The Gaza Bombshell

Worth the five minute read:

"According to Dahlan, it was Bush who had pushed legislative elections in the Palestinian territories in January 2006, despite warnings that Fatah was not ready. After Hamas�??whose 1988 charter committed it to the goal of driving Israel into the sea�??won control of the parliament, Bush made another, deadlier miscalculation.

Vanity Fair has obtained confidential documents, since corroborated by sources in the U.S. and Palestine, which lay bare a covert initiative, approved by Bush and implemented by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams, to provoke a Palestinian civil war. The plan was for forces led by Dahlan, and armed with new weapons supplied at America�??s behest, to give Fatah the muscle it needed to remove the democratically elected Hamas-led government from power. (The State Department declined to comment.)

But the secret plan backfired, resulting in a further setback for American foreign policy under Bush. Instead of driving its enemies out of power, the U.S.-backed Fatah fighters inadvertently provoked Hamas to seize total control of Gaza.

Some sources call the scheme �??Iran-contra 2.0,�?? recalling that Abrams was convicted (and later pardoned) for withholding information from Congress during the original Iran-contra scandal under President Reagan. There are echoes of other past misadventures as well: the C.I.A.�??s 1953 ouster of an elected prime minister in Iran, which set the stage for the 1979 Islamic revolution there; the aborted 1961 Bay of Pigs invasion, which gave Fidel Castro an excuse to solidify his hold on Cuba; and the contemporary tragedy in Iraq.

Within the Bush administration, the Palestinian policy set off a furious debate. One of its critics is David Wurmser, the avowed neoconservative, who resigned as Vice President Dick Cheney�??s chief Middle East adviser in July 2007, a month after the Gaza coup.

Wurmser accuses the Bush administration of �??engaging in a dirty war in an effort to provide a corrupt dictatorship [led by Abbas] with victory.�?? He believes that Hamas had no intention of taking Gaza until Fatah forced its hand. �??It looks to me that what happened wasn�??t so much a coup by Hamas but an attempted coup by Fatah that was pre-empted before it could happen,�?? Wurmser says.

The botched plan has rendered the dream of Middle East peace more remote than ever, but what really galls neocons such as Wurmser is the hypocrisy it exposed. �??There is a stunning disconnect between the president�??s call for Middle East democracy and this policy,�?? he says. �??It directly contradicts it.�??"

The freedom agenda is exposed as hypocrisy, maybe it once had a bit of truth to it. And, if further proof were needed, more evidence of the titanic foreign policy incompetence of this administration.

  1. We shouldn’t be aiming to spread democracy. See Hamas.

  2. Abbas is no friend, and it was foolish to side with him.

  3. The US doesn’t need to be involved at all in this conflict.

Surprise, this is not.

I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing. [/quote]

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair?

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair? [/quote]

Huh? We call for an election and then try to militarily overthrow the winner because we didn’t like the result? This doesn’t strike you as hypocritical and wrong?

Not to mention the fact that Hamas has NOTHING to do with American national security.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair?

Huh? We call for an election and then try to militarily overthrow the winner because we didn’t like the result? This doesn’t strike you as hypocritical and wrong?

Not to mention the fact that Hamas has NOTHING to do with American national security.[/quote]

When the winner is Hamas then yes, overthrowing them is a good goal. Good god man, peace in that part of the world has much to do with national security and getting rid of Hamas would help that course.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair?

Huh? We call for an election and then try to militarily overthrow the winner because we didn’t like the result? This doesn’t strike you as hypocritical and wrong?

Not to mention the fact that Hamas has NOTHING to do with American national security.[/quote]

Are you being serious?

What’s wrong about trying to get rid of a terrorist, islamo-jihadist government that refuses to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist?

If there is to be peace in that region - as much of a pipe dream as it is - it most certainly won’t be done with the cowards that are in charge of the Palestinians right now.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair? [/quote]

I’d like to see an additional source actually. I am not say Vanity Fair is wrong, but those are some bold accusations. I would think other media outlets would have picked up on them too even if Vanity Fair scooped them.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair?

Huh? We call for an election and then try to militarily overthrow the winner because we didn’t like the result? This doesn’t strike you as hypocritical and wrong?

Not to mention the fact that Hamas has NOTHING to do with American national security.

When the winner is Hamas then yes, overthrowing them is a good goal. Good god man, peace in that part of the world has much to do with national security and getting rid of Hamas would help that course.

[/quote]

No, Hamas’ enemy is Israel, not us. As Russell Kirk noted of American neo-cons years ago, “Some of them seem to forget that America’s capital is in Washington, not Tel Aviv.”

