The Middle East Continues...

[Az]

Originally posted by Sprayber


Either they seriously underestimated Hezbolla or they simply had no plan beyond the need to strike out. The idea of somehow convincing the Lebanese that they were bombing them for their own good was stupid if they actually believed that they could. Airstrikes are effective but only up to a certain point. After awhile you run through your list of targets and you start making stuff up and in a crowded area with civilians, that is bound to lead to bad PR. Ground occupation at this point seems half hearted and desparate. Unless something drastic happens this is becomming a big waste. What Hezbolla lost in men and rockets will be more than made up for the bad PR Israel is getting.

No, the plan was the magic of airpower, which is what the airforce (and the pilot chief of staff we have now) had been feeding the government for ages ( and still continues to this day: War in Lebanon? let's consider buying F-22s! ). This, coupled with not wanting a land campaign in general, is what created this. The land forces command urged for a land campaign since day 2, but their demands were seen as "adventurous", and "unreal".

22 days later, what's needs to be done is finally being done.

[Lodi]

Given the attack on Lebanon, Israel could hardly get away with just invading,

Che, what do you mean that Israel couldn't get away with just blatantly invading Syria? This is friggin Israel we are talking about, consequences be damned.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I refer you to GePap's post to Kuci on the same subject.

I can't be arsed to wade through an ME thread. If it ain't on the last page, it ain't worth reading.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Yes. And you?

Obviously you haven't been paying attention if you think Lebanon is still somehow a functional country.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


I can't be arsed to wade through an ME thread. If it ain't on the last page, it ain't worth reading.

It's at the top of this page. However, if you insist on being proud of your obvious ignorance carry on and don't let me rain on your parade.

[chequita guevara]

It's GePap's assertion, backed up by "official pronouncements" which, during war time, have all the substance of a rice cake. No Air campaign by itself has ever worked in the history of warfare, including the Kosovo War, which ended when the U.S. finally moderated its demands tow what Serbia had initially asked for and when Russia told Serbia it was going to cut off it's oil supplies if ti didn't make a deal.

Israel may be politically stupid (at least in the long term), but militarly they are geniuses. They had to know an air campaign wasn't going to solve their problem. However, had they announced in the begining their intention to invade, it would have created a huge problem for the President as well as Israel, as many countries, even in the ME, who had been willing to step back and let Israel do a little bombing would have been adamantly opposed to an invasion.

[DinoDoc]

It's GePap's assertion, backed up by "official pronouncements" which, during war time, have all the substance of a rice cake.

As opposed to your obviously well researched posts?

[RGBVideo]

thoughts

Either they seriously underestimated Hezbolla or they simply had no plan beyond the need to strike out. The idea of somehow convincing the Lebanese that they were bombing them for their own good was stupid if they actually believed that they could. Airstrikes are effective but only up to a certain point. After awhile you run through your list of targets and you start making stuff up and in a crowded area with civilians, that is bound to lead to bad PR. Ground occupation at this point seems half hearted and desparate. Unless something drastic happens this is becomming a big waste.

First of, two opinions of mine: For every terrorist they kill, they'll make two new out of kids living in Lebanon. Even if they were to completely destroy Hizbollah, some new terrorist group would be created (the problem isn't the main organization, it's the fact that it has and will have motivated recruits).

I don't think Israeli leadership is stupid enough to do basic strategic mistakes like this. Call me crazy, but the more and more I try to ponder the motives of Olmert, the more and more this looks like a cynical way to prop up his tough guy -image and broaden up domestic support. Sharon had his share of primitive atrocities to ensure fundamentalist support before he became prime minister, Olmert is now creating his own.

[Chemical Ollie]

Several hours later, no one here has commented on this. Anyway, the UNSC will have a meeting shortly.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/5248868.stm

US, France agree UN Lebanon text

The US and France have agreed the wording of a UN resolution to end the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah.
It calls for a "full cessation of hostilities", demanding that Hezbollah halt all attacks and Israel stop all offensive military operations.

A BBC correspondent at the UN says the wording would allow Israel some freedom if it argues it needs to defend itself.

The Security Council is to discuss it later. The US envoy to the UN said it was likely to be adopted within days.

---

The draft resolution follows weeks of disagreement over the precise wording of a call to end the violence in Lebanon.

US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, said he was keen to get the resolution adopted as quickly as possible.

He said the text did not include a requirement for an immediate cessation of hostilities.

But it does call for "the immediate cessation by Hezbollah of all attacks and the immediate cessation by Israel of all offensive military actions".

The draft text - sent to all 15 member states in the security council - also calls for the current UN force in Lebanon to monitor any cessation in fighting.

The mandate for a far stronger multinational force will follow, the BBC's James Robbins at the UN in New York says.

Swift passage of the resolution now seems likely, he says, and a formal vote could come as soon as Monday.

Foreign ministers are expected to come to New York for that vote, to give the maximum political weight to a global call to all sides to stop fighting, and work for a long-term political settlement, our correspondent adds.

UK Prime Minister Tony Blair welcomed news of the agreement, calling it "an absolutely vital first step in bringing this tragic crisis to an end".

---

[Sandman]

Israel and Hezbollah have a mad glint in their eyes - they'll most likely ignore this.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Several hours later, no one here has commented on this. Anyway, the UNSC will have a meeting shortly.

This will not do anything in the short term. It will take ages before any UN-troops will be put on the ground.

I expect the war will continue for at least two weeks. It will only get worse: more destruction everywhere and many dead.

Israel has told the residents of Sidon to leave.
Actually, I think that's the news of today

[Ecthy]

Israel

Peaceniks

[Chemical Ollie]

Originally posted by germanos

---
Israel has told the residents of Sidon to leave.
Actually, I think that's the news of today

And no one has commented on that the last two days were the most bloody in the war. This far, more Lebanese children than Hizbollah warriors have been killed. So much for precision bombing.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
So much for precision bombing.

No, no - the precision bombing is hitting its targets...

It's just a pity that when the Israelis decide to blow up a highway in christian north Lebanon during rush hour they don't give a flying **** if there are civilians actually driving on the road in the first place...

They are out of control!

This is a country born out of zionist terrorism - Olmert's own father was in Irgun for christ's sake! (anyone miss this the other week?)

27/7/2006
British Outraged at Zionist Terrorism Celebration

LONDON — As Israel wages war against Hezbollah “terrorists” in Lebanon, Britain has protested about the celebration by Israelis of a Jewish “act of terrorism” against British rule 60 years ago this week.

The Israelis, including Benjamin Netanyahu, the former Prime Minister, are commemorating the bombing of the King David Hotel in Jerusalem, the headquarters of British rule, that killed 92 people and helped to drive the British out of Palestine.

They have erected a plaque outside the restored building, and are holding a two-day seminar with speeches and a tour of the hotel by one of the Jewish resistance fighters involved in the attack.

Simon McDonald, the British Ambassador in Tel Aviv, and John Jenkins, the Consul-General in Jerusalem, have written to the municipality, stating: “We do not think that it is right for an act of terrorism, which led to the loss of
many lives, to be commemorated.”

In particular they demanded the removal of the plaque that pays tribute to the Irgun, the Jewish resistance branch headed by Menachem Begin, the future Prime Minister, which carried out the attack on July 22, 1946.

The plaque presents as fact the Irgun’s claim that people died because the British ignored warning calls. “For reasons known only to the British, the hotel was not evacuated,” it states.

Mr. McDonald and Dr. Jenkins denied that the British had been warned, adding that even if they had “this does not absolve those who planted the bomb from responsibility for the deaths”. On Monday city officials agreed to
remove the language deemed offensive from the blue sign hanging on the hotel’s gates, though that had not been done shortly before it was unveiled last night.

