Has Tucker Carlson ever heard of the Marshall Plan? Seriously. The question arises in light of Carlson's show-closing diatribe this afternoon. Tucker was irate that, "now that Israel is done pummeling Lebanon, Uncle Sam wants to help clean up the mess. Your hard-earned tax dollars will include $42 million to help Lebanon's military prepare for deployment in the southern part of the country, rebuild schools and help mop up an oil spill off the Lebanese coast."
He continued: "Here's the question - if the United States was so opposed to the physical destruction of Lebanon, so opposed that we would pay for the reconstruction of Lebanon, why did we allow Israel - and we did allow Israel - to use American arms to pummel Lebanon. Maybe it was a good idea, maybe it wasn't. But the fact that we are paying for the clean-up suggests we were against it in the first place. And if we were against it in the first place, why didn't we do something about it? Good question!" [If Carlson did say so himself].
"The fact that we are paying for the clean-up suggests we were against it in the first place"? No, it doesn't. At all. Shouldn't it be obvious to an astute fellow like Carlson that whereas the US regretted the destruction of civilian infrastructure, it felt it was a necessary price to be paid in the service of the greater goal of weakening Hezbollah? And that now that the fighting is over - at least for the time being - is it not at least arguably in our national interest to help rebuild Lebanon?
By Carlson's logic, since we obviously had no regrets about defeating Hitler, the US would have never spent a penny, let alone billions of dollars, to help rebuild post-WW II Germany. See why I ask about Tucker's knowledge of the Marshall Plan?
Finkelstein lives in the liberal haven of Ithaca, NY, where he hosts 'Right Angle,' an award-winning public-access TV show. Contact him at firstname.lastname@example.org