Middle East thread continued

[chequita guevara]

Why is Israel attacking the Lebanese army?

[TCO]

I'm not always cute?

[Spiffor]

Now this is rich.

From the BBC:

Israel claims Iran link to crisis
Hezbollah's capture of two Israeli soldiers last week was timed to divert attention from Tehran's nuclear programme, the Israeli PM has claimed.

Ehud Olmert said that the cross-border raid in which the two soldiers were taken and eight others killed was co-ordinated with Tehran.

About 30 people died in a seventh day of conflict, most of them in Lebanon.

US President George W Bush has meanwhile accused Syria of trying to use the crisis to return to Lebanon.

"Syria is trying to get back into Lebanon, it looks like to me," Mr Bush said in Washington.



"It's essential that the government of Lebanon survives this crisis. We've worked hard to free - and we meaning the international community - worked hard to free Lebanon from Syrian influence."

The US state department refused to confirm comments by an Israeli ambassador that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice would travel to the region on Friday.

Israel launched its assault and blockade last Wednesday after the two soldiers were captured.

About 230 Lebanese people have been killed since then - the majority of them were civilians, but the toll includes about 30 soldiers. The number of Hezbollah militants killed is not known.

Twenty-five Israelis have died - 13 civilians and 12 members of the military.

Israel has frequently blamed Syria and Iran for arming and backing Hezbollah, but Mr Olmert's comments were the first explicit claim of Tehran's direct involvement in the capture of the soldiers, correspondents say.

Mr Olmert said the timing of the incident was not an accident, and the international community at the G8 summit in Russia had fallen for it - discussing Lebanon rather than Iran's nuclear programme.

Earlier, Israel's foreign minister met a UN team trying to negotiate a ceasefire, but said the soldiers' release and the deployment of the Lebanese army in the south would have to precede any ceasefire.

Thousands more foreigners have continued to flee Lebanon as the crisis deepens.


FOREIGNERS IN LEBANON
Canada: 40,000
Philippines: 30,000
Australia: 25,000
US: 25,000
UK: 22,000 (inc. 10,000 with dual nationality)
France: 20,000

The UN announced that its non-essential staff would join the exodus.

A British warship is currently on its way to Cyprus, carrying the first Britons to be evacuated from Lebanon by sea.

HMS Gloucester picked up 180 of the most needy cases, including children, after docking in Beirut. Up to 5,000 more Britons are expected to follow over the next few days. The US, Canada and other governments were also organising evacuations by land, air or sea.

In other developments:

* Lebanese PM Fouad Siniora said Israel was "opening the gates of hell and madness" on his country, and said Israel's response to the soldiers' capture had been disproportionate

* Pro-Syrian Lebanese President Emile Lahoud vowed to stand by Hezbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah

* UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said he expected European nations to contribute troops to a proposed stabilisation force to end the fighting

* The UN warned of a humanitarian disaster as Lebanese flee their homes, with air strikes on roads and bridges hampering efforts to help them

* Shlomo Goldwasser, the father of one of the missing Israeli soldiers, said he hoped all means - legal or illegal - would be used to get his son Ehud back

As Israel launched fresh air strikes and cross-border attacks on Tuesday, six bodies were pulled from the rubble of a home in the Lebanese border village of Aitaroun, and another family was killed in the coastal city of Tyre.

In one attack, 11 Lebanese soldiers were killed at a barracks east of Beirut.


HAVE YOUR SAY
Hezbollah, Syria and Iran are using our country as a battleground against Israel
Nayef, Beirut

The Lebanese army has been ordered not to respond to the Israeli attacks. But Lebanese soldiers have now died in several strikes, including one on the port of Abdeh on Monday in which nine died.

Fresh volleys of Hezbollah rockets landed on northern Israel on Tuesday. One attack killed an Israeli in the town of Nahariya.

Rockets also hit Haifa, Safed, Acre, Kiryat Shemona, and Gush Halav region near Safed, Israeli officials told AP news agency.

Israeli military officials say more than 700 Hezbollah rockets have now landed in Israel since the crisis began.

So, Israel responds to the capture of two soldiers by launching a full fledged assault on its neighbour, thus turining an incident into a major international crisis, and they now criticize the G8 for having fallen in an Iranian manipulation?

Do you think Olmert is like those Arab leaders whose propaganda is "all the others are wrong and we're always right", or do you think he is a genuine moron?

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Why is Israel attacking the Lebanese army?

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
I read in the WaPo today that it was in an attack on the radar installation used for the missile attack on the Israeli warship.

It's an isolated incident. Israel has specifically stated it's not targeting the Lebanese army.

[Kuciwalker]

Spiffor: it's possible that Iran intended the attack and whatever response occured to distract the G8, even if they didn't predict the scale of Israel's response.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Sandman

Quite a peculiar view you've got there. Normal countries would start off with a bit of sabre-rattling, demands, diplomacy etc. War as a last resort.

