to accomplish the overthrow of the Syrian government. Thank God no administration has ever been foolish enough to let Peretz get anywhere near the policy process. He trots out several of his favorite memes and a few other oddities: Obama’s delusions, “that fool, George Mitchell”...Erdogan’s “Ottomanistic fantasies”...the rather metaphysical ”playing dice with the universe”...the word guerrilla repeatedly misspelled...and the interestingly fratricidal “TNR’s own silly judgment.” My favorite bit was this line about the Arab League: “It can do nothing and does nothing except rant.” The irony of Peretz's making such an allegation is, of course, utterly lost on him. The more significant part of the article is the earth-shattering news about Ali Khanenei’s “strategist” outlining the destruction of Israel. Of course, it’s utter nonsense. Peretz, employing the “intellectually reliable” MEMRI and the equally reliable Jerusalem Post is, for some reason, unable or unwilling to grasp this obvious truth. Alireza Forghani is described by Peretz as “Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s strategic counselor” and the former “governor of Kish Province.” His is clearly neither. First of all, there IS no Kish Province in Iran. There is a Kish Island in the Persian Gulf that is part of Hormozgan Province. It is a 35 square-mile dot that serves Iran as a free trade zone and tourist attraction. If Alireza Forghani had any actual connection to Kish Island, it is not mentioned in the biographic blurb, taken from his website, at the end of the linked MEMRI piece. Moreover, Forghani’s age is given as 28, making the notion of his being a governor of anything, much less a strategic counselor to the Supreme Leader, laughable. The bio makes no mention of any significant positions, but does include his “Favorite book: The Absolute Rule of the Jurisprudent” and his "Favorite sport: Jihad in fierce war." That’s actually what is says. If Peretz had bothered to do any research, he would have seen that YNET on 5 February described Forghani as “an Iranian blogger” and a “computer engineer” with no mention of any of the lofty titles Peretz takes to the bank. (http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4185497,00.html) As to the actual content of this blogger’s piece on the Alef website (scroll down for English transation: www.alef.ir/vdcepw8zwjh8ewi.b9bj.html?142262), it’s a hodge-podge of absurd and amateur strategic thinking. At the beginning of the article is this caveat that the JPost itself acknowledges: “This approach is just the personal opinion of the author and there is no guarantee whether the government of Islamic republic of Iran will accept and apply it or not.” The idea that the Iranian government would be conducting serious discussions about attacking Israel on public websites is ludicrous beyond words, though not, for course, for Peretz who entertains dark thoughts about why the media have not covered this revelation. Thinking that what Forghani writes has any relation to Iranian policy making is like thinking that anything Peretz writes is reflective of the US policy process. So, like the scary plot to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the US of a couple months ago and, in all probability, the supposed Iranian attacks in India, Georgia, and Thailand, this is just an attempt to create another myth that, aggregated with all the other myths, will somehow provide political cover for some sort of attack on or provocation against Iran. The only interesting question is this: Does Peretz actually believe the little fable he has helped disseminate here, or is it, rather, his view that petty dishonesties in the service of the Great Truth are permitted to those with superior moral understanding? I tend to favor the latter.

- ccarrick@vzavenue.net-old

February 16, 2012 at 11:20am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Caroline Glick is the last reporter I would quote to substantiate any claim. I noticed that even Peretz seemed a little uncomfortable quoting her.(“Now, Ms. Glick, with whom I sometimes (but not so often) disagree,….”) I too mostly (but not always) agree with Glick on what the real threats are, but disagree on how best to deal with them. Glick makes it seem that these threats can be dealt with easily if only were to apply real force. Peretz too identifies real threats but he seems to think that most of them were Obama’s fault. If only Obama had done this or that… It seems that once Peretz identifies someone as an enemy (here it’s Obama, there it was Hillary) he will never change his mind no matter what the person does. Thank god no one ever made him secretary of State or even a minor diplomat.

- arnon

February 16, 2012 at 11:32am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

“Obama’s delusions, “...Erdogan’s “Ottomanistic fantasies”...” I agree with much of what Zenophon said, but “Erdogan’s Ottomanistic fantasies”...” is not one of them. Last time he visited Egypt Erdogan wanted to act as the leader of the Arab world and was told that ‘the days when the Ottoman Empire ruled is over.’

- arnon

February 16, 2012 at 11:36am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

As usual with Marty's articles, so much heat and so little light. And again with the unsupported bullshtein about how Obama loved Assad and wanted him to be a linchpin of American diplomacy in the Middle East. Erdogan is one thing -- Obama did visit Ankara after his Cairo speech, the US has made nice with Turkey these past four years. But Assad? Seriously, where the heck is the evidence that anyone at the White House or State Department above Junior Assistant Hat Check Boy ever tried substantively to improve US relations with Syria or work with the Syrians on, well, anything? Any evidence at all? Even an opinion piece from the Jerusalem Post or the WSJ? Oh, I suppose Marty said that Obama "promised" them the Golan. Of course, he "promised" Syria the same thing that every US President from LBJ to W has promised to them -- if the Syrians are willing to peacefully negotiate with Israel for a return of the Golan in exchange for a peace treaty, the US will work with the two sides similar to how the US worked with Israel and Egypt on Camp David or Israel and Jordan on their treaty or Israel and the Palestinians on Oslo and other attempts at peace. Barak was interested when he was PM and the US worked to get the two sides to a deal that the Syrians ultimately rejected; Olmert was also interested and the US indirectly assisted in discussions that didn't get particularly far; Netenyahu isn't interested and the US hasn't pressured him one bit to try. What's wrong with that? I guess it's only wrong if you think the US should be the first country in the world to recognize Israeli de jure sovereignty over the Golan. Maybe you can wait for President Santorum to do that.

- wildboy

February 16, 2012 at 12:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Thank god no one ever made him secretary of State or even a minor diplomat." Arnon, in his own mind Martin Peretz served as President Gore's Ambassador to Ruritania for eight fruitless years, characterized by constant struggles with the petty interference of Catherine Ashton and Madeline Albright in his negotiations of an agreement to exempt the local rugelach industry from American tariffs.

- wildboy

February 16, 2012 at 12:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Arnon, in his own mind Martin Peretz served as President Gore's Ambassador to Ruritania for eight fruitless years, characterized by constant struggles with the petty interference of Catherine Ashton and Madeline Albright in his negotiations of an agreement to exempt the local rugelach industry from American tariffs." Love that, wildboy.

- bunthorne

February 16, 2012 at 12:28pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I'm still puzzled as to why it's Obama's fault that TNR, not the president, characterized his foreign policy as something that, in Marty's view, it's not.

- ironyroad

February 16, 2012 at 12:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

@JAIMECHUCH "In our small world of bloggers we have to fight the islamo fascists, the anti-Israel gang of leftists neo-fascists and the self hatred Jews." Well aren't you the brave keyboard warrior. In your small world, do they award Purple Hearts for carpal tunnel syndrome? And I'm going to say something I've wanted to say for a long time to the hawks on this board: Barack Obama is President of the United States, not Defense Minister of Israel. But who knows, maybe Mittens or Sen. Sweater Vest will win in November and get us in all kinds of boots on the ground adventures, while their own kids stay safely home.

- dubyadoubte

February 16, 2012 at 12:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Peter - God bless you, brother.

- Tristan

February 16, 2012 at 12:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Thanks Vincent, God bless you too. Oh, I'm going to Vegas in a couple of weeks. Bought tickets to the Mob Museum. I'll let you know about the shipping and handling charges for that horse's head. Jack Woltz will be so surprised. I think he'll give that part to Frankie Fontaine.

