> On the conservative side,
> its basic tenets are:
>
> 1) Any marxist revolutionary group -- especially one that has "liberation
> organization" or "popular front" in its title -- is always the devil and
> should be crushed;
>
> 2) Any terrorist group -- and the unquestionably spectacular terrorism of
> the 70s still counts for these people (see last rule) -- is similarly the
> devil;
>
> 3) Islamic revolutionaries ditto.
No, I really don't think this is right. In Kosovo, the leading lights of the neo-conservative movement - Jeanne Kirkpatrick, Paul Wolfowitz, the WSJ editorial board and many others - all had vehement anti-Serb and pro-KLA positions. The movement in Congress to overtly arm the KLA was led by Mitch McConnel (an extreme Israel supporter) and Joe Lieberman.
Even though the Serbs were "fighting terrorists." Even though the "terrorists" were Muslim and the Serbs Christian. Even though the ideological background of the KLA was mostly Maoist, Hoxhaist or Stalinist (though mostly nebulous).
The old America-first right-wing argued with them, trying to connect the KLA with Bin Laden, "terrorism," the Islamic Peril, multicultural separatism. But it didn't work and the most dynamic and influential neo-cons sided firmly with the KLA. (So did Bob Dole for other reasons).
So I really disagree with the idea that right-wing support for Israel is nothing more than reflexive dislike for swarthy guys with guns spouting revolutionary slogans. There's something specific about the Palestinians and the Arabs.
Seth