image
Scan
SpaSoireeTOP
bulletNight Moves
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer
spacer
image
spacer spacer

September 19, 2012

The Attack On Our Embassies


Yemen, Egypt and Libya all have two things in common: they all have new governments, and they all received financial and military support from the United States, either directly or indirectly. Yet our embassies in all three countries were attacked last week.

The current U.S. leadership has been effusive in its desire to aid militants seeking to overthrow dictatorial governments, but has been myopic when considering the long-term repercussions.

Several astute foreign affair specialists warned President Obama that in Egypt, the Mubarak regime, however oppressive, might at the very least have been the devil we know. The fear was the militants who end up running the country might well be radical Muslims more in tune with the terror tactics of al-Qaeda than their predecessors. At least Mubarak understood that in return for U.S. foreign aide his grudging support of Israel was expected.

In Libya, Gaddafi, for all his faults, understood the value of working with the United States. Again, Obama supported the uprising that led to the very public murder of the dictator by a bunch of savages. The same people control the fate of that country now, and the way U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens was brutally murdered is indicative of the anti-U.S. sentiment there.

The U.S. backed Yemen government at least condemned the attack on our embassy there, though the anti U.S. -- and anti Israeli – sentiment is palpable.

It was bad enough Washington's first response in the hours after Stevens was killed was apologetic, but it's worse that at a time when this country's financial condition is beyond critical we continue to funnel money to these radical governments whose people hate us.

By the way, the attack occurred on September 11 – obviously signaling these were planned.

We don't pretend to have insight into national affairs from our perch on the East End. But it doesn't take an expert to see our friendship with and support of Israel now, more than ever is essential to our survival.

Frankly, there has been nothing coming from the Obama administration that indicates Washington understands our staunchest alley is positioned where we can launch a quick response should one of these rogue governments decide to get brave. It is crucial we bond with the Israeli government, not alienate it.

We remember when the Shah of Iran was overthrown; folks there hoped it would signal a new era of prosperity. Now look at that country.

The jury is out on Iraq and Afghanistan. Sure, leaders in both countries appear to support our interests, but that may be because we have troops on the ground. Once we vacate, it would be no surprise if radicals seize those governments as well down the road.

"Change" isn't necessarily a good thing, especially when we have to pay for it. Sometimes status quo is better than the unknown.

Before this country throws guns and money at every would be Che Guevara out there it might be a good idea to find out if he intends to use them on us.

  1. print email
    Our Staunchest Ally
    September 24, 2012 | 10:33 AM

    In your editorial last week you refer to Israel as "our staunchest ally". It occurs to me, however, to wonder how our centuries-long friends throughout the world, most particularly Canada and other members of the British Commonwealth, along with our more recent NATO colleagues, feel about this apparent slight to them.

    It is abundantly clear that most Middle East countries "hate the US" because of our unconditional support of Israel's every move, yet you suggest the situation could only improve by our clinging ever tighter to Israel.
    Please explain this rationale.

    Wm Jackson
  2. print email
    Our Staunchest Ally
    September 24, 2012 | 10:44 AM

    In your editorial last week you refer to Israel as "our staunchest ally". It occurs to me to wonder, however, how our centuries-long friends throughout the world, most particularly Canada and other members of the British Commonwealth, along with our more recent NATO colleagues, would react to this apparent slight to them.

    It is abundantly clear that most of the Middle East countries that "hate the US" do so because of our unconditional support of Israel's every move, yet you suggest the situation could only improve by our clinging ever tighter to Israel. Please explain this rationale.


    Wm. Jackson
Reader Feedback Submission
Use this form to submit Reader Feedback.
* required value
Your Name*

Subject

Comment*

Verification*


Site Search



Gurney's Inn
SpaSoireeTOP