- dubyadoubte

February 16, 2012 at 2:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

dubyadoubte Have you condemned the Syrian Muslim to Muslim massacre going on. Has Tristan, the hide Muslim massacres, condemn the Muslim to Muslim carnage. Has wildboy been assertive with condemnations of Muslim carnages? Yes like MP I am against Muslim violence. And I am pro Israel and support Israel defending itself. Tristan is the sorry example of shutting up and never criticizing Muslim extremist fanatics misguided aggressivenes. But is prompt to criticize Israel. If we are the hawks you are the vultures. Do not be stupid. Who the hell wants Obama to be defense minister of Israel. Surely he was defense minister of Lybian rebels. Pal of Islamist Erdogan of hapless Turkey. And until recently kissing ass with the Syrian dictator. It has taken 8,000 Syrian civilian lives for Obama/Clinton to start criticizing the Syrian Muslim dictator. Obama/Clinton have been going slow on the nuclearization of Iran. Not one beep from Tristan about the Iranian 50,000 Hizbolah Lebanon and 10,000 Hamas Gaza Missiles. With these Muslim fanatics shouting that their objective's the destruction of the Jewish State. Yes you are my enemy and Tristan the hypocrite is my ex-friend. And I am here to uncover your vile malfeasance.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 2:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Obama/Clinton have been going slow on the nuclearization of Iran." That's a lie.

- ironyroad

February 16, 2012 at 2:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

If we're going to highlight Jamie's lies, we're going to be here a very, very long time.

- Tristan

February 16, 2012 at 2:29pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

However Obama says one thing in public mistreating the Israelis and kissing ass with the Muslims. But in private he has been the bests friend of Israel of all the USA presidents, according to Ehud Barak ,yes, defense minister of Israel. These is to keep the turds like Tristan and his new "friend" dubyadaubte confused. While also Obama is using drones to kill Muslim terrorists at max, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya , and more. Maybe soon will take action in Syria and Iran. And contrary to your arachnid brains ,Obama is doing these to protect American shall we say oil interests and protecting Saudi Arabia and such little powerful Arab oil countries. So do not equivocate that is in defense of Israel. Israel defends itself with their own people dying for their own country. However it is nice to know that Obama's is the American President Most friendly ever of Israel. Well the anti-Israel gang is as confused as ever. Why don't you change your posting name to daby daby doo fitting your brainless clown. Of course Tristan took it from Tristan and Isolda the opera of that rabid anti-Semite Richard Wagner. It fits him well it makes him happy . And I kid you not.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 2:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

O'bama''s foreign policy leaves a lot to be desired, an awful lot, like bullying 30 Billion from small countries for his banking handlers; 30 Billion that's funded by cutting Special Needs Assistants in schools for example. But you just know he's doing something right if he's annoying Marty Peretz. In fact, that's all the analysis you need really.

- IggyPop

February 16, 2012 at 2:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

irony road your timeline is different from israel's. You are the liar. Obama Clinton were slow with Syria and they are slow with iran's nuclearization. You don't read well the news. It is at the point that Israel in a joint operation with USA are to bomb iran's nuclear facilities. I advise you to get help in reading the news. irony road . Of course this will distress Tristan , the hypocrite Muslim massacre lover. Joint attacks by real friends USA Israel against Muslim terrorist Iran . Ex friend Tristan I have spoiled your dinner. Go and feed the cat , and remember keep your cool

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 2:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

IggyPop. Another viper tongue attacking MP. What kind of manure is attracted here. Well what can you expect with very old brainless kidos like Tristan. And time sensitive slowness like irony road.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 2:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

IggyPop. Another viper tongue attacking MP. What kind of manure is attracted here. Well what can you expect with very old brainless kidos like Tristan. And time sensitive slowness like irony road.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 2:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tristan, ex friend, you can go to some other site where they love Muslim massacres by Muslim dictators.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 2:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I think I have it figured out. Jamie knows no one will take him seriously, he of the spittle-flecked insult blogs and the crazy-as-a-moonbat analysis. He posts this goofiness deliberately, knowing they will provoke exactly the OPPOSITE reaction. There is only one logical conclusion. He is a secret agent of Hizballah. Or maybe Hamas. I forget which ones are crazier. Jamie, you crazy muslim terrorist, you! Trying to fool us all into talking smack against Israel and refusing to send troops into the Middle East every time you and your craxy Arab friends are up to your usual shenanigans. But we're on to you, Jamie the Muslim terrorist! Hey, do you prefer "Hamas Jam", or "Jamie the Hiz" as a nickname from now on?

- Tristan

February 16, 2012 at 2:59pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Typical Martin Peretz fallout. Just saying.

