Jason, the Armchair Generalist, has some thoughts about the most recent Bu$hCo public relations “plan” to resolve the Israel/Lebanon warfare:

Just as a quick aside, I heard a political commentator discuss Condi Rice's Rome Plan on NPR this morning. Seems that the "big plan" is to get moderate Middle Eastern nations - Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan - to be the multinational force in Lebanon. The Bush administration logic is that they've convinced these nations that it's in their best interests to contain spreading Iranian influence in the region, and this is a step in that direction. I'm wondering though, 1) why would Israel trust other Arabs to keep the peace in Lebanon; 2) why would the Arab nations trust Israel to not attack their forces in any future incidents; and 3) why would the U.S. government expect Arab nations step up to sign onto this adventure when not one of them signed up for Operation Iraqi Freedom?

I don't see this idea having a snowball's chance in hell, especially if the Bush administration remains the sole exception to those nations calling for a cease-fire. The Bush administration's weak support for getting Israel out of Gaza and the West Bank doesn't exactly give it cred either. In the military, we had a name for plans like this - "GOGIs" - a General Officer Good Idea, which meant an idea that was doomed to failure from the beginning but you knew that the boss wanted you to try to implement it anyway.

Saudi Arabia and Jordan? Our extraordinary rendition outsourcing partners? Is this the best the Bu$h malAdministration can come up with?