"See the irony is that what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this s--- and it's over," Bush told Blair as he chewed on a buttered roll.how exactly is that ironic?
i don't even think it's right. contrary to what bush says, syria does not pull all the strings for hezbollah. it does support and fund the group, but that's not the same as having complete control over their actions. by that logic bush himself is responsible for the death squads in iraq (who have often worn official iraqi police or military uniforms) that have been linked to the shia-led government, a government that bush's administration supports and funds.
and with all of bush's calls for hezbollah to cease it's attacks to end the crisis in lebanon, i've been wondering if that really would work. say hezbollah did stop firing missiles into israel today, would the israeli bombardment stop? not according to israel. israeli ministers are saying that they won't stop until hezbollah's infrastructure is "wiped out." transportation minister shaul mfaz specified that the infrastructure they are referring to includes the civilian infrastructure in the heart of beirut.
it's pretty evident that even if hezbollah complied with the administration's demands, israel would not stop it's attacks. so how can we possible expect them to stop?
(that top link via atrios)