- Tgossard

February 16, 2012 at 3:20pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Marty's comments about the Middle East remind me of someone trying to put a 1000-piece puzzle together and who has lost a couple hundred of the pieces. I quit in frustration halfway through the article. Throwing dice would produce as much good in the Middle East as "policy" would--and, of course, the interpretation of "good" would depend on who's throwing the dice. Give it up, Marty. You're tying yourself and the readers in knots.

- magboy47.

February 16, 2012 at 3:35pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This piece gives me a headache.

- Sophia

February 16, 2012 at 3:47pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Your advice is both unnecessary and unwanted, Jaime. I'm an conscientious and intelligent reader of news, and have been for my adult life. Your interpretation of events is, if I may say so, not worth cat's piss. If you're looking for someone to blame, the administration previous to Obama's helped Iran by taking out Saddam Hussein's Iraq, their most dangerous rival in the region. Obama has actually focused on the Iranian nuclear problem in a way that distinguishes him from his predecessor. Whether Israel's timeline is mine or not is quite irrelevant, as I am not engaged in policy decisions in either country.

- ironyroad

February 16, 2012 at 3:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Soph: Santorum's guy could give you something for that. And it's not only good for headaches! Turns out it's a great way for...... http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cohn/100798/foster-friess-girls-used-aspirin-birth-control-santorum-msnbc

- Tristan

February 16, 2012 at 3:54pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Honestly Marty why on earth why would you or any rational person advocate a more "hawkish" position? We love war? We want to kill more people? PS we can afford this? As for the idiocy of Israel striking Iran - that's what it would be: idiocy. Ergo one hopes the Israelis are smarter than those hoping they attack, or trying to egg them on. As it is, it seems there are good indications the Iranians are willing to stop sabre-rattling and start talking, the threat of economic annihilation being much more persuasive than hot air about a nation the size of New Jersey launching a military attack; Iran isn't Jordan, Lebanon or even Iraq so hello? Like I said I have a headache. PS, the Ottomans? Oh give me a break. On that score, though, the British attack on the Ottoman Empire didn't work out so well did it? Marty hates the Arabs yet, who empowered them, created new nation-states out of whole cloth regardless of whether the borders made sense, indeed just about guaranteed centuries of major headaches; not to mention the fact that the main body of Turks to the East was cut off from the Turks in the West; what is right or just about that? Maybe we need to revisit the whole history of the modern Middle East/Central Asia? The Turks in our mythology are cast as demons; we they, are they? Who has been more tolerant, in real terms, to Jews, to cite but one example? Good lord do people know anything at all about Turkish culture, including the Ottomans? I wouldn't be so quick to put them down. The Kurds are another issue altogether; justice for them will be difficult to achieve since they straddle several nations and ethnic groups: Iran, Iraq, the Caucasus, Turkey. Regardless simply being bellicose in word or in deed won't help will it. Pass the aspirin.

- Sophia

February 16, 2012 at 3:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tristan you are funny, I needed that! LOL!

- Sophia

February 16, 2012 at 3:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Santorum's money bags, not so much. Oy.

- Sophia

February 16, 2012 at 3:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"PS - While almost everyone's piling on Peretz and to a lesser extent, Caroline Glick, I don't notice anyone going after Fouad Ajami. Perhaps is it because Ajami's criticism is dead on?" Mal, I will be the first to criticize Ajami (or rather the two paragraphs quoted by Marty, as I'm not a WSJ subscriber so I can't read the whole article behind their Murdochian paywall). It may seem silly to have tried to get Russian and Chinese approval of anti-Syria resolutions at the UN, but it probably seemed equally silly to Fouad Ajami to have tried to do so with Libya last February -- except it worked and the UN essentially gave its seal of approval to the use of force to stop Qadaffi from genocide in Cyrenaica and gave NATO the legal right to intervene in the Libyan revolution to topple Qadaffi later in the year. So it wasn't the height of stupidity to try it again with Syria, especially where no Western nation actually expects to step out and help the Syrian opposition militarily of its own accord. Even though it didn't work for Syria, it did put the Russians in a diplomatic box and is forcing them to scramble to preserve their political standing in the broader Middle East (the Chinese are another matter -- I don't think they really care diplomatically about the Middle East as long as the oil keeps flowing their way, but the Russians want to be seen as players). The alternative that Ajami would have preferred -- telling the Russians and Chinese off and trying to assemble some "coalition of the willing" with the UK, France and who knows who else -- would have just encouraged the Russians and Chinese to actively make mischief by working hard to support Assad rather than attempt to move him out. As I also noted in another post, it could have produced a whole host of complications in the Western relationship with Russian and China, including active impediments to Iranian sanctions, more trouble in the Caucusus and Eastern Europe, more belligerent natural gas diplomacy, less cooperation on nukes and so forth. Ajami and Marty don't care because they are not running anything except their mouths, and Syrian opposition leaders don't care because they are fighting for their lives, but the people who actually run American and European foreign policy have to care because these sorts of eggs are what goes into the omlet.

