"'I believe there is a likelihood that there are Scuds that Hezbollah has in Lebanon. A high likelihood,' Senate Intelligence Committee chair Dianne Feinstein, a Democrat from California, told AFP.
'The rockets and missiles in Lebanon are substantially increased and better technologically than they were and this is a real point of danger for Israel,' Feinstein added.
'There's only one thing that's going to solve it, and that's a two-state solution,' she said, referring to stalled international efforts to create an independent, viable Palestinian state living at peace with Israel."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100420/pl_afp/usmideastlebanonsyriahezbollaharmspolitics
"The rockets and missiles in Lebanon are substantially increased and better than they were"? Excuse me, but what is the Intelligence Committee chair attempting to tell us by way of this garbled sentence?
"A real point of danger for Israel"? You don't say, senator.
Yes, Ms. Feinstein, Hezbollah indeed received Scuds from Syria, but you need to be daft to believe that a two-state solution involving the Israelis and Palestinians will eliminate this threat.
Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas have all called for the annihilation of Israel. At no time have they said that the conclusion of an agreement between Israel and Fatah in the West Bank will affect their resolve to destroy Israel.
Moreover, Feinstein is blind to historic Persian-Arab and Shiite-Sunni animosity, which has resulted in more wars and exponentially more deaths than all of the Arab-Israel conflicts. Iran has its own agenda, i.e. Middle East hegemony, and the shipment of arms to Hamas and Hezbollah is part of a larger game in which Israel serves as a diversion. As recently observed by Ray Takeyh:
"Although pressuring Israel to restrain its settlements may be a sensible means of gaining constructive Arab participation in the peace talks, it is unlikely to affect the region's passive approach to Iran. Indeed, should Tehran perceive fissures and divisions in U.S.-Israeli alliance, it is likely to further harden its nuclear stance.
The notion that the incumbent Arab regimes are reluctant to collaborate with the United States on Iran because of the prevailing impasse in the peace process is a misreading of regional realities."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/04/09/AR2010040905075_pf.html
Needless to say, Feinstein also appears ignorant of historic hostility between Palestinians and Lebanese Shiites, dating back to the period when Arafat held sway over South Lebanon.
Sorry to say, Dianne, you are in need of better intelligence.
"Sorry to say, Dianne, you are in need of better intelligence."
ReplyDeleteI think, she is just fine. She is not under threat in any way. But we do have a serious problem here.
'There's only one thing that's going to solve it, and that's a two-state solution,' she said, referring to stalled international efforts to create an independent, viable Palestinian state living at peace with Israel."
We never will know for sure what exactly this charming lady was "referring to". May be, she wanted to say that there should be two states for Lebanon and Israel? Since she was speaking about Lebanon, it seems to be a natural interpretation.
I received a standard propaganda letter from my Senator Schumer. He is talking about two things: how bad are Republicans ("party of NO"), and how much Obama has achieved already. Fight between parties for the power is what US Senators care about and know best.
Schumer, as I learned when I met him with his family some 28 years ago (his daughter Jessica was still a toddler), is a politician's politician. As Bob Dole once said of him, "the most dangerous place in Washington is between Charles Schumer and a television camera." I wouldn't expect too much from him.
ReplyDelete