It's time to engage in diplomatic efforts to help build a new Lebanese consensus that focuses on electoral reform, an end to the current corrupt patronage system, and the development of the economy that provides for a fair distribution of services, opportunities and employment.
The poster notes that according to the Obamanians:
Yes, the problem with Lebanon is not the militia backed by Damascus and Tehran who have squared off against almost every US ally in the Middle East. No, in the Obama worldview, the issue is about “the corrupt patronage system.”
Unfortunately, this isn't simply about Obama's naïveté about foreign policy. This is about Obama's naïveté about the whole world. Ask yourself, does this not sound exactly like Obama's explanation for the thinking of rural Pennsylvanians? We're not dealing with an aw-shucks Jimmy Carter type here. We're dealing with a full-blown Marxist materialist who sees the whole world as being nothing more than the interplay of politico-economic structures and an unconscious proletariat in need of his guidance to effectuate its self-liberation.
Which leads to the question: If the rural Pennsylvanians who cling to Gods and guns decided to break away from the U.S. government and form their own country in a country, would Obama send the Secretary of State or the National Guard?