- wildboy

February 16, 2012 at 5:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

irony road you should stick to proper English. Policy and information is not your bag. Kiss ass with Tristan the hypocrite. You need help to read the news. I conclude you are misinformed. Make it even better why don't you use Shakespearian English like this we will not understand your silly thoughts.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 5:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"irony road you should stick to proper English. Policy and information is not your bag. Kiss ass with Tristan the hypocrite. You need help to read the news. I conclude you are misinformed. Make it even better why don't you use Shakespearian English like this we will not understand your silly thoughts." Whatever, dude. Just sleep it off, is my advice.

- ironyroad

February 16, 2012 at 6:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

irony! how dare you insult my cat's piss by comparing it to the ramblings of jaime. my cat was so insulted he's taken it upon himself to go lick himself clean from being made to 'feel so dirty'

- singlspeed

February 16, 2012 at 8:14pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Utterly incoherent babbling. The only thing Peretz is capable of at this point. This one is a new low, even for him. "Perhaps it's the price paid for the West's bending and twisting of the mandate under the Security Council resolution on Libya. That authorized the establishment of a no fly zone and assistance short of occupation to protect civilians, but was interpreted by the West/Nato into overt military action on behalf of the Libyan opposition." I predicted this on these pages at the time that the reaching beyond the bounds of the UNSC Libya resolution was being celebrated here.

- roidubouloi

February 16, 2012 at 8:21pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

siqnglspeed There is a chorus insisting that USA military involvement in the ME is to defend Israel. Well the oil interests of America are not the main reason, to protect Saudi Arabia with the oil and trillion dollars investment no reason. Remember ,read your Wikipedia, that the first Iraq war under Bush I was to kick out Iraq from their invasion of Kuwait a major oil provider of ours, or so. And it goes on and on. Cats are pretty smart, mine is misty. As far as your comments, are to quote ironyroad so irrelevant and out of line. I would agree with you that you should dedicate yourself to feed your cat, clean it's scoop. And read read the Wikipedia , and try hard not to be a bigot, the favorite word of Tristan., the Muslim massacres denier. Well UN general assembly condemned Syria for Muslim massacres of Muslims. Sing speed and Tristan are saying what what.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 9:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

singlspeed Got his moment of attention. He knows nothing , says nothing, he is lonely and neglected. And Tristan is shaking , he just learned that the USA and Israel are going to have joint military excersices preparing the attack to destroy Iranian nuclear facilities. The Saudis are very happy . singlesped says what what.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 16, 2012 at 9:32pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Chaos in the Middle East is what we can expect from the Arab Spring: http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/chaos-the-new-status-quo-1.413392

- noga1

February 17, 2012 at 10:26am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

100% deserves repeating for drilling to one core issue in US foreign policy under Obama the Transnationalist: 02/16/2012 - 5:43pm EDT | malahat "... I think that Libya will exact an even higher price tag in terms of future lives lost - the idea that the international community has a "responsibility to protect" civilians that trumps national sovereignty and the latitude of despots to murder their populace has de facto been rewound all the way back to Westphalia." The UN wanted to prevent another Rwanda with R2P. Libya was the test case. So far, a semi-oops on R2P, and it is so obvious that neither China nor Russia wants to ever hear about R2P again. I give Dr. Peretz a pass on this post because I am certain he was doing everything he could to refrain from putting one word online about what was happening in Israel past few weeks that has absolutely nothing to do with regime change in Syria :) Hey, I am bursting to post my thoughts online, but, no need to fuel any more conspiracy theories about the US elections. Those of us who watch Glick's LatmaTV have the big clue. I just wish noga and I had a way to chat about this in private!

