Meyerson's article is silly, uninformed and as you said, biased, but that is pretty much what you would expect from today's journalists. To compare this situation to 1914 is absurd, if only because the two sides are militarily unbalanced and there is no prospect of a war of attrition - in any straight fight, Iran's gamble in the Middle East is all over. I am also a bit dumbfounded by this idea of an 'international army' - unless it is made up of American, Australian and British forces with a mandate to hunt down and kill remaining Hizbollah terrorists, this 'army' will merely give a chance for the enemy to regroup and rearm : it's a non-starter.

Looking at the situation objectively, I assess the situation as follows: Hizbollah is being badly degraded and has been damaged, but to remove them 'root and branch' requires ground forces and hand to hand fighting all the way to the Syrian border and in the Bekaa. This objective achieved would seriously embarrass and damage Iran's objectives and is therefore a most worthwhile policy goal for Washington. I therefore very much doubt that Israel has been given only 1 week to finish the job and has been provided with a green light to continue for as long as it wishes, irrespective of 'international opinion'. I also think that if Hizbollah crosses further 'red lines' and attacks with WMD and/or attacks Tel Aviv, Syria will fall within the frame of attack.

This has been a masterstroke by the Israelis - by taking Hizbollah by surprise with a full scale assault, they have started unravelling Iran's grasp on the Med. I doubt the Americans are going to agree to anything to stop this. The Israeli population know that they won't get a second chance and that failure to hold their nerve will mean far more frightening consequences in the future.

Speaking of attributing...did you mention that your story about your "friend" is actually a line from Sienfeld?

james,

well how about that! you learn something new every day!!

An "International Army" made up of Third World soldiers who couldn't fight their way out of a hot air balloon. Or maybe he had in mind an army made up of moderate Arabs, >>wink wink

Israel's attack has moved the timeframe closer for dealing with Iran and Syria. We can't let them down, it's been their War for a very long time. When you think about the sources of the rockets you have to realise Hizbollah is their "proxie army", too. But then, one of those countries has always used proxie armies to do their fighting.

Waiting for Iran to make an even bigger mistake.

An "International Army" made up of Third World soldiers who couldn't fight their way out of a hot air balloon. Or maybe he had in mind an army made up of moderate Arabs, >>wink wink

Israel's attack has moved the timeframe closer for dealing with Iran and Syria. We can't let them down, it's been their War for a very long time. When you think about the sources of the rockets you have to realise Hizbollah is their "proxie army", too. But then, one of those countries has always used proxie armies to do their fighting.

Waiting for Iran to make an even bigger mistake.

An "International Army" made up of Third World soldiers who couldn't fight their way out of a hot air balloon. Or maybe he had in mind an army made up of moderate Arabs, >>wink wink

Israel's attack has moved the timeframe closer for dealing with Iran and Syria. We can't let them down, it's been their War for a very long time. When you think about the sources of the rockets you have to realise Hizbollah is their "proxie army", too. But then, one of those countries has always used proxie armies to do their fighting.

Waiting for Iran to make an even bigger mistake.

"...the Washington Post publishes... with the title "The Guns of July," written by Harold Meyerson..."

I am sure the WoPo thought that title up themselves ;)

I would not expect them to give you any credit.

This is happening opposit of what I had thought earlier: the US would hit Iran and Israel would take out Hizbollah and Hamas as the end game. Syria would become isolated, alone in the midst of democracy and freedom fighters.

Did you credit Barbara Tuchman? ;) I thought it was a great post, but the analogy was so fearsomely good that I suspect it occurred to a lot of people.

Then again, maybe the WaPo headline writer is a thieving weasel.

Yes, Tuchman deserves credit too, of course. It's her big idea after all.

All these other attributions unsung are the reason I'm not weeping loudly about this . . .

If it means anything at all, in January, I said:

Pundits are all worked up debating whether 2006 will be like 1994.

Perhaps a better comparison might be 1914. and,

Here's what I expect in the next 12 months.

-There will be airstrikes upon Iranian facilities by either the US or Israel.
-There will be catastrophic, if not cataclysmic, terror attacks in various parts of the Middle East, sponsored by Iran or its proxies; The Gulf States, Jordan, Israel, and Iraq are potential targets. That has to be worth something if it all happens. I'll be happier if it doesn't.