The controversy over the plaque and the two-day celebration of the bombing, sponsored by Irgun veterans and the Menachem Begin Heritage Center, goes to the heart of the debate over the use of political violence in the Middle East. Yesterday Mr. Netanyahu argued in a speech celebrating the attack that the Irgun were governed by morals, unlike fighters from groups such as Hamas.

“It’s very important to make the distinction between terror groups and freedom fighters, and between terror action and legitimate military action,” he said. “Imagine that Hamas or Hezbollah would call the military headquarters in Tel Aviv and say, ‘We have placed a bomb and we are asking you to evacuate the area’.”

But the view of the attack was very different in 1946 when The Times branded the Irgun “terrorists in disguise”. Decades later, Irgun veterans are unrepentant. Sarah Agassi, 80, remembers spying in the King David Hotel.

She and a fellow agent posed as a couple. They danced tangos and waltzes, sipped whisky and wine while they cased out the hotel.

On the day her brother and his fellow fighters posed as Arabs delivering milk and brought seven milk churns, each containing 50kg of explosives, into the building. Ms. Agassi waited across the street until her brother rushed out.
She said that she then made the warning call to the British command in the hotel.

Sitting in the luxurious hotel lobby, she expressed no regret. “We fought for our independence. We thought it was the right way … If I had to fight for Israel, I swear even now I would do anything.”

Murderous. Terrorist. Scum!

No wonder they are terrorising Lebanon so effectively as they are now when the leader of the country learned how to use terror from his father...

John McCarthy: Israel and the art of sophistry
What is 'brave' about giving back something you have stolen?
Published: 06 August 2006

In Tony Blair's speech in Los Angeles last Tuesday, he said he was sickened by what was happening in Lebanon but went on to effectively absolve Israel of responsibility for the devastation there. He urged: "Just for a moment, put yourself in Israel's place."

In that one phrase, our Prime Minister summed up everything that is wrong with our policy for the Middle East. In that one statemen, he gave credence to all the so-called Islamic extremists who claim the British and American governments care nothing for Arabs. His protestations of sympathy were profoundly offensive, two days after the attack on Qana. If he had really wanted to help he should have been shouting long and loud for an immediate ceasefire to stop the killing of innocents, rather than opting for diplomatic sophistry, important though the proposed UN deal will be in the long term.

Mr Blair ignored the carnage of Israel's rampage through Lebanon and attacks on Gaza. He blamed all the horror - indeed all the world's ills - on what he described as an "arc of extremism" stretching across the Middle East. Amazingly, his "arc of extremism" formed, among others, by Hizbollah, Hamas, Iran and Syria, failed to include Israel. He said: "We need to make clear to Syria and Iran that there is a choice: come in to the international community and play by the same rules as the rest of us." The sort of rules that accept Israel's wanton destruction of Lebanon as a reasonable response to the killing of four soldiers and capture of two more by Hizbollah?

Israel is out of control. A craving for physical security (unsurprising with the post-Holocaust generation's attitude of "never again"), together with secular Zionist ideals and the Jewish fundamentalist belief of being God's chosen people, has allowed Israel to believe it can do as it will. Anything, it seems, is legitimate, and Mr Blair has backed the US in rubber-stamping actions in Lebanon and Gaza which surely will be looked back on as crimes against humanity.

Groups such as Hizbollah and Hamas have said they want the destruction of the Israeli state. This obviously unacceptable ambition is shared by Iran and others. At times, such statements appear largely rhetorical; at others, they are backed by suicide bombings and rocket attacks. But, even now, no one can sensibly claim that Israel faces a real threat of destruction or occupation. Israel, on the other hand, is actively engaged in the destruction of a nation, bombing Lebanon back "by 20 years", as the military put it, and in the occupation of Palestinian land.

Look at the events leading to the crisis on Israel's other fighting front, Gaza. Gaza is Palestinian territory, occupied by Israel until last September and still dominated by Israel's military might. On 25 June, Palestinian fighters crossed into Israel, attacked an army post and returned with their captive Cpl Gilad Shalit.

Like many, Mr Blair sees this as the start of Israel's (not Palestine's) "crisis in Gaza". The action was widely reported in our media as being "an escalation" by Palestinian "militants", and Israel's aggressive response was only to be expected. What Mr Blair and other observers will not admit is that the day before Cpl Shalit's capture, Israeli forces went into Gaza and kidnapped two Palestinians whom Israel claims are Hamas militants.

Tony Blair should put himself in the Palestinians' place for a moment. Israel kidnaps your citizens from your territory and no one takes a blind bit of notice. A ***-for-tat raid justifies an onslaught that has cost more than 140 Palestinian lives, many of them civilians. Whose "arc of extremism" is in action here?

The UN says 63 Palestinians were killed and 142 wounded in Israeli attacks on Gaza in May and June this year. These attacks included more than 3,000 artillery shells and almost 50 air strikes. In the same period, Palestinians fired 369 rockets, nearly all home-made and inaccurate Qassams. Fourteen Israelis were injured. Two Israeli soldiers died trying to rescue Cpl Shalit.

Doubtless the people of towns such as Ashkelon and Sderot - within range of Palestinian rockets - are terrified and angry. But what about the terror of the people of Gaza? It is one of the most densely populated places on earth; 1.4 million people live in an area smaller than the Isle of Wight. In the past month, Israel has turned Gaza back into a ghetto, bombing the power station so homes are often without electricity or clean water. Aid agencies say Israel is allowing in only just enough food to stop the population from starving. The UN says Gaza is on the brink of a humanitarian disaster.

Mr Blair did acknowledge the core need to "put a viable Palestinian government on its feet". But there was the usual caveat. The Palestinian state must be "democratic and not threaten Israel's safety". The Palestinians have a democratically-elected government. It is led by Hamas, but because Hamas has not recognised Israel formally the Hamas government will not be recognised. If one is being balanced, or "proportionate", one has to ask: Why would Hamas recognise Israel? Why should Hamas bow before the guns of Israel and say they will stop fighting for their freedom?

Israel has been occupying Palestinian land, in defiance of UN resolutions, for almost 40 years. Instead of insisting on Israel leaving all Palestinian territories, Mr Blair spoke of the former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon's "brave step of disengagement from Gaza" last year. What is brave about giving back something you have stolen, still keeping the rightful owners in a virtual prison? Until the safety and human rights of Palestinians - and of all people in the region - are valued as much and put on an equal footing with those of Israelis, there is no hope for a peaceful settlement.

The LA speech was vintage Blair but he seemed undecided which of his two favourite roles he was playing, world leader or preacher. Ultimately, his words, though full of sound and fury, signified nothing. The Lebanese, Palestinians and Israelis - all of us - deserve better and more honest leadership.

John McCarthy was kidnapped in Lebanon in 1986 and held for five years

In Tony Blair's speech in Los Angeles last Tuesday, he said he was sickened by what was happening in Lebanon but went on to effectively absolve Israel of responsibility for the devastation there. He urged: "Just for a moment, put yourself in Israel's place."

In that one phrase, our Prime Minister summed up everything that is wrong with our policy for the Middle East. In that one statemen, he gave credence to all the so-called Islamic extremists who claim the British and American governments care nothing for Arabs. His protestations of sympathy were profoundly offensive, two days after the attack on Qana. If he had really wanted to help he should have been shouting long and loud for an immediate ceasefire to stop the killing of innocents, rather than opting for diplomatic sophistry, important though the proposed UN deal will be in the long term.

