RUSH: Before I get into the detailed explanation of why I think this is a gift to the world that is happening now in the Middle East, a little historical perspective first. To set up the historical perspective I've got to share with you some audio sound bites. First, this morning in St. Petersburg, Russia. This is a portion of President Bush's conversation with Tony Blair about Lebanon. The president was eating lunch there. There was a microphone on a table that -- the story is, that -- Bush and Blair didn't know the microphone was on. I'm not sure I believe that. You don't get to be president... You see a microphone, you always assume that it is going to be on. This is what the president said.
THE PRESIDENT: See, the irony is that what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this [bleep], and it's over.
RUSH: So what he said there, "See, the irony is that what they need to do is get Syria to get Hezbollah to stop doing this [bleep], and it's over." That's a key comment aside from the expletive that was deleted. So I'm not sure that that was a comment that was made in ignorance of the fact that a microphone was on. So go to this morning, MSNBC, let's just set the table here. The anchor, Contessa Brewer, with NBC's chief correspondent, Andrea Mitchell, about Bush's swearing. Contessa Brewer says, "Do you think he expresses his frustration with these other players going in and getting their fingers involved where they don't belong?"
MITCHELL: What he was saying in that moment of unvarnished comment to Tony Blair was that he's frustrated that Kofi Annan has first of all been calling for a cease-fire. A cease-fire right now would stop Israel from cleaning out Hezbollah or trying to clean out --
RUSH: Come on! I can't take it. Stop the tape. I cannot handle this. All week long I've been listening and hearing Israel must practice restraint. Israel, world leaders tell Israel to practice restraint, it's Israel's fault. Just sit tight, folks, Israel's been told, "You give up that plot of land and there will be peace," there's no peace. "Give up that plot of land, there will be peace." There's no peace, and by the time they're said and done, Israel is a country that, at its narrowest up there is nine miles wide and everybody keeps telling them, "Give that back to the Palestinians. Give that back to Hezbollah. Give that back to whoever, Hamas. We'll have peace," and it's not the case.
This is a classic illustration of the Limbaugh Doctrine. There's not going to be peace in that region, and that's why this is a gift to the world in part. There is not going to be peace in that region until somebody emerges victorious over somebody else. The peace results from the winner setting the terms of surrender to the loser, and not before. The UN, absolutely worthless. The US State Department, absolutely worthless, in prior years. All this about negotiation and diplomacy, diplomatic solution, what's this been going on, 50 years? When are we going to wake up? When are people going to wake up and realize this is not how this is going to be solved? Here's the rest of Andrea Mitchell.
MITCHELL: -- placements and not return the soldiers, not in fact stop Hezbollah from continuing to rocket northern Israel. The second thing, the second frustration which you just saw there was the president saying that Kofi Annan has not come down hard enough on Syria's president Assad to stop Hezbollah. So all of those things are in play and that was President Bush unvarnished.
RUSH: I refuse... I know President Bush. He's a smart man, and I refuse to believe that President Bush is sitting around waiting for Kofi Annan to deliver some hard hitting message to somebody that's going to stop this. He's not that stupid nor is he that ignorant nor does he live in that sort of pie-in-the-sky world. Now, we put together here a little montage for you of the Drive-By Media and Democrats, and the basic premise here, the new action line, the new template is that the war in Iraq has caused this new instability in the Middle East, and that has caused the president to be distracted and bogged down in Iraq, and therefore he was ignoring the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is been going on for thousands of years! Bush has not been ignoring it.
It was Clinton who left all of these problems to be solved by his successor. If anybody was ignoring everything it was Bill Clinton. I know you libs get upset with me. "Why can't you let Clinton go?" The Clinton administration is a factor in all this stuff. They're a factor in the way we deal with China, a factor in Iraq, they're a factor in North Korea, they're a factor in Iran. (Well, Jimmy Carter gave us the modern day Iran.) But just listen to this media montage to show you the narrow focus of the Drive-By Media. The action line on all US foreign policy is that whatever problem in the world exists, it's Bush's fault for one reason or another, largely Iraq. Anything they can do to portray Iraq as a failed policy in as many ways as possible they will do, and this montage demonstrates that.
ANDREA MITCHELL: The administration has been so focused on Iraq and Afghanistan, it has failed to pay enough attention to the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians.
GEORGE MITCHELL: Where it's focused is Iraq.
NORAH O'DONNELL: The war in Iraq has led to what has happened in the actions by Hamas and Hezbollah.
JOE BIDEN: Does anybody think we can wage a war now against Syria, against Iran, while we're still bogged down in Iraq?
RUSH: Stop the tape. The only people that don't think we can wage a war and win anywhere are people like you, Senator Biden, and it's because of policies of the Democratic Party and the American left that we now have this whole notion. I'm getting so sick and tired of people rooting for the defeat of the good guys. New York Times has an editorial that's just -- they may as well have announced that they have chosen sides and they want the terrorists to win. It's the most amazing editorial. We'll get to all that. Here's the rest of the montage.
SEN. BOXER: There's been an obsession with Iraq, taking advantage of the fact that we're bogged down.
SEN. DODD: The issue of Iraq. We are bogged down there.
CHRIS WALLACE: Are we so bogged down now in Iraq?
JIM VANDEHEI: Iraq, a distraction.
TIM RUSSERT: Did the president pay enough attention to the Middle East or was he preoccupied with Iraq?
GEORGE STEPHANOPOULOS: Many argued that going into Iraq would stir up a hornet's nest.
RUSH: Oh, my God.
MADAM ALBRIGHT: The war in Iraq has clearly spread in many different ways --
RUSH: I can't believe what I'm hearing.
MADAM ALBRIGHT: --has made the situation worse.
BILL SCHNEIDER: The United States is paying for having put the Israel-Palestine issue on the back burner for most of the last five years paying much more attention to Iraq.
RUSH: Literal idiots. And these are the people in the Drive-By Media with such a narrow focus. They have missed the problem with one letter. The problem is Iran. It is not Iraq, folks. The problem is Iran.
RUSH: As you know, the liberal left is bouncing off the walls right now. There's new confusion in the confused-already Drive-By mainstream. There is near suicide in the epicenters of liberalism over all this because the cowboy did it again. "President Bush unilaterally supported Israel!" Unilateral! Oh, they just can't stand that. The American left despises Israel, as does much of the rest of the terrorist world and so forth. The president of the United States, our commander-in-chief, faced off over there with this group of eight and supported Israel, supported their right, Israel's right to defend herself -- and our left, our liberals, our "progressives," they have to suck it up...
I'm getting ahead of myself here just a little bit. There's a week of catch-up to do, a week of split-screen confusion that needs the clarity of me, your all-seeing, all knowing Maha Rushie. Everybody wants to know who's at fault here. Well, the American left and the Arab bloc, of course, blame Israel. Our realists blame Hezbollah, Syria and IRAN -- and put IRAN in capital letters -- and then of course the American left says, "Well, Israel shouldn't overreact. Hezbollah didn't fire rockets, and we'll have peace and flowers and happiness, wouldn't that be nice? Can we just have a cease-fire?" Well, just who is at fault here, who is to blame? It's not Israel, and it's not really Hezbollah. It's not even Syria.
Well, it has to be Iran, but what is it that's enabling Hezbollah and Syria and Iran to act as they are? Folks, this is terribly important here, because if a strong show of response is not demonstrated to these people, Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, they are going to be emboldened. If you want to know who I think is at fault here, the United Nations for one, our state department number two, and perhaps Colin Powell number three. We have political opportunists in this country always putting ambition over country, and we have the Bush hating Drive-By Media that refuses to criticize UN failures while continuing to hold out hope that the only body on the planet that can ever solve any problem when it hasn't ever solved one is the United Nations.
Now, six years ago, folks, Israel and Lebanon and the United Nations agreed that Israel would withdraw from southern Lebanon. Lebanon would disarm the terrorist militia Hezbollah, and the UN would supervise. Oh, let's all sing kumbaya. Let's have a party. Six years later, what's happening? Hezbollah rocket launchers are launching alongside UN flags at the border, and now, after all of this, God help us: Kofi Annan wants to supervise a cease-fire after a policy which guaranteed us all that this that's happening right now could not and would not happen if Israel would just withdraw from southern Lebanon. So much for John Kerry's United Nations. Now, for the State Department. President Bush showed the Middle East that the fun's over, did so in Iraq.
