An offensive too far
The Washington Post's editorial board isn't buying the Iraq Study Group's proposed "New Diplomatic Offensive." They find that to embrace such a proposal "would be to suppose a Middle East very different from what's on the ground." Specifically, says the Post, the ISG errs in believing (1) that resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is highly relevant to ending the chaos in Iraq and (2) that the current regime in Syria can be "flipped."
As I've suggested before, the administration caught a big break when the ISG signed on to James Baker's Middle East fantasies.
