Israel Cannot Give What The World is Looking For

[dilloduck]

Though a UN ceasefire agreement was made, Israeli troops don't plan to leave the area they have occuppied in Lebanon until Monday (if I heard correclty). Nasrallah mentioned that as long as Israel stays in Lebanon, Hezbollah will continue attacking the Israeli troops (though they wont be advancing). The second this happens, the ceasefire "agreement" will be flushed down the toilet.

While the Israeli military is much superior in tactics and weapons to the Hezbollah guerilla fighters, in hand-to-hand face-to-face firefights in urban areas, Hezbollah is gaining the upper hand on Israel. There are constantly stalemates that last for days, and i believe yesterday, 19 Israeli soldiers were killed (the most in one day, during this war). Recently, hundreds of helicopters deployed thousands of more troops in the area. The problem that Israel faces is: 1. does it carpet bomb all of Lebanon and level it to the ground, risking minimal troop deaths, or 2. does it send in ground forces to take out hezbollah soldeirs who are hiding behind civilians, and risk many troop deaths.

If Israel acts in accordance with number 1, then it is likely that Iran, Syria, Jordan, and multitudes of other arabic nations (which are on the fence about joining in on this war against Israel already) will attack Israel- and they'll have a bigger problem.
If Israel does number 2, then they will drag this war on for years, losing many people, Hezbollah rockets will continue to attack Israeli cities (they are now hitting Haifa- a range that no one thought they could reach 2 weeks ago). The UN will continue to condemn Israel, and the US will have to help out Israel- thus exasuting more of our troops and extending our war on terror.

Koffi 'the scourge of the UN' Annan want to have a ceasefire, but as I always say: "There is no avoiding war, only putting it off to the advantage of others" (i believe it was originally Napolean's). Just as Hezbollah spent 7 years to build up the area just to the North of Israel in preparation for a war, if the ceasefire is legitimate and no one keeps a keen eye on Lebanon, they will build up again, and they, like a virus, will be more difficult to defeat the second time.

I think Europe and the UN need to realize that negotiations are not possible in the middle east area. This is because the arabs in the area want nothing short of Israel disappearing- this is not compromisable. Though arabic governments may say "we condemn the acts of terrorists, in our countries, towards israel" they still do nothing to prevent these attacks- and thus are just as guilty. Israel needs to finish the middle east war as soon as possible before the nuclear capabilities of Iran will prevent it from protecting itself from militant islam in neighboring countries.

They have the Hibullys trapped in southern Lebanon. What is the point in ferreting them out? The UN says they can't recieve arms--if they shoot at Israel it can shoot back. Advantage Israel.

 

[Told you So]

hey, if i were israel and i heard a handgun going off from the hezbollah side I'd carpet bomb everything in sight until no sound can be heard.- unfortunately this comes with consequences. Luckily, if Israel is going to use this tactic (not worrying about collateral damage) it can take out all of the enemies surrounding it in 2 weeks top.

Funny, Nasrallah calls Israel's lack of advance for the few days a 'victory'... then again he called the last time Israel destroyed Lebanon a 'victory' when they left... the guy's insane, and the people are so oblivious of the facts that they believe him

 

[dilloduck]

hey, if i were israel and i heard a handgun going off from the hezbollah side I'd carpet bomb everything in sight until no sound can be heard.- unfortunately this comes with consequences. Luckily, if Israel is going to use this tactic (not worrying about collateral damage) it can take out all of the enemies surrounding it in 2 weeks top.

Funny, Nasrallah calls Israel's lack of advance for the few days a 'victory'... then again he called the last time Israel destroyed Lebanon a 'victory' when they left... the guy's insane, and the people are so oblivious of the facts that they believe him

First I don't see a chance in hell for the shooting to stop. Second, both sides will accuse the other of breaking the "cease fire". Again the UN proves itself impotent.

 

[Gunny]

Now that the Hizbullys are considered "legitimate" by that honored institution SO WHAT?

So much for not officially dealing with criminals.

 

[dilloduck]

So much for not officially dealing with criminals.

What dealing are you talking about? Through the UN?

 

[Annie]

Kind of encapsulates the discussion of this thread. Links at site:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015007.php

August 14, 2006
Don't worry, be happy

Captain Ed has emailed NRO to explain why he thinks Israel wins by virtue of the cease-fire. Ed discusses what he perceives to be the three possible scenarios are under the agreement. First,

Lebanon and Hezbollah agree to implement it: Southern Lebanon gets cleared of Hezbollah and their launchers, they cannot re-arm, Lebanon finally takes control of its own territory south of the Litani. Israel gets a secured northern border and peace for its northern cities, and a sovereign partner with which to finalize the border settlement.
​

Ed wisely avoids attaching a probability to this scenario. If, by the statement "Hezbollah agree to implement it," he means Hezbollah agrees to turn over, for example, its remaining 10,000 or so rockets to the Lebanese and/or the U.N., we can assign a probability of roughly zero. If Ed contemplates that the Lebanese and the U.N. will forcibly seize Hezbollah's weapons, the odds don't improve much. Indeed, the French foreign minister now has said that France (whose troops apparently will take the lead in the U.N. force) intends to disarm Hezbollah through diplomatic means.

The second scenario is

Lebanon and Hezbollah reject it: Israel continues its military assault with just a few hours of rest for both sides. This time, however, they get tacit UN Security Council endorsement, since they agreed to the cease-fire and their enemy did not.​

Absent the cease-fire, Israel would have continued its (belatedly forceful) military assault. With the cease-fire, that scenario becomes contingent on what the Lebanese and Hezbollah decide to do. In exchange for giving up control of its military decision-making, Israel gets "tacit UN Security Council endorsement." Here, Ed falls into the same trap that threatens to undermine the Bush administration's anti-terrorism efforts -- believing that UN Security Council endorsement is central. Moreover, any such "endorsement" would be short-lived. The Israel haters and Hezbollah appeasers at the U.N. would be back to assigning some of the blame to Israel within a few days.