The next domino was to be Syria. This Iraq war was never meant to stop in Iraq. Remember the original Axis of Evil. This was to root out that whole region over there, either through diplomacy or through military action. Syria should have blinked at all this, but it was our state department that blinked first, and Syria learned that they could withdraw from Lebanon without withdrawing. They could pull out without actually pulling out because nobody was going to do anything about it once they didn't pull out, and Iran now enters the fray with a brand-new strategery, and it's called war by militias. We've got the Hezbollah militia in Lebanon. We have the Hamas militia in Gaza, and the Muqi al-Sadr militia in southern Iraq.
As for our allies, the old reliable Jacques Chirac (nobody surprised here), accuses Israel of overreacting. I think to the French, if Israel said "ouch" after one of these bombs struck or one of these missiles struck, the French would accuse them of having an overreaction. Wonder how many rockets France would have suffered without overreacting if somebody lobbed some missiles into them. France gets upset over penalties in the World Cup but they don't get upset over anything else. So here we are today, this very moment, the media template is Israel overreacting. Bush was distracted. Bush caused all of this by going into Iraq rather than the appropriate template, after England, France, and Germany -- what was it? Two years negotiating with Iran, Iran still is doing their nuke buildup.
Iran is still engaged in influencing events throughout that region. Any wonder why Iran unleashed the militia strategy on the Middle East? Because nobody cares. Nobody cares what Iran's doing. Nobody wants to do anything to stop Iran from what they're doing except Israel. Now, if America is the cradle of democracy, Israel is the cradle of reality in that region. That's why the rest of the world doesn't support us. All of this restraint and cessation of hostilities is just a bunch of garbage, folks. They gave them Gaza. They pulled out of south Lebanon. Now they want to destroy Israel, so what is this restraint business? Israel is just supposed to sit back? I had a conversation when I was gone, a guy said, "You see the movie Munich?"
I said, "No, haven't seen it. I've got it on DVD but haven't seen it."
"It's a brilliant movie. You've gotta watch it. It was all about these Israelis who went in and sought revenge after the '72 Olympics, and the commandos finally said, 'You know what? It doesn't matter. We kill them; they kill us back, and it never stops.'"
"So what are we supposed to do then? They're not supposed to avenge what happened in the '72 Olympics?"
All this moral equivocation: There are no good guys, no bad guys. "You know, we just have to stop the killing." Well, all right, and guess who has to be restrained? The good guys! Israel has to be restrained, but when Hezbollah attacks, or Hamas attacks, or Iran through proxies attacks. "Why, it's somewhat understandable because Israel shouldn't be there. Israel transplanted itself. It's those people's country, and they're so poor, and they're so bedraggled and nobody wants them. Who can blame them for what they're doing," but we can always blame Israel. Here's the key: Are we going to take care of Iran now before it has nukes or are we going to wait until we can't do anything?
That's the key here.
Iran is nothing more than a third-rate dictatorship. It's not supported by it's own people. There's a very restive population there. It's a Jimmy Carter legacy which has to be ended. Now, Israel can't do this. People say, "Turn Israel loose on Iran." Israel can't do it, folks. They can't take care of Iran without us. Iran is too far away for their ground forces. It's too far away for their fighter jets to run bombing missions and to get back, but just think. Ask yourself a hypothetical: if we were doing to Iran what Israel is doing in Lebanon, that might be enough. You don't need to go in and occupy Iran. Anything that takes its place can't be any worse if we were to root out the current mullah regime and that has to be objective number one. That's why I think this is a gift to the world, folks. This is an opportunity finally to do something about Iran. Iran is the elephant in the room in all of this, and if we sit here and say it's Hezbollah or it's Assad or it's Syria or it's Hamas, we are blaming the tentacles and not the brain, and Iran is the center and the focus of this, and that's why this is a gift.