Can you give me an example of such a "normal" country which wasn't debilitated by weakness allowing incursions on their territory and indiscriminate bombardment of their cities responding with saber rattling and demands?

[notyoueither]

I'll bet he can't give you an example of the last time Hebollah did this (capture soldiers as bargaining chips) with Israel.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
If Lebanon cant control its own territory, then it and the international community must allow Israel to protect itself as it must. Im not as pessimistic about what Lebanon can do, with international support, and if Hezbollah is cut off from its outside support. But IF Lebanons sovereignty is going to be invoked against Israel, Lebanon must assert that sovereignty.

Why are you not 'pessimistic'? The country is choked with refugees and it will take months or years to repair the damage to the infrastructure. The country has recieved no international support, and Hezbollah is doubtless still receiving help from Syria.

What do you think has been going on for six years, since Israel withdrew from Lebanon? And especially since UNSC 1559 was passed? Plenty of demands, diplomacy, and saber rattling. The kidnapping wasnt the first act of war by Hezbollah. It WAS an attempt by Hezbollah to show it could strike with impunity, while Israel was distracted. It was important for Israel to show it could strike back EVEN while still engaged in Gaza.

Also, since its a kidnapping, it was imperative to strike while they still had some idea where the kidnap victims are.

You are confusing an ongoing problem with a crisis. Even from purely military perspective, it would make sense to have time to discuss things over and come up with an actual strategy. When it comes to planning and diplomacy, even the Americans are streets ahead.

[Sandman]

Originally posted by Sikander

Can you give me an example of such a "normal" country which wasn't debilitated by weakness allowing incursions on their territory and indiscriminate bombardment of their cities responding with saber rattling and demands?

The U.S. waited for a month before attacking Afghanistan.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Sandman


Why are you not 'pessimistic'? The country is choked with refugees and it will take months or years to repair the damage to the infrastructure. The country has recieved no international support, and Hezbollah is doubtless still receiving help from Syria.

This 'incident' is bringing the need to support the government of Lebanon to the forefront.

Syria and Iran can crap their pants for all they want after a multinational force, with widespread Arab blessings and perhaps participation, occupies Southern Lebanon and tells Hezbollah that they are out of the game of being a semi-autonomous force.

[Eli]

The U.S. waited for a month before attacking Afghanistan.

Afhghanistan appeared very suddenly on the American radar. There was a point in trying to convince them to get rid of AQ because it was never done before, at least earnestly.

Israel is already fighting with Hizballah for a good two decades, constantly demanding from the Lebanese government to dismantle it and constantly issuing threats to Syria. Israel sits on the international border for six years, during which 3 of it's soldiers were kidnapped and killed, at least 6 civilians were killed in one major attack and a few more soldiers and civilians were killed in sporadic fighting. After every such incident, there was quite a bit of "sabre-rattling, demands, diplomacy, etc".
In those six years, Israel's retaliation was always very contained and included mainly artillery fire on the combat zones and all those incidents ended within a few hours.

The current response is not an out of the blue attack. It is a wise decision to finally (try to) solve the Hizballah problem by force, instead of wasting another six years on "sabre-rattling, demands and diplomacy".

[VetLegion]

Wait, three kidnappings and six dead civilians in six years? I don't want to sound callous, but isn't that pretty successful?

[Eli]

Originally posted by VetLegion
Wait, three kidnappings and six dead civilians in six years? I don't want to sound callous, but isn't that pretty successful?

That's the major events that I remember. There were a few more smaller attacks. But yes, the damage they caused in six years is very small if you look at it from the perspective of an entire state. Nevertheless, every such attack, despite being relatively minor, is a casus belli.
Also, I forgot to mention Syrian and Hizballah involvement in terrorist attacks by the Palestinians.

My point is that Israel did not just chose to respond with extreme force without first trying other avenues of problem-solving. There were more than enough limited fire-exchanges on the border, there were symbolic attacks on Syrian interests in Lebanon and one such attack in Syria, there were two overflights above Assad's "palace", there were a few mysterious explosions in Lebanon killing a senior Hizballah member or two and there were constant complaints to the UN.

In short, despite numerous casus belli, Israel restrained itself to diplomatic protests and limited military actions for six years. Sandman is wrong.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Sandman


The U.S. waited for a month before attacking Afghanistan.

All the while moving assets to the region and negotiating basing and overflight rights so that we could actually get forces to that state (which is completely surrounded by other states.) Do you think we would have given the Taliban another chance if we could have immediately and directly taken out the AQ elements? Remember Clinton's attempt to hit AQ in Afghanistan a couple of years earlier?

[Arrian]

The primary reason we waited before attacking Afganistan is that it is on the other side of the world, and it took some time to work out setting up bases in surrounding countries and bedding down with the northern alliance warlords.

-Arrian