Barack Obama has formed a presidential exploratory committee, and is expected to announce his candidacy formally on February 10.
There’s a surprise.
Who doesn’t have an exploratory committee? Even Christopher Dodd has one. This is a very rich country, and it seems to behoove many people to give money to politicians for any semi-plausible reason. For the politicians themselves there is virtually no downside: running, becoming a national figure, losing and learning from your mistakes is excellent practice for—next time. Besides, it is so much more fun than being a serious Senator, engaged in the dull business of making policy choices and then making them again when the first set fail in unanticipated ways.
Some might find it offensively arrogant for a neophyte, with two years in the Senate, no experience running anything, and a thin resume to seek the nation’s highest office. But it’s hard to argue with the reception Obama has gotten. At a moment when national politics increasingly resembles a reality-TV show, his breezy, confident manner, good looks, and natural speaking talent all add up to a version of plausibility.
“Running for the Presidency is a profound decision, a decision no one should make on the basis of media hype or personal ambition alone,” he announced with a straight face on Wednesday. I must have missed the part of the announcement where he revealed the substantive rationale for his candidacy.
Obama is the perfect fresh face, the new “it girl,” on whom the left end of a very disenchanted electorate can project their hopes and dreams for . . . something different. He’s black, but not militant, not Al Sharpton. White mom, absent African dad: almost like Tiger Woods.
But then there’s the Clinton factor. The media are playing Obama’s candidacy as a big “diss” to Hillary on the part of Democratic primary voters who may regard her nomination as inevitable but are not particularly enthusiastic about the prospect. And she seems to be obliging them, by looking worried. But at the end of the day? I’d bet on Clintonian discipline and ruthlessness.
In fact, Obama is a pretty good foil for Hillary. He makes her look experienced, reasonable, mature, serious. And did I mention mature?
There is a chance this can work if Fatah maintains its posture of opposition to Hamas. Could Fatah be the moderate faction that can align with Israel to eliminate Hamas as the Northern Alliance allied with the U.S. in Afghanistan against the Taliban or as the Sons of Iraq against al Qaeda in Iraq?
A simple proposal for eliminating the ‘terrorist’ infrastructure: Any Hamas terrorist sympathiser should be immediately handed over to Fatah in the West Bank. Let Hamas be judged by their own methods. Obviously, the Israelis believe in human rights. They have been more than patient with the threats at their door steps. The major players, the US, Russia, and China would have responded much sooner and in a much harsher manner long ago. Unfortunately, the Terrorists at the hands of the Israelis would be guaranteed far more rights than if the situation were reversed. Let the two warring Palestinian factions judge each other. The outcome would be very ‘Islamic’, and would result in a winning propoganda victory for Israel. Israel wouldn’t be holding prisoners, and moreover they would submit these animals to the punishment they would ultimately deserve. I’m sure that Fatah would love to have these terrorists in their hands. I guarantee you after what happened in Gaza a few years ago between Fatah and Hamas, Israel would no longer have anything to fear from them.
As Operation Defensive Shield proved in 2002 (remember when Sharon knew how to defend Israel?) the only way short of carpet bombing the population to disrupt the terrorist infrastructure is to go in on the ground, house to house and destroy the terror dens, accompanied by targetted killings of the terror leaders.
Without these two tactics, this air war is nothing but a dump of ammunition.
That is not to say those tactics are sufficient. As the counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq have shown that it is not enough to clear, but the counterinsurgents must also hold the territory to prevent the infestation from returning once the forces of good leave.
Israel will not do this, and any hopes that the PA can move in an effectively hold the area cleared by the IDF is premature at best, and most likely a pipedream. Indeed, even if Fatah had such capabilities (doubtful) it shares Hamas’ goals.
george – that was exactly the flawed premise of Oslo — that the secular Fatah would be more effective at stopping Hamas (and at the time the more powerful PFLP, PIJ and other marxist and Islamist terror groups).
Despite the occasional harsh war of words between Abbas and Hamas, they are really united. Fayyad just happens to slip Hamas money by accident. Fatah has neither the will nor the power to challenge Hamas in the West Bank.
There is no way for the peace process to move forward even if Hamas is badly crippled, even decapitated. Who imagines that the feckless Fatah can restore order to Gaza when it can’t even hold the West Bank without IDF muscle? Who believes that the people of Gaza and the West Bank — indoctrinated into genocidal hatred, glad to sacrifice their babies as human shields to terror — will settle for peace anytime in the forseeable future. If Hamas falls, another rejectionist regime will rise in its place. Let’s stop kidding ourselves. Middle East peace is not attainable in our lifetimes. The sooner we retire this fantasy, the sooner we can consider reasonable stop-gaps.
I think the rules have changed between Hamas and Fatah. When Hamas started throwing Fatah members off of roof tops, I’m pretty sure hatred grew (otherwise their society is far more forgiving than I’ve ever witnessed.) I think Fatah is praying that Israel finishes the job for them.
I was on this same conference call, and I do not think the HAMAS response we are seeing tonight in southern Israel (Beer Sheva is under attack for the first time since Israel captured it in 1948, the HAMAS having “upgraded” to Iranian Grad missiles) is going to please the Israeli military.
Let’s put it this way: I sure wouldn’t want to be in a Hamas bunker in Gaza right now.
Yael – it does not matter whether the Israeli military is pleased or not. It is the calls of Olmert (and maybe Livnie and Barak) on the scope of the actions taken against Hamas.
Olmert has longed sacrificed Sderot, but the conventional wisdom has been that Askelon and Asdod were the redlines that would escalate Israeli response. Ashkelon comes under attack and nothing. I have no reason to believe that Beer Sheva will play anymore role in escalating the Israeli response which is based upon many other factors.
Real franlky (and real cynically) I think that the personal political fortunes of Olmert, Livni and Barak are playing more into the decision than anything else. If Olmert thinks he can salvage his legacy, in go the ground troops. However Barak and Livni likely see that a temporary quiet in the South (a false victory) will bolster their chances in February and will play for the short term at the expense of the long term. Make no mistake, none of those three are putting the country or the future first – not that they wish ill on the country (well except for Olmert), but they are looking out for numero uno.
Pres. Bush today committed another $85 million in U.S. taxpayer dollars to the Palestinians… $60 million of it specifically to go to GAZA. I guess so they can buy more rockets to kill Jews. I’m going to be sick. This is my country, those are my taxes. How to stop them going to Hamas? I’ve lost count, but we’re getting close to a billion dollars from the U.S. alone this year, and something like $2 billion altogether from the “international community.” When will the U.S. stop kissing up to terrorists? Or will it run out of revenue first?
J. Lichty, I understand your cynicism, but why don’t we wait and not bash Olmert et al until (if) they screw this up. In the meantime, I think we need to express our support and gratitude. The IAF is not only defending and protecting Israelis, but Jews the world over.
Isn’t that something? The U.S. is subsidizing a pocket of Arab terror while the 22 Arab states, most awash in western petro dollars, do what?