I have run in to too many people that think they are smarter than those that have come before them. People in the Middle East have been angry at each other over differences for more than 1000 years. It is hard to think, with that much time being angry at each other, that anything is going to be solved through some "Conversation". A bunch of people have gotten the Noble prize for their peace efforts in the Middle East, but none of it seems to stick. So, maybe the problem is a bit more complex than talking.
So, I have several problems with Pelosi's trip to Syria.
- Assad is a murder and a thug. He supports a bunch of terrorists that want to kill Israel rather than negotiate.
- In most of the middle east, sodomy is punishable by death. Members of Pelosi gay constituency, who she honorably represents, would have their human rights abused without limit if they lived in the middle east.
- The President of the United States was elected to have sole operational control over foreign policy. He did not want her or anyone to meet with Assad.
- She mis-represented the Israeli's. I wouldn't be surprised if the Israeli's even worked to let her make such an amateur mistake - "I have a message from the prime Minister". I can't believe Syrai and Israel were honestly sitting there waiting for someone to come over and practice shuttle diplomacy. Its not like she had some brilliant untried insight.
- We hired the democrats to take needed steps in congress. I don't think we thought our vote included congress becoming Secretary of State. We may have voted for a change in war policy, but only in as much as congress has traditionally led change. I don't think we voted for a virtual impeachment of the President or the elimination of executive power.
But here is the biggest irony. Pelosi said her message was the President's message. So, does that mean she agrees with the president's policy or disagree?
The problems in the middle east are long and deep. Experts, who have taken the time to read the history of the region, spend their time dedicated toward progress. I don't think they have left any stones un-turned. One of Bush's key advisers is Bernard Lewis, who many recognize as a leading academic on the history of the middle east. I won't claim that the US has the strategy correct. I just believe that the folks in the White House and the State Department are working very thoughtfully on the problem. To think one trip by the speaker of the house is going to drive some great diplomatic breakthrough is nuts.