they are striking the same targets. This current state is more for effect than actually effort.

whether it is to scare the bees out of their nests to find locations for future strikes, or to create images that draw out Syria and Iran, couldn’t tell you…

I would bet a used piece of 8×11 1/2 lined notebook that they don’t move in for at least a week, but it may stretch into several weeks IF AT ALL. There is no hurry-fortified positions make better targets-they will kill far more hezbollah by scouting and performing airstrikes, then by putting their soldiers further at risk by full scale invasion. There is no timetable driving them, unless they invested troops heavily into Lebanon and as casualties mounted, it would weaken their overall effort.

The best game they have going is threatening a full scale invasion, so perhaps Iran and Syria can be caught in direct support.

An airstike on damascus…which is what the Israeli would love, has a better chance of ending this early than any other action they have taken. It is a card the Israeli have yet to play.

Peter, I can think of at least 52 Americans who would disagree with that assesment very strongly.

“However, my point is that we don’t have the leverage — short of military invasion or blockade — to influence events towards a positive outcome.”

When did we have that option? I mean Reagan got out in 82, so clearly that we didn’t have the power then.

The US still remains the most powerful figure on the board. The katushya(go ahead correct the spelling) rockets don’t exactly disappear. We are assisting the Israeli in their targeting…

I don’t see a big rush on the part of Israel. While word is spreading that a ground invasion is pending, I’m guessing the Israeli’s are taking their time letting things play out a little more. They await the pending rxn from Iran and Syria-both are not acting in a manner that will help their cause and outside factors will be weighing in.

For Carter and Nixon-they couldn’t go any further…Carter stymied by the hostages, Nixon by the growing unrest of Vietnam-with impeachment hanging over his head.

The US hasn’t moved a man to theatre(nor do I wish them to)-but it is one of many cards left to play.

We do have influence on Israel and Egypt, by virtue of the fact that we give them billions of dollars every year. However, my point is that we don’t have the leverage — short of military invasion or blockade — to influence events towards a positive outcome. Kind of brings back an old Nixonism about being a “pitiful, helpless giant.”

“There is something qualitatively different about the latest cycle of violence in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, although I’m having trouble in my own mind hanging a label on it.”

no label?(the implication of the choice of word say a lot)

How bout-borders are not being observed by either side?
The label is quite simply- ‘war’.

It is my understanding(open to correction) that the hostage crisis could have been averted had he taken the people out of the embassy. His fear was that the appearance of an unwillingness to negotiate would deepen the quagmire.

By leaving the people in for political reasons that he thought he understood, he brought about his own demise. Looking back, when he evacuated non-essential employees, he should have taken them all out.

(I haven’t seen some good carter bashing in a while-any chance you got the links?)

Where to begin? Not today…

But I would ask-is Israeli foreign policy abandoning US support(money and military) to attack unialerally or are they acting in conjunction with the US?

Your earlier statement(no cards to play) implies that we have no affect over any ME country, whether by financial aid or implicit support…

Sorry Peter, but whatever the outcome, the opportunites presented still have the potential for good, and the US is not without the ability to affect the region or indivdual countries in the region.

We also have more control over the outcome than any other country, ask the Palestinians.

Until your needs are met, fire at will, Israel….

Yes, Jimmy Carter did a fine job at Camp David (perhaps the only triumph of that miserable presidency) but I find it odd that you would choose as your model for dealing with Radical Islam the man who stood impotent before the world in a 400+ day hostage crisis.

Suit yourself…

There are many reasons why we are paralyzed. Previous administrations viewed the Isreali-Palestinian conflict as central to any solution to the Middle East, and assigned people like Dennis Ross as high-level emissaries to the region. By abandoning this approach and relegating the conflict to back burner status, we lost the ability to play the honest broker.

By adopting a my-way-or-the-highway approach to foreign policy, this administration has no diplomatic leverage to use against Syria or Iran. By refusing to talk to them — and, in Iran’s case, including it in an axis of evil — we have walled ourselves off as well as them. It’s all well and good to be a chest thumper and declare that we won’t negotiate with regimes which support terror, up until the point when you need something from them. American diplomacy has found a way to work with repugnant regimes such as those of Stalin, Kruschev, Mao, Riza Pahlevi, and the Fahds, to name a few. By branding Damascus and Tehran as rogue regimes and ceasing dialogue with them — despite any opportunities which may have been available with new regimes in both countries — the only leverage which remains to us is military force.

Needless to say, the adventure in Iraq has exacerbated the whole situation. By destabilizing Iraq, we lost any credibility we may once have had and we have weakened what passes for moderate governments in the Middle East. Our troops are bogged down and we lack a credible military threat against Iran, much less North Korea. We have made ourselves vulnerable to Iran by giving them the ability to harrass our troops by proxy. Abu Ghraib, Gitmo, Haditha, and the daily bloodshed in Iraq — not to mention sending Karen Hughes to lecture the Saudis about how they would have more fulfilling lives if they could be more like us — has made the hearts-and-minds battle a complete loss. Although I don’t know how you would measure these things, it is hard to imagine a time when we were more despised in the Middle East than we are today.

Say what you will about Jimmy Carter, but he had an intensive diplomatic effort aimed at the Middle East, which was a far less dangerous place under his watch. Far from improving things, the current administration has created problems which it has neither the resources nor the ability to find a solution for.