- K2K

February 17, 2012 at 12:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jaime, If you could only read your own posts with a detached sense of self you would realize that they read like a first-year lit student's version of trying to write in a stream of consciousness style. Except you're not trying to do that, it just comes naturally to you to write so incoherently. It's unfortunate that someone who appears to be as unhinged as yourself should need such constant reassurance of their importance in the form of responses from the other posters around here on TNR. But pity only runs so deep and I'm beginning to wish TNR had an "ignore' button.

- singlspeed

February 17, 2012 at 1:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

single speed. Defense of Israel, condemnation of Muslim islamo fascists, maintenance of USA Israel alliance, is my first priority. Your pedantic posters full of shallow opinions disguised with elaborate words that support an ill conceived antagonism to American Israel objectives in the ME makes You a singleton. Your choice is to attack me, just like hypocrite Tristan, not my opinions. Are you anti-Israel, yes. Are you condoning Muslims massacring Muslims, yes. You wish for an ignore button. That's funny. You can not control yourself of bypassing my posters and ignoring them. Admit that I am right and you are wrong, and that irritates you the most. Same goes for hypocrite Tristan, my ex friend.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 3:17pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jaime the secret muslim terrorist is back. Jamie, you sly dog, you. Trying to get the US to keep fighting war after war to bring us down. We are not fooled. None of your claims to be Jewish or pro-Israeli are fooling anyone. Go back to your madrassa, Jamie the secret muslim terrorist.

- Tristan

February 17, 2012 at 3:26pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The hypocrite Tristan is reacting with his turret syndrome. I called him in the past a paid Iranian blogger. He talks like one he reacts like one. He might be paid or he might be doing it w/o pay. It reminds me of the prostitute that does it because she likes it regardless of money. noga1 Thank you for the article in Haaretz. Arab Spring followed by chaos . You can be optimistic. You can be pessimistic . Hard to be realistic. My prediction is that will produce strong dictators. There will be a lot of blood spilled just like it is happening in Syria. Muslims massacring Muslims. What is ironic is that the islamists like the Muslim Brotherhood, like Hamas , are very well organized because of their charity work, lack of corruption, helping the poor, the sick, providing schools and shelters. People will follow them. But that are fanatics, full of hatred towards Israel towards the Jews , towards the non believers, towards other religions, towards the USA and the West. Then they bring war and violence. And they bring their young to die in war. Is a paradox that has taken hold of Muslims. That is why the alliance of USA Israel is so important to contain , and cut the evil dragon's head, of Muslim aggressive violence imbedded in Iran, imbedded in the fanaticism of the Muslim Brotherhood.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 3:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tristan. You are not making sense. You are wild as a hyena (correct spelling ironyroad?)or a wild animal that has been hurt in verbal battle. This hypocrite pro Muslim killing Muslims, pro Iranian, is foaming at the mouth. And all because the alliance USA Israel helps the ME from their chaos . Will stop Iran from nuclear belligerence. Get hold of yourself. Or follow ironyroad suggestion, sleep it over.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 4:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tristan use correct spelling Jaime is the Spanish for James. Jamie is incorrect. What are ex-friends for?

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 4:11pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Talking of dos here is the winner of the Westminster. http://www.philly.com/philly/news/breaking/20120214_Pa__Pekingese_becomes_Americas_top_dog_at_Westminster.html

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 4:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here are the photos, ain't it nice? http://www.chron.com/life/article/For-Malachy-slow-and-steady-wins-Westminster-3337358.php

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 4:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Here are the photos, ain't it nice? http://www.chron.com/life/article/For-Malachy-slow-and-steady-wins-Westminster-3337358.php

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 4:27pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jamie, does it concern you at all that every other poster on here thinks you're a blithering idiot? Even the most die-hard, anti-Obama, pro-Israel blogger on here takes time to point out that you have the intelligence of a goat, no literary skills, no reading comprehension, and you're crazy as a damn fruitbat. In other words, Jamie, even the people that are supposed to be on your side think you're a fruitloop. Are you incapable of self reflection? You're actually helping to answer a long-standing question of mine... do really, truly crazy people KNOW they're crazy? I mean, do you whackadoos ever sit back and go "Wow, I am really just totally out to lunch." ? Apparently, the answer is no.