And anyway, getting rid of Hamas will not bring peace. There are Islamist elements in Gaza far worse than Hamas. And Fatah has little credibility either.

[quote]pat wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair?

I’d like to see an additional source actually. I am not say Vanity Fair is wrong, but those are some bold accusations. I would think other media outlets would have picked up on them too even if Vanity Fair scooped them.[/quote]

I am assuming they are correct. Who leaked the documents. Shouldn’t they be arrested?

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair?

Huh? We call for an election and then try to militarily overthrow the winner because we didn’t like the result? This doesn’t strike you as hypocritical and wrong?

Not to mention the fact that Hamas has NOTHING to do with American national security.

When the winner is Hamas then yes, overthrowing them is a good goal. Good god man, peace in that part of the world has much to do with national security and getting rid of Hamas would help that course.

No, Hamas’ enemy is Israel, not us. As Russell Kirk noted of American neo-cons years ago, “Some of them seem to forget that America’s capital is in Washington, not Tel Aviv.”

And anyway, getting rid of Hamas will not bring peace. There are Islamist elements in Gaza far worse than Hamas. And Fatah has little credibility either.[/quote]

You don’t get it do you? Without peace there will be no peace. Kind of obvious but you live under the fantasy that war in the middle east will not impact the US.

Isolationism doesn’t work.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair?

Huh? We call for an election and then try to militarily overthrow the winner because we didn’t like the result? This doesn’t strike you as hypocritical and wrong?

Not to mention the fact that Hamas has NOTHING to do with American national security.

When the winner is Hamas then yes, overthrowing them is a good goal. Good god man, peace in that part of the world has much to do with national security and getting rid of Hamas would help that course.

No, Hamas’ enemy is Israel, not us. As Russell Kirk noted of American neo-cons years ago, “Some of them seem to forget that America’s capital is in Washington, not Tel Aviv.”

And anyway, getting rid of Hamas will not bring peace. There are Islamist elements in Gaza far worse than Hamas. And Fatah has little credibility either.

You don’t get it do you? Without peace there will be no peace. Kind of obvious but you live under the fantasy that war in the middle east will not impact the US.

Isolationism doesn’t work.[/quote]

I’m not isolationist at all, though that’s an easy label to throw around. I’m saying whichever Palestinian faction happens to be in charge and fighting Israel is of little consequence to us. If we were an honest broker for peace in Palestine, that would be one thing, but we aren’t and never have been.

And you think we can bring “peace” by overthrowing the elected government of a region from afar? That worked real well in Iran a few decades back.

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
rainjack wrote:
I’m in favor of any effort to rid the Israeli border of Hamas.

Too bad you have people in the whitehouse bent on waging polite, PC wars. This could have been a very good thing.

Exactly. Getting rid of Hamas is a laudable goal. How many of you are going to call for prosecution of whoever leaked this to Vanity Fair?

Huh? We call for an election and then try to militarily overthrow the winner because we didn’t like the result? This doesn’t strike you as hypocritical and wrong?

Not to mention the fact that Hamas has NOTHING to do with American national security.

When the winner is Hamas then yes, overthrowing them is a good goal. Good god man, peace in that part of the world has much to do with national security and getting rid of Hamas would help that course.

No, Hamas’ enemy is Israel, not us. As Russell Kirk noted of American neo-cons years ago, “Some of them seem to forget that America’s capital is in Washington, not Tel Aviv.”

And anyway, getting rid of Hamas will not bring peace. There are Islamist elements in Gaza far worse than Hamas. And Fatah has little credibility either.

You don’t get it do you? Without peace there will be no peace. Kind of obvious but you live under the fantasy that war in the middle east will not impact the US.

Isolationism doesn’t work.

I’m not isolationist at all, though that’s an easy label to throw around. I’m saying whichever Palestinian faction happens to be in charge and fighting Israel is of little consequence to us. If we were an honest broker for peace in Palestine, that would be one thing, but we aren’t and never have been.

And you think we can bring “peace” by overthrowing the elected government of a region from afar? That worked real well in Iran a few decades back.[/quote]

It worked for a while didn’t it? The other optioin was to do nothing and have them likely become dominated by the Soviets like Afghanistan.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
It worked for a while didn’t it? The other optioin was to do nothing and have them likely become dominated by the Soviets like Afghanistan.[/quote]

It certainly did, and if we had had a President instead of Jimmy fuck face Carter - it would still be working. But no - that piece of shit couldn’t find his butt with both hands, and showed just how worthless he was.