The third scenario is

Lebanon and Hezbollah accept it, then renege once the UNIFIL forces are in place: This is the one loser scenario, and even that is overrated. Israel does not have to attack either the Lebanese or UN forces to attack Hezbollah positions in the sub-Litani, unless both are stupid enough to allow Hezbollah to position their weapons nearby their positions. If they are, then that positioning will become rapidly apparent.​

The odds overwhelmingly favor this scenario. The first scenario is fantasy; the second is a temporary one that would give way to the third once Condi Rice and the French patch things up. Ed agrees that Israel loses in this scenario, but says that Israel still can attack Hezbollah without attacking the U.N. force. Maybe yes, maybe no. Hezbollah managed to position itself next to the U.N. in the last go- round, and there will be more "peacekeepers" among whom to inter-mingle this time. The real point, however, is that in another few years Hezbollah will be able to attack Israel with rockets that might well contain nuclear tips. A longer Israeli military action followed by a U.N resolution along the lines of what the U.S. and France originally proposed would have provided greater protection against this prospect.

Ed also notes that "Israel plays for the big game, and always has." But part of its big game has typically included playing to win each "little game" big. That's how Israel maintains its ability to deter. Here (to its great discredit) the Israeli government, which I'm told did not for the first time since the early 1960s contain an experienced military man as either prime minister or defense minister, failed to play to win at the outset. And by the time it got around to doing so, the U.S. worked with the U.N. to pull the plug.

Finaly Ed says

[W]e need to quit worrying about whether terrorists can claim victory. As long as they breathe, they will claim anything as a stunning victory. It's like taking Stalin's farm forecasts seriously; only the chronic worriers bother.​

This is way too facile. The problem is not that the terrorists can claim victory; it's that the claim is highly plausible. Hezbollah has become the first force to provide substantial resistance to the IDF. The dissension between the IDF and Israel's political leadership shows that Hezbollah is not just blowing smoke. Moreover, Ed does not deny that, the terrorists aside, Iran and Syria are winners. Should we not worry about that either?
Posted by Paul at 10:27 AM

 

[red states rule]

hey, if i were israel and i heard a handgun going off from the hezbollah side I'd carpet bomb everything in sight until no sound can be heard.- unfortunately this comes with consequences. Luckily, if Israel is going to use this tactic (not worrying about collateral damage) it can take out all of the enemies surrounding it in 2 weeks top.

Funny, Nasrallah calls Israel's lack of advance for the few days a 'victory'... then again he called the last time Israel destroyed Lebanon a 'victory' when they left... the guy's insane, and the people are so oblivious of the facts that they believe him

Body Shop Bombed?
Posted by Bob Owens on August 14, 2006 - 11:44.
This is just surreal:


The caption reads:

Lebanese civil defense rescuers, try to remove two blanket-wrapped bodies, found trapped under debris and concrete of the destroyed buildings, attacked late Monday by Israeli airstrike, in the southern Beirut suburb of Chiah, Lebanon, Tuesday Aug. 8, 2006. The raid on the Muslim southern suburb next to a Christian neighborhood killed at least 15 people, police officials said. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)
The bodies were found already wrapped in blankets under the debris of the building.

I'm trying to think of rational reasons that Lebanese would keep pre-packaged corpses in their homes, and I'm coming up with nothing. Nada. Zip.

One irrational explanation is that some bodies are being saved by Hezbollah to use in photo ops at a later date, and that the Hezbollah Body Shop (for lack of a better term) got hit, and buried those that should already have been buried.

But that's just nuts. Hezbollah would never use corpses to stage a media event.

Ever.

Update: Same photographer, different angle, similarly-worded caption:

Lebanese civil defense rescuer directs a buldozer as he stands next to a two blanket-wrapped bodies, center, found trapped under the destroyed buildings, which were attacked late Monday in an Israeli airstrike, in the southern Beirut suburb of Chiah, Lebanon, Tuesday Aug. 8, 2006. The raid on the Muslim southern suburb next to a Christian neighborhood killed at least 15 people, police officials said. (AP Photo/Hussein Malla)
And another.

So either he really does mean to imply the bodies were blanket-wrapped when found, or his preciseness with the English language is right up there with Adnan Hajj's PhotoShop skills.

Further Update It seems Malla was also one of the photographers that took one of the pictures of Twice-Bombed Lady, and was hanging out with with fired Reuters stringer Adnan Hajj, he of the questionable llama picture, among others.

Update: Dig this.

From Brian Denton, a photographer in Lebanon, at photography forum LightStalkers:

i have been working in lebanon since all this started, and seeing the behavior of many of the lebanese wire service photographers has been a bit unsettling. while hajj has garnered a lot of attention for his doctoring of images digitally, whether guilty or not, i have been witness to the daily practice of directed shots, one case where a group of wire photogs were choreographing the unearthing of bodies, directing emergency workers here and there, asking them to position bodies just so, even remove bodies that have already been put in graves so that they can photograph them in peoples arms. these photographers have come away with powerful shots, that required no manipulation digitally, but instead, manipulation on a human level, and this itself is a bigger ethical problem.

http://newsbusters.org/node/6955

 

[dilloduck]

Kind of encapsulates the discussion of this thread. Links at site:

http://powerlineblog.com/archives/015007.php

I read the whole article and still can't find what it is that the world wants from Israel that Israel can't give it.:huh: