To wander a bit far afield, Burston reminds me of Paul Krugman, the economics columnist for the New York Times. Krugman posts many and varied arguments for economic policy -- but they all have one thing in common. In one way or another, they all promote a return to the kind of managed capitalism/social welfare vision epitomized by the Western European economies of a generation or two ago. Similarly with Burston. He says all kinds of things -- but they're all in aid of an Israel but only an Israel that is within the pre-1967 boundaries. It's a bit dull. Surely reality isn't that monolithic? Don't some aspects of it imply there should be no Israel at all, whilst others imply it should have all of Palestine? There is a kind of mendacity here. All events conspire to demonstrate that the exact cease-fire line Israel reached in 1949 is the one eternally true, just, and workable solution. I'm inclined to be skeptical.
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Syrian army confirms Russian announcement of 'regime of calm' around Damascus for 24 hours (Reuters)
from the article: How to tell when a Mideast Expert is lying