RUSH: I want to stick with this theme. I'm just amazed. I really am. These are otherwise intelligent people, the Drive-By Media I'm talking about, but they are so narrowly focused right now on just getting rid of Bush, harming Bush that no matter what happens in the world it's Bush's fault, and they can't even see the real evil when they look at it. To them, George W. Bush represents more evil than Ahmadinejad in Iran or any of these kooks around the world such as Kim Jong ll and, of course, it's all Bush's fault, and now they're starting to say, "Bush is getting ready to leave, wants to leave all these problems for his successor."
Ladies and gentlemen, if there's anybody who left every problem on this planet to his successor, it was William Jefferson Clinton, from Iraq to Iran to North Korea to Al-Qaeda, every one of those problems left to his successor. Now, this war on terrorism, which a significant population, or portion of the population of this country does not even want to consider a war, and many of those people are elected Democrats, but it's a war, and I don't know how you can look at these pictures and not understand that there's something really serious going on that yet presents us finally with an opportunity that we didn't start. Of course, the Drive-By Media thinks we did start all this by going into Iraq and stirring up a hornet's nest, as though there hasn't been tension in the Middle East long before we got there.
By the way, as far as stirring up tensions, have you seen this about-face? The Sunnis want the US to remain in Iraq. I thought John Murtha's out there saying that they wanted us out of there. The Sunnis have now undercut Murtha, they've thrown Murtha overboard. Many Sunni, Arab, political and religious leaders once staunchly opposed to the American presence in Iraq, are now saying they need American troops to protect them from the rampages of Shi'ite militias and Shi'ite-run government forces. They don't want us to leave. That's really stirring up a hornet's nest, huh? See, the war on terrorism was never supposed to be limited to just Iraq.
You have to attack. If you're going to have a war on terror, there are terrorists all over the place, you have to hit them where they reside, and from where they are attacking our forces in Iraq. If what they're doing now, if what Hezbollah... I keep saying Hezbollah and Hamas. It's all Iran, folks. If what Iran is doing does not result in a big blow to these people in Lebanon and in the Palestinian areas, they are going to be emboldened. In fact, Ralph Peters has a piece today saying he's a little worried because the Israelis are not fighting this as they've fought other times before.
They have sent ground troops in before, and his theory is that if the Israelis don't send some ground forces into Lebanon -- they did, for a while, temporarily, pulled them back -- if they don't do that, they're going to send the message that they're not serious about this. If they're just going to trade missile lobs and not actually send in some ground troops, then these people will be emboldened and it will show the Hezbollah types and the Hamas types that all of a sudden Israeli has become afraid of casualties. That's Ralph Peters' theory. Who knows, it probably will have some sort of effect on the bad guys if they do think, if they tell themselves -- whether it's true or not -- that the Israelis all of a sudden are afraid to take casualties, it'll have the same effect as bin Laden assuming we were afraid to take casualties after Somalia.
In fact, I mentioned this to you after I was in Afghanistan a year ago February. I guess about a year and a half ago now. I had dinner one night at the home of the commander of the Mujahideen forces against the Soviets. You know, they're the first ones that actually defeated, in a ground war, the Soviet Red Army. How did you do it? "Very simple. We wanted it more than they did, but they became afraid of casualties. They were afraid of the news going home of all their losses. They were afraid to put themselves in a position to take casualties for the first time in their history." So you read what Ralph Peters thinks, military strategerist, author and so forth, he's in the New York Post today writing this. You have to say that he's got a point, but it's soon. Israel may not want to show all their cards.
He says in the next two or three days, week, whatever, if they don't send in ground forces to root out some of these hell spots it will indicate a new strategery on the part of the Israelis that might not be all that positive in terms of the emboldening effect it would have on the bad guys. But I'll tell you what else we don't know. I've got a couple of sound bites from Madeleine Albright. I'm getting fed up with hearing from Madeleine Albright. I'm getting fed up with hearing from all the failures in this thing for the last 30 years. We don't need right now to be hearing from all of those who failed this process for the last 30 years, and they're all over television, these former ambassadors, former members of the State Department, former secretaries of state, all failures, pontificating on what this administration is doing wrong.
