Bush and the Israeli-Palestine Issue

[erpowers]

Does anyone have an opinion as to why Bush waited until the last year of his presidency to really try to deal with the issue. Was it because of the fact that some of his main supporters did not seem to want a solution to the problem? Was it that in his last year he began thinking about his legacy and getting money to build his presidential library? I ask this question because I saw a speaker last night who said he believed Bush waited until the last year of his presidency to deal with the issue partly because he is hoping to get money from Arabs to help build his presidential library. So, what do duers think? I think his decision had a great deal to do with politics; some of the people who supported him were not the biggest supporters of Palestinians.

[Deny and Shred]

1. I think he actually believed the hype - a Pro-West MIddle East

He never wanted to use diplomacy - force only, baby.
He trusted the NeoCon plan of toppling the dominoes arrayed against Israel. First, Iraq, eventually Iran, Syria, and any remaining Arab supporters. This way, he doesn't have to broker anything. With force as the guiding principle, the region and world will fall into line.
Diplomacy is a last resort for him and them. I think after the Israel/Hezbollah/Syria '06 fiasco and the departure of Rummy, Condi and the State Dept finally could have a bit of a voice. Bush realized he ought to do something, because his MidEast legacy is looking like, well, ....
The diplomacy road started with Powell's RoadMap, then went nowhere. Bush is simply grasping at straws. He thinks he'll be able to say "I tried, just like my predecessors, but couldn't git er done." He has no clue the problems he's wrought for the future.
As for the library, that is ancillary. A crumb for a job well done. The plan was to leave the Saudis in the dominant position in the region, clear out the competition. With the oil profits and billions in arms we've sent, that might still be the case.