While there Bush's comments on the recent outbreak of war in the middle east have been pretty well received by most, I think many people are overlooking one small thing that he said, that isn't quite sending the right message.

First, yes, President Bush and the rest of the G8 crew were right in directing the blame towards those who are at fault for this flare up - Islamic terrorists "extremist elements" (gotta keep it PC, right?). I was pleasantly surprised to see a statement so on target from a group that plays host to so many weasels. One that even Israel concurs with!

Israel is welcoming a statement by Group of Eight leaders on the surge in Middle East violence, asking the militant group Hizbollah to act first to end the fighting.

In a statement from their summit in Russia, G8 leaders urged Israel to exercise the "utmost restraint" in its offensive in Lebanon. But they blamed the crisis squarely on "extremist elements" and called for the return of Israeli captives and an end to rocket attacks.

As well as these bits from the statement, via ABC News (h/t Michelle Malkin):

"These extremist elements and those that support them cannot be allowed to plunge the Middle East into chaos," said the text hammered out by the leaders of the world's richest nations.

"We demand first that the Israeli soldiers be returned to Israel healthy, that the attacks on Israel cease, and then naturally for Israel to halt military action," German Chancellor Angela Merkel told reporters.

Of course Malkin notes that the statement wasn't without pointless warnings for Israel, but hey I still think the overall statement is better than we would normally expect out of this bunch.

I also particularly liked one of Bush's other comments on his own today:

"One of the interesting things about this recent flare-up is that it helps clarify the root cause of instability in the Middle East and that Hezbollah, Hezbollah's relationship with Syria and Hezbollah's relationship with Iran and Syria's relationship with Iran," he said.

Right on. Sadly, most of the world and more importantly most of America still just doesn't get it. People have been lulled in to this false sense that we aren't in a global war on terror which is in fact WWIII. It's pretty sad, but given history not that shocking, that it happened so quickly after 9/11.

Anyway, my only issue with President Bush's statements on this recent conflict is regarding this comment:

"Our message to Israel is: defend yourself but be mindful of the consequences. And so we've urged restraint."

Now I understand that he's not speaking condescendingly to Israel, the way a parent warns a child about the consequences of their reactions, and that he fully stands by Israel... But that be "mindful of the consequences" just doesn't sound right to me. Because the second I heard that, my intial reaction was - "Be mindful of the consequences of retaliation? What about the consequences of not retaliating?!"

Again, I understand that the President is trying to issue a statement that is diplomatic and non-inflamatory to Islamic terrorists religion of peace groups. But my bottom line point is, what is Israel supposed to do? I mean, they haven't killed thousands of people or invaded and taken Lebanon or anything. They seem to be excersizing a lot of restraint to me. Any more restraint and the attacks on them will only escalate, and it's important to remember how these terrorists fight.

So sure, Israel should be mindful of the consequences, and it's clear they are. But they should be equally or more mindful of the consequnces of inaction. So I suppose my disappointment isn't so much with the statement, as it is with the media pasting it on the cable news screens in large font, without full context. I'm just not pleased with how the uninformed viewer might read the statement I guess.

As for Senator John McCain? I've got nothing but praise for his performance on MSNBC's Hardball with Chris Matthews Norah O'Donnell (video at Expose the Left). O'Donnell took the typical media/liberal position and in her line of questioning asked McCain, "should Israel exercise some restraint?". McCain fired back with a lengthy question to answer her question, essentially asking - (paraphrasing) 'Shouldn't Hezbollah and Hamas exercise restraint? Shouldn't we direct that question at those who initiated all of this?'

After McCain shot that question back, O'Donnell took a few seconds (to comprehend the question?) of silence, which I translate as a big "oh crap, I just got punked". It was as if McCain's question back to her had never crossed her mind. Like in her circles, Israel is always the bad guy and the terrorists are the good guy, and this was the first time that someone had brought up that the truth is the exact opposite to her. O'Donnell recovers a few seconds later saying "It's a good question, it's a good question" and quickly changes the subject. Classic stuff, be sure to watch it.

In related, and odd news, the G8 official home page doesn't mention the conflict at all. Of course the meeting was planned earlier, with a different agenda, but they have a news section at the bottom of the page, and I just am a little surprised to see no mention at all.

Don't worry about the G8 not putting it on the web page though... Howard Dean is doing enough bloviating on his own, saying that this all wouldn't be happening if Democrats were in power. Wow! Brief post on that to follow.

More:
Captains Quarters, Freedom For Some, Captains Journal, Paxalles, Zionist, Move On and Shut Up, Ed Driscoll, California Conservative, Amy Proctor, Macsmind, Flapsblog, Stop the ACLU, Sister Toldjah, One Jerusalem, Israelly Cool, Noblesse Oblige, Right on the Right, Tel-Chai Nation