Yup.

Just to clarify, I generally don't think that the foreign policy of the United States should really be motivated by what is good for Israel. Israel being a different country and all. It's a contentious position, I know.

And a third thing. Sorry, I've very scattered today. Baker thinks that (talking with Iran and Syria and) trying to resolve the Israel situation are all things we need to do in order to carry out his magical plan to save Iraq, which doesn't involve "packing up and going home", or at least he won't say it outright. If we really leave, we don't have to deal with any of those players. The real question, is do you think salvaging Iraq is worth selling out Israel?

So, just so I'm clear, we're going to sell out the only real ally we have in the Middle East to appease...who, exactly? Terrorists?

I'm sure that you and I probably have totally different reasons for thinking that the ISG is a joke, and not agreeing with its suggestions.

But most of Baker's proposals are things that will supposedly make Iraq not a disaster if we just hang in there. So don't blame those of us who want to come home; y'all who want to stay can argue amongst yourselves about Israel and Palestine and Iran and Syria. It is being in Iraq that makes it an issue, not wanting to get out.

I'd dare say that throwing Israel to the wolves would be rather, shall we say, foolish for three reasons. One, they're the one country who we can count on to help us in the region if the chips go down. Two, sometimes it's nice to have plausible deniability (e.g., Osirak) when we don't feel like bombing the crap out of someone ourselves. Finally, that would be rewarding the Palestinians, Syrians and Iran in the negotiating room for being incapable of winning on the battlefield. I don't think that's a precedent the United States (that whole dominant military power thing) wants to set.

Your mileage may vary, but I'm afraid the whole "Oh, those poor benighted Palestinians..." is just a smokescreen for, "We hate the Jews, can't beat them on our own, and would really like the West to hand us the knife...". Sorta odd that the Palestinians have gotten their butts kicked out of every country that has ever sheltered them, don't you think? Maybe that's because they're really crappy houseguests and tend to try to overthrow the ruling party (*cough* Jordan *cough). Pardon me if I have little sympathy for folks who walked away from the 95% offer at Oslo.

So, just so I'm clear, we're going to sell out the only real ally we have in the Middle East to appease...who, exactly? Terrorists?

James Baker doesn't care about American interests, he cares about Saudi interests because that's where his money comes from (as Joe Katzman describes here) His law firm represented Saudi sponsors of terrorism and fought against 9/11 families.

Baker is selling us out too. History will probably remember him as a more malign influence than Benedict Arnold or Jack Philby. Well, if the Saudi funded Islamists don't win, that is. History is written by the winners.

Israel would never let it happen. Not to mention Israel can defend herself.

The reference in the report is so vague it just says that issue will be addressed.

So...no right of return...it's been addressed..lol.

It goes without saying that Israel and Palestine should not be discussed within the Iraq umbrella...Seperate issues as far as I'm concearned.

I'm suprised there wasn't an ANWAR drilling line item. That would be more relevant.

Obviously, the world has written off the existence of Israel.

Because the world has given up stopping Iran from developing a nuclear weapon. When Iran succeeds, Israel will be 5,132,378 acres of fused sand.

Hey man, don't bust on the coming apocalypse. How else are we going get to the rapture?

Why, on earth, we agreed to this pointless, incompetent "study group" after the fiasco of the 9/11 commission is a total mystery.

The not-so-fabulous Baker Boys must have missed the memo where Ahmadinejad said he wants to wipe Israel off the map. Or, maybe they got the memo, and it simply doesn't animate them.
After all, James Baker has always had a Pat Buchanan animus against Israel.
But recommending the Golan Heights to Syria will magically appease Syria & Iran demonstrates that Baker doesn't understand the stated objective of an Islamic caliphate.

There has been another memo floating around---one regarding Iran's proliferation of a nuclear program.
Sounds like Baker didn't see that one.

I know Baker prides himself on being a 'realist,' but there's no realism to the rose-colored lenses he wears.
Pulling out would be a disaster with fatal ramifications for decades.

Why didn't the ISG include anyone from the democratically elected Lebanese government ? Anyone from the Israeli Defense Forces ? Anyone from the U.S. brass who has served in Iraq ?

Wait a sec mary. Baker's like Arnold or Philby ? Well, hell, why not mention Judas or better yet America's new generation of traitors Pollard, Franklin, Rosen and Weisman ? Dante placed traitors in the lowest and worst realm of hell. Baker is an American and not an Israeli. He is supposed to put the Stars and Stripes over the Star of David.

The neo-con/zionists in charge will never let us leave Iraq. Baker is the 'false' opposition that the Democrats used to be (until they voted FOR the Iraq War). However, Iraq is a bloody diversion. As the army demolishes Iraq, the US gov't erodes rights at home by ending habeas corpus, caging protesters, banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon, rigging elections, conducting warrantless wiretaps and starting 2 illegal wars based on lies. Soon, another US false-flag operation will occur (sinking of an Aircraft Carrier by Mossad) and the US will invade Iran (on behalf of Israel).
Final link (before Google Books bends to gov't demands and censors the title):
America Deceived (book)

Whoa, break out your tinfoil hats and buckle your seatbelts, the charge of the conspiracy theorists has begun!

1.) Mossad sinking an aircraft carrier will occur about the point I shoot a flaming fireball out of my arse and slay an entire army of Englishmen (with apologies to Braveheart). The fact that you can make that statement means you inhabit an alternate universe where the same government that is capable of pulling off impeccable schemes is that regularly redefines inefficiency in new and astounding ways.

2.) However, for those of you who aren't suffering from the effects of direct moonbat beams, I'd like to see what 'lies' rather than 'mistakes' got us in these two wars? Because last time I checked Afghanistan was pretty much an open and shut case of, "You kick superpower in shins, you get hammer to the forehead." (Except we didn't do the hammer to the forehead part very well, but I digress.)

3.) That's funny, but I have yet to seen a protester _caged_. Jailed, yes, caged no. (When was the last time you saw someone get out of a cage?) You show me someone who's in indefinite holding for non-violent protest and I'll show you someone who should've been saving their bail money _before_ they got stupid.

4.) That being said, you are right that some of our 'inalienables' are being bent a bit. However, don't blame your government, blame the guy you know who, "Had school, man..." or "just couldn't make it..." to the ballot box before you start blaming either party. When only 40% or so of the population can be bothered to vote it's not some government conspiracy that has rights being eroded, it's the average citizens' freakin' inability to get off their a** and be heard.

5.) Finally, pull your head out of your waste disposal orifice on Iran. I don't know what part of "death to America" you can't seem to understand, but I think people who regularly hold conferences discussing "a world without America and Israel" are _hardly_ the poor, benighted victims you're casting them as. If you think Iran getting the bomb is a good thing, you're either nowhere near a major city, a village idiot, or delusional (but I repeat myself). If you're so certain that the Iranians are nothing but beacons of benevolence, feel free to get on an airplane and take up residence. Otherwise, please stop your uninformed bleating of left-wing, anti-Zionist talking points in a pathetic attempt to have someone actually notice you.

(Sorry Karol, didn't mean to bogard--I just really, _really_ hate the tinfoil brigade.)

James, he's a troll trying to sell a book. Don't pay him no nevermind.

Dan, I'm not sure Israel can defend herself in the long run. There are about four million Jews in Israel surrounded by sixty million arabs. The fact they're still around is attributable to three things:

1. They have nowhere to retreat to so even the peaceniks fight when the need arises.
2. As Moshe Dyan said "It helps to fight Arabs."
3. They've been supported by the US (and parts of Europe before they turned away from socialism.

The numbers are so heavily against them they can't afford to make mistakes, so in the long run they really only have two things going: American support and nukes. If we don't support them, they might end up breaking out the nukes someday, and that will be a serious problem for everyone, the US included. You okay with burning radioactive oil?

Look, folks, the so-called "war on terrorism" isn't. As Michael Moore is fond of pointing out, terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology. Bush can't say so for political reasons, but doesn't everyone realize this is a war between what's left of Western "liberal" (as in libertarian, not socialist) tradition and Islam? Why would we abandon our only friend in this war? Iraq is one battle in a larger conflict, and we can't choose not to fight it. We'll need Israel as much as they need us.

I don't see how anyone who keeps up on current events could believe the Syrians or Iranians give a tinker's damn about Palestinians. If this greivance is resolved, there will be plenty more to justify arms flows across borders.

Two things
1) Israel were quite happy to use terrorism as a tactic when it suited them to gain independence.
2) Imagine you live in a country which the USA overthrew the legitmate leader in order to install a monarchy. Then, much later, after you have kicked out the monarchy, the USA fund the neighbours in a bloody eight year war. This country in IRAN. Why on earth would Iran have any wish to help the USA pull itself out of the hole it has dug itself, UNLESS there was a fairly big something in it for them?

Sadly bryan is right on that one. Look at Begin, the King David Hotel, etc.

Anyone who really thinks Israel is the keystone to Mideast dysfunction is just like the drunk looking for his wallet under the streetlight, not because he thinks he lost it there, but because the light is good.

Some relevant points that I think should be self-evident:Israel has nothing to do with the ethnic tensions between Arab/Persian/Kurdish/etc. populations.Israel has nothing to do with Sunni/Shi'ite tensions.Israel has nothing to do with the conflict between oil rich/oil poor nations (and regions within nations).Israel has nothing to do with millennium-old cultures of nepotism and corruption.Israel has nothing to do with millennium-old traditions of patriarchy-managed inbreeding. (I really wish I was making that last bit up.)I'm not saying the problems directly associated with Palestinian displacement don't involve Israel, but I am saying that the real bad actors from our however-isolationist-you-want-to-get perspective in the region (Ba'athist Iraq, Iran, Saudi Arabia) didn't and don't really have dogs in that fight; Israel just gets trotted out as a justification for any barbarism that needs to be justified.

And elements in the West buy it because hey, our governments have some leverage on Israel, and little-to-no leverage on the real causes of said barbarism.

Don't blame antisemitism (or anti-Americanism) when simple stupidity works just as well.

Wait a sec mary. Baker's like Arnold or Philby ? Well, hell, why not mention Judas or better yet America's new generation of traitors Pollard, Franklin, Rosen and Weisman ? Dante placed traitors in the lowest and worst realm of hell. Baker is an American and not an Israeli. He is supposed to put the Stars and Stripes over the Star of David.

Baker is supposed to put the Stars and Stripes over the Saudi shahada and sword, he's supposed to favor millions of American lives over millions of petrodollars but he clearly does not.

Ignore what he says and pay attention to what he does. His actions speak for themselves. He's not working in our interests.

Is this the same Jim Baker who was been the coachman for the Bush family for the last few decades ? The one who GHWB was promising would help on everything in 92, the one who was sent down to La Florida in 2k ? I happen to agree with you that Baker does serve foreign interests and does not put America first. You can attack Baker's patrotism in a lot of ways but I don't think ravaging him for not putting Israel first is the way to do that.

Don't know why the ISG had to get involved in the Israel/Palestinian conflict when they're supposedly focusing on the Iraq mess. It just makes their report even less credible than it already was.