LATimes Not Yet Ready to Smile
Given this situation, the LATimes editorial board tells us, the last thing we'd better do is smile or hope.
Hold the Confetti, the headline declares. "Not so fast," it cautions anyone hopeful before launching into a series of "what ifs" that could apply as closely to Eastern Europe and Russia in the 1980s as to the Middle East today. The LAT is suspicious of "presidential harrangues," and points out that:
Washington thus has competing interests: Stability, which would be wrecked by popular uprisings, keeps the oil flowing and assures the continued help of authoritarian governments in the region for the global war on terrorism.Despite the end-of-editorial moderate blather thrown out to appease this and other growling dogs, the LAT doesn't get it. It doesn't answer the question, "What's the alternative." It doens't support US troops enforcing anti-terrorism, it doesn't believe that someone subhuman Middle Easterners can handle the complexities of democracy and freedom. It doesn't think the US can put anything above oil interests.
When you get a bright idea, LAT, be sure to let us know. Until then, blather away to your shrinking audience. (Yes, they're still delivering despite my cancelled subscription.)