- Tristan

February 17, 2012 at 4:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

'hyena' is spelled correctly -- if it's not, you should get a red underline in the text box. But in terms of the metaphor -- tristan (just got a red underline!) doesn't strike me as very hyena-like. More of a mountain lion, padding softly just above and behind his prey.

- ironyroad

February 17, 2012 at 5:05pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Wow, this is the first time I've seen a Peretz piece where the comments were more repulsive than the original text.

- gwcross

February 17, 2012 at 5:22pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't know if these animals hyena or mountain lion attack when they are hungry or else. Tristan is human , or so it appears, he is deeply hurt by my comments, and he is out of his mind. Good. His anti USA Israel alliance and his condoning of Muslims massacring Muslims, has been justly punished. But is characters like Tristan that attract Muslims to acts of terror against the USA. Read about this illegal USA resident Moroccan Muslim trying to blow up the Capitol http://www.cnn.com/2012/02/17/justice/us-dc-security-threat-arrest/index.html?hpt=hp_t1 Thank you ironyroad for the corrections. Well Tristan ex-friend get hold of yourself, madness is in your future.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 5:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Since you decided to misspell my name, I will do the same with tours Tristan is now Triston (the sad one in Spanish) . That does not change nothing, he is still an hypocrite, he is still an anti alliance USA Israel, he still condones Muslims massacring Muslims. He has called me a mad dog. Then he called me crazy. Then he criticized my lack of literary skills. But the bottom line is that he understands my description of his persona. Tristan/Triston you have been uncovered you can not be any longer a hiding hypocrite.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 5:44pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

gwcross In previous MP blogs you did not considered the vile attacks against MP repulsive, eh? What low class vermins we have here. There is infestation of anti-Israel condoning Muslims massacring Muslims vermins.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 5:52pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tristan is not a mountain lion. He is a giraffe that wants to be a mountain lion. http://www.flickr.com/photos/31720437@N06/2966288657/

- noga1

February 17, 2012 at 6:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

noga 1 Thank you for the reference. It is nice.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 17, 2012 at 10:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Why are the leftists silent. Are Triston, gwcross, ..etc, really leftists? Or just anti coalition USA Israel, condoners of Muslim massacring Muslims? http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4191180,00.html

- JAIMECHUCH

February 18, 2012 at 8:23am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Hello Tristan: just for the record, although I am amongst the ardent pro-Israel commenters here, I have chosen to ignore JaimeChurch, but never to criticize him. Part of my comprehensive ban on name-calling, as has been done to me. Serves no purpose to namecall anyone as "crazy" or "retarded". I confess to a current keen interest in Newfoundland dogs as a result of having one as a new neighbor- finally, one dependable and kind neighbor! - so I AM almost ready to question JaimeChurch's infatuation with the Pekingese winner of the Westminster Dog Show. Instead, here is Lord Byron's perfect ode to his Newfoundland, Boatswain, a poem which succinctly characterizes the true nature of man, and the virtues of Newfoundlands. (Nana in "Peter Pan" is a Newfoundland): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epitaph_to_a_Dog How ironic that the ancestor of almost all modern dog breeds is the Arabian Grey Wolf.

