Here is a look at the Middle East conflict through the filter of Bush,
using my own bullet points rather than artillery. Bush being the straight shooter, err talker.
--- Ceasefire? Or stay the course?
The latter is preferred or the former later.
---A Bi-partisan Delegation to resolve the conflict? Or change the course?
The former would need the latter, so much later.
Actually the above were more fleshed out than mere bullet points.
---Isreal v. Hezbollah
---Democracy v. Disarmament
---Hostages v. Prisoners
Movement is needed, but not forward ho! Nor bring 'em on.
It is more than about who started it, or who will finish it.*
Only the Shadow knows, but Bush thinks...
THE ABOVE preceded Bush's comments in regard to this issue.
His approach is that the root cause of the current conflict is terrorism. That seems to be as valid as that the root cause of terrorism is the current conflict.
That does seem to make sense now. But is it not as valid to say that terrorism is the result of conflict or war is the result of conflict?
Not if you don't care who started it, but intend to finish it. Or may not intend to finish it. Syria and Iran and supporters of terrorism must be dealt with. Terrorism must be dealt with {in Bush's view), but issues are what must be dealt with or in my view the course is set. [7-19-06: Italics added to my take on Bush's take, and senentences flip-flopped here for better flow.] As difficult as it is to see the difference between cause and effect and what starts anything, a change is required to be made.
Maybe later I will fill in a few more details without tampering too much with the format above, but part of the Phase II concept is to move forward in that regard as well as look back.
* Reference a comment by Congressman John Dingell on The Ed Shultz Show. I have previously noted the childish nature of such tit for tat arguments as who started it, or what justifies what or what is the means of ending anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment