I just got back from a CMEP-sponsored panel on Annapolis and what it all means, and though there were differing views on where things would go from here, all the panelists were unanimous in their relief and enthusiasm for renewed U.S. engagement in the process.
Daniel Levy, who was one of today's panelists, wrote this last Tuesday:
Last week, Chris Hayes had a great story in the Nation about the phenomenon of the right wing email forward, and how this new form of "folk media" serves to keep various rumors and urban legends alive. One of the most notorious of these is the notion that Barack Obama is secretly a Muslim extremist who plans to throw a burkha over the Statue of Liberty and institute shari'a law after taking his oath of office on the Qur'an while munching on falafel, or something.
Anthony Cordesman takes a realistic look at claims of the surge's success:
"US and Iraqi forces are scoring important, if regional, tactical victories. However, these cover only western and central Iraq and may well be temporary. For all the claims that the “surge” worked, it is clear that it did not work purely on its own.
ViaRob, Frank Gaffneyestablishes the new standard by which all future spittle-flecked neoconservative hyperbole will be judged:
"It is fitting Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice chose the U.S. Naval Academy for the venue of today's so-called Mideast peace conference. The reputation of that extraordinary institution in Annapolis has been sullied in recent years by a succession of rapes of young women.
Demonstrating the aluminum bat-like subtlety which, combined with an enthusiasm for rehabilitating the paradigms of 19th century colonial discourse, has made him a foreign policy guru for wingnut racists everywhere, Ralph Peters offers his version of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in today's New York Post: