Thursday, July 27, 2006
Harper's: Is Bush seriously considering sending troops into Lebanon?
OMFG... just when I think things can't worst, I read this (via Harper's): "There's much discussion of putting a multinatl, NATO-led force in S Lebanon as part of a ceasefire agreement in the Israel–Lebanon conflict, but Condi Rice, according to a story in the Wa Post, has said that she does “not think that it is anticipated that US ground forces . . . are expected for that force.” However, a well-connected former CIA officer has told me that the Bush Admin is in fact considering exactly such a deployment. The officer, who had broad experience in the Middle East while at the CIA, said that despite ardent opposition by the uniformed military, Israel and the US are currently discussing a large Amer role in exactly such a “multinational” deployment, and some top admin officials, along w/ senior civilians at the Pentagon, are receptive to the idea. Sending US soldiers is at this pt simply an option and by is no means a certainty, but if the admin decides to move forward, my source said, "It would be viewed in the Arab world as the US picking up a combat role on behalf of Israel." Well, given that Israel says that the diplomats' decision not to call for a halt to its Lebanon offensive at a Middle East summit in Rome has given it the green light to continue, why the hell shouldn't the US just send troops, right?