Newt's out there saying "World War III." World War III began on 9/11! But there's an opportunity here. We right now have no plan to deal with Iran if it gets nukes. Now is the time to deal with Iran, folks. I can't emphasize enough how I think this is a gift. Israel's bogging down Hezbollah, Israel has opened a western front in the process. Israel is wiping out the infrastructure. Israel is not trying to hurt the Lebanese, by the way. They're trying to encircle and close in on Hezbollah in Lebanon, cutting them off from leaving and getting support. That's why they're blowing up the highways. That's why they're blowing up the airports, and all this has been portrayed as Hezbollah, "Hey, nobody's ever seen them fire rockets like this. I guess Hezbollah is serious."
Hezbollah is being cordoned off. Hezbollah is being surrounded, and they're being bogged down, and I don't care what these narrowly focused lamebrains in the Drive-By Media are trying to tell you. It is the front line in the war against Syria and Hezbollah. But Israeli cannot do this by herself because Iran is in the mix. I mean, Israel can take out Hezbollah in Lebanon and Israel could wipe out Syria, if they had a mind to. Don't think that little tinhorn, Bashar Assad, is not scared to death today. You know, this guy has been emboldened in the past because he was told to pull out of Lebanon, he said I'm pulling out, and he didn't, and he got away with it, thanks to our state department and the UN not following up, putting pressure on him.
So he was feeling his oats. He's out there flexing, thinking, "A-ha! I'm a big guy. I stared them down," but don't think he is not scared right now today. He is scared to death. But as I say: Israel cannot get to Iran for a knockout blow. They cannot do at all. (Well, unless they use nukes but they're not going to do that, not now.) So while Israel is bogging down Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, we keep hearing from the Drive-By Media and our population keeps hearing that we're "bogged down in Iraq." Oh, yes, we're bogged down! The big, mighty United States of America bogged down in Iraq, and you people are being told that we cannot fight multiple wars at once. You just heard Joe Biden say it in our montage in the last half hour.
"Well, because we're bogged down in Iraq we can't deal with Iran, we can't deal with North Korea." We are the United States of America, for crying out loud! We haven't shown one-third, maybe not even that much of the force that we can project. We haven't, we are fighting a minimalist war in Iraq, and we have been from the get-go because we're trying to allow the country to rebuild and reestablish. We don't need to occupy all these places in order to fight wars in them and to show our force and to project our power. We haven't unleashed our Air Force. We haven't unleashed our big bombers. We could do ten times what Israel's doing in Lebanon to Iran if we had to, if we had the will to. Make no mistake about it.
"But, Rush! But, Rush! It would stir up a hornet's nest. The Muslims around the world would get mad."
We're talking about the head here. "What about bin Laden?" We're talking about the regionalized conflict here going on between Israel and Iran. You know what Ahmadinejad's been saying ever since he came into power: Israel is going to get wiped off the earth. He's in power to do it. People are dead serious over there. Here's the point. Much of the ongoing terrorism in Iraq is funded and aided and directed from Iran and Syria, especially Iran, and much of the effort to undermine Iraq's government is coming from those countries. They have to deal with them. We know that Iran is sending in these IEDs. They're being manufactured there. That's been discovered, and if we deal with both Syria and Iran, then Iraq has an even better chance of surviving and becoming what everybody hopes -- well, most people hope -- that it will become.
And have you noticed? I've got the story here in the stack. I'll get to it in detail in a moment, but have you noticed that several of the usual Arab countries have not blasted Israel in the usual terms? In fact, the story I have is they're worried. The Saudis and a number of others, the Egypts of the world. These guys are not coming out like they usually do. They're worried about Iran. Everybody is worried about Iran. This guy is a nut case. Iran is not Arab. Iran's nuking up. Iran's trying to make sure that it's the #1 supplier of oil. There's a lot going on and they are worried to death about that. They know what Iran is doing. They know who's funding Hezbollah. They know who's funding Hamas. They know that Syria and Iran are, and they know that Iran and China are linked together, too, and that doesn't make 'em happy. They're troubled by Iran. They're troubled by Hezbollah. It's not that they like Israel. Don't misunderstand. They fear what Israel will do in response. They also fear for their own survival.