- K2K

February 18, 2012 at 12:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't mind saying that I was wrong about Iraq, that appreciable good *has* stemmed from our invasion, however just plain inept the idea of attacking Iraq at once rather than waiting a spell to find out how convincing beyond reasonable doubt the evidence might be it was. The occupation, messy and deadly as it has been, has on balance done appreciable good—at the very least ridding the country of Saddam. Ironically, what crowned the success of this outcome, however messy it may be, has been Obama's decision to end active participation now, in favor of an assistive role when needed. If the government and people on balance credibly and vociferously object to our presence alone, than consult and negotiate what level of participation they *can and will tolerate*, and adjust accordingly, short of total withdrawal; or quit the place as orderly and responsibly to all concerned as we can. Now with Iran, outcomes being unpredictable, we should do every thing we can, short of invasion, to effect regime change. Personally I don't think it a bad idea to consider nuclear bombing the Holy City of Qom to wipe out or critically damage the clerical apparatus, but that is not a solution. Time for any solution is past due and unrecoverable were it even possible to accomplish it. What is is and will remain so, and little to nothing can be done about it.

- Tgossard

February 18, 2012 at 6:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I was kidding about the nuclear part, it was only a fantasy. Not a bad one, though, don't you think? (;

- Tgossard

February 18, 2012 at 6:03pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Do you suppose, TG, that if we had known with perfect foresight both the outcome and the cost of invading Iraq that any significant percentage of Americans would consider it to have been worth it? Do you?

- roidubouloi

February 18, 2012 at 8:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This for the enjoyment of noga1, K2K, skahn A pet emu escaped , a present from a father to his children. There have been difficulties in capturing this 150 lbs non flying bird. The father is disappointed with his gift choice. http://www.wcax.com/story/16963117/escaped-emu-on-the-loose-in-the-champlain-islands Even the" ignore button "can enjoy it. It is Saint Valentine day delayed. In Veracruz they are celebrating carnival. Also in Rio.

- JAIMECHUCH

February 18, 2012 at 8:13pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

roidubouloi said: "Do you suppose, TG, that if we had known with perfect foresight both the outcome and the cost of invading Iraq that any significant percentage of Americans would consider it to have been worth it? Do you?" That's a very good question. Probably my answer would be 'no.' But I'm no longer certain about that. What I am certain of is it was grievous mistake to have entered the war as and when we did. My conviction is that rash and willful act was absurdly misguided from any vantage point. All I'm saying is that the outcome has been surprisingly good, given all the costs and errors. What I had expected was things would only get worse at best, and I think I was wrong about that. Did it justify all the cost, trial and tribulations, I just don't know. History often disappoints or upsets one's expectations, and we can't underestimate the value of having been rid of Saddam. I think the Iraqi people would probably on balance agree with this. In retrospect many years from now the war will most likely be seen as a muddled and confused blip on the screen, with surprisingly lucky outcome. The economic costs of the war, taken alone, pale before the dreadful shadow cast on our economic future as a consequence of the so-called "mortgage crisis." That term is an insult to the vast majority of American people whose lives have been turned upside down and inside out, causing massive suffering that wasn't necessary or called for. The longer this "recession" persists the insult only grows by orders of magnitude that appall me more and more. Massive fraud and blind robbery have been perpetrated not only Americans but those people in every Western nation. Why there hasn't been an uprising anywhere near worthy of the magnitude of deception and dereliction that precipitated the "crisis" and "recession" is very worrisome to me. The divisiveness and rancorousness of politics has cast a veil on what I deem to be a monstrous crime. Had I the inclination to arbitrary judgment and punishment to fit the crime, every Wall Street head with the banks' ceo's and lobbyists would roll like water over a cliff the heads of the perpetrators and beneficiaries under the guillotine's blade. I consider it worthy of serious consideration for such high crimes to resurrect the guillotine and off the wicked devils with dispatch and such satisfaction as can be head.

- Tgossard

February 20, 2012 at 11:44am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

For a pacifist at heart I surprise myself at my bloodthirstiness, but there you have it.

- Tgossard

February 20, 2012 at 11:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

...I conclude I'm merely human, good intentions and goodwill notwithstanding!

- Tgossard

February 20, 2012 at 11:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"For a pacifist at heart I surprise myself at my bloodthirstiness," Pacifists are not peaceful people. Pacifists think they know best which people deserve to be beheaded for the greater good of society. Considering the bloody fantasy you have just shared with us, I would say you have a lot more in common with the jihadists who beheaded Daniel Pearl than with Einstein or the Dalai Lama. “Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist. This is elementary common sense." ― George Orwell

- noga1

February 22, 2012 at 7:47am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close