Rich, is it not possible that many of these hawks are not quite as reactionary as you suggest? That is to say, is it not possible that they are very dissatisfied with what the administration thinks qualifies as a “friendly Arab country”?
Take the UAE, for example. Let’s pretend for a moment that it did not have a history of supporting al Qaeda. It remains to this day supportive of the view that Israel should not exist, and sympathetic to the tactics that have been used to bring about that end. (Cf. the Bush Doctrine (“you are either with us or with the terrorists”)). Yemen declined our repeated requests that it hand over the Cole bombers, one of whom has now escaped (along with other al Qaeda operatives – perhaps with the assistance of the authorities). The instances of Saudi Arabia’s contributions to terror are too numerous to recite. Yet all of these regimes are regarded as “friendly Arab countries.”
Isn’t it possible that the problem some of us are having isn’t that these countries are Arab, but that they are not very friendly?
In any event, my take on the ports controversy is here.