RUSH: I checked the e-mail during the break, and I got some libs out there that have joined Rush 24/7, my website, just to have a direct pipeline of e-mail to me. "You just can't leave Clinton alone, can you? Clinton's gone. Clinton's finished. You can't beat Clinton," as though everything I have said other than about Clinton has been discredited because I mentioned Clinton. Well, Drudge has this little flashback posted, folks. This is from Sunday, August 4th of 2002, almost four years ago, and this is from the Daily Times: "Former US President Bill Clinton, who many Arabs thought was even more evenhanded on the Palestine question than his predecessors, shocked many when he asserted in Toronto last..."
Can anybody figure who was the #1 guest at the White House during the Clinton administration? Yasser Arafat. Now, get this quote. Clinton says, he's in Toronto in 2002, that had Israel been attacked by Iraq or Iran during his presidency, he would have been ready to grab a rifle, get in the ditch and fight and die. Here's his quote. "Yeah, you know, the Israelis, I mean they know that if the Iraqi and Iranian army came across Jordan River I would personally grab a rifle, I'd get in the ditch and I would fight and die," Clinton told the crowd at a fund-raising event for a Toronto Jewish charity on Monday. I don't know if they believed him. The point is everything is about him. He probably wouldn't do this for America, but he says he would do it for Israel.
Meanwhile, Arafat is the #1 guest. He didn't do anything to solve the problem. What did the Oslo accords solve? What did any of this stuff that Clinton and Albright brokered, what did it accomplish? Diddly-squat. Now, from the French News Agency, dateline Cairo: "The spiraling Middle East crisis has exposed deep divisions within the Arab world and forced its leaders into a frank admission of helplessness. After an emergency meeting of Arab League foreign ministers on Saturday, the 22-member bloc admitted it was impotent in the face of Israel's deadly attacks on the Gaza Strip and Lebanon. 'Don't ask me what to do,' the League's secretary general, Amr Moussa, told reporters after the meeting. Analysts said the huge rift between Western allies such as Egypt and Jordan and radical states like Syria had proved impossible for diplomats to bridge."
Finally we've got some honesty that this is not the stuff of diplomats. This is a war, and it's been going on for I don't know how long, and diplomats have been trying to stop it and solve it and come up with peace plans for, what, 30 or 40 years? Where are we today?
"'The main structure of the Arab League is the idea of consensus, so meetings always come up with the lowest common denominator,' said Nadim Shehadi, a Middle East specialist with the London-based Royal Institute of International Affairs. Saturday's meeting 'was a bit more revealing,' he said. 'There are real divisions at this time especially to do with relations with Iran on the one hand and with the United States and Israel on the other.' ... 'We must take swift steps with sincere intentions to solve the Arab-Arab differences which create an obstacle to reaching a unified Arab position,' Foreign Minister Abu Bakr al-Kurbi said. ..."
Moussa: "'The only way to revive the peace process is to take it back to the Security Council.' His comments sparked an angry reaction from Arab journalists, but analysts said he was just playing to the gallery." I mean, even these clowns know that the UN Security Council is worthless in all this. The United States State Department is... Well, I'm sorry. I think it's useless, too. I think any of these people who want to focus on a diplomatic solution to this are just repeating bad history and not seeing the light. Of course, that's what they are, diplomats. They're not supposed to solve problems or they'd be out of work if they actually solved problems. But my friends, the bottom line is as I said.
In this new round of militia fighting, Hezbollah, Hamas, Syria, Iran, the usual suspects in the Arab world are holding their fire when it comes to condemning Israel. They are, because this is a whole new strategery here that's broken out. It's the militia strategery, the insurgent strategery, much as the insurgent strategery we're seeing in Iraq and have for a year and a half or two, whatever the length of time it has been. So all kinds of things are different here in this time around, but the Drive-By Media, with their tunnel vision and their action line are totally clueless -- and these are not even subtleties. These are not even subtleties that you have. You don't have to read the stitches on a fast ball to be able to see this. They don't see it because they don't want to see it, but the bottom line is you spell the problem and the solution here, I-R-A-N.