Mr Blair ignored the carnage of Israel's rampage through Lebanon and attacks on Gaza. He blamed all the horror - indeed all the world's ills - on what he described as an "arc of extremism" stretching across the Middle East. Amazingly, his "arc of extremism" formed, among others, by Hizbollah, Hamas, Iran and Syria, failed to include Israel. He said: "We need to make clear to Syria and Iran that there is a choice: come in to the international community and play by the same rules as the rest of us." The sort of rules that accept Israel's wanton destruction of Lebanon as a reasonable response to the killing of four soldiers and capture of two more by Hizbollah?

Israel is out of control. A craving for physical security (unsurprising with the post-Holocaust generation's attitude of "never again"), together with secular Zionist ideals and the Jewish fundamentalist belief of being God's chosen people, has allowed Israel to believe it can do as it will. Anything, it seems, is legitimate, and Mr Blair has backed the US in rubber-stamping actions in Lebanon and Gaza which surely will be looked back on as crimes against humanity.

Groups such as Hizbollah and Hamas have said they want the destruction of the Israeli state. This obviously unacceptable ambition is shared by Iran and others. At times, such statements appear largely rhetorical; at others, they are backed by suicide bombings and rocket attacks. But, even now, no one can sensibly claim that Israel faces a real threat of destruction or occupation. Israel, on the other hand, is actively engaged in the destruction of a nation, bombing Lebanon back "by 20 years", as the military put it, and in the occupation of Palestinian land.

Look at the events leading to the crisis on Israel's other fighting front, Gaza. Gaza is Palestinian territory, occupied by Israel until last September and still dominated by Israel's military might. On 25 June, Palestinian fighters crossed into Israel, attacked an army post and returned with their captive Cpl Gilad Shalit.

Like many, Mr Blair sees this as the start of Israel's (not Palestine's) "crisis in Gaza". The action was widely reported in our media as being "an escalation" by Palestinian "militants", and Israel's aggressive response was only to be expected. What Mr Blair and other observers will not admit is that the day before Cpl Shalit's capture, Israeli forces went into Gaza and kidnapped two Palestinians whom Israel claims are Hamas militants.

Tony Blair should put himself in the Palestinians' place for a moment. Israel kidnaps your citizens from your territory and no one takes a blind bit of notice. A ***-for-tat raid justifies an onslaught that has cost more than 140 Palestinian lives, many of them civilians. Whose "arc of extremism" is in action here?

The UN says 63 Palestinians were killed and 142 wounded in Israeli attacks on Gaza in May and June this year. These attacks included more than 3,000 artillery shells and almost 50 air strikes. In the same period, Palestinians fired 369 rockets, nearly all home-made and inaccurate Qassams. Fourteen Israelis were injured. Two Israeli soldiers died trying to rescue Cpl Shalit.

Doubtless the people of towns such as Ashkelon and Sderot - within range of Palestinian rockets - are terrified and angry. But what about the terror of the people of Gaza? It is one of the most densely populated places on earth; 1.4 million people live in an area smaller than the Isle of Wight. In the past month, Israel has turned Gaza back into a ghetto, bombing the power station so homes are often without electricity or clean water. Aid agencies say Israel is allowing in only just enough food to stop the population from starving. The UN says Gaza is on the brink of a humanitarian disaster.

Mr Blair did acknowledge the core need to "put a viable Palestinian government on its feet". But there was the usual caveat. The Palestinian state must be "democratic and not threaten Israel's safety". The Palestinians have a democratically-elected government. It is led by Hamas, but because Hamas has not recognised Israel formally the Hamas government will not be recognised. If one is being balanced, or "proportionate", one has to ask: Why would Hamas recognise Israel? Why should Hamas bow before the guns of Israel and say they will stop fighting for their freedom?

Israel has been occupying Palestinian land, in defiance of UN resolutions, for almost 40 years. Instead of insisting on Israel leaving all Palestinian territories, Mr Blair spoke of the former Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon's "brave step of disengagement from Gaza" last year. What is brave about giving back something you have stolen, still keeping the rightful owners in a virtual prison? Until the safety and human rights of Palestinians - and of all people in the region - are valued as much and put on an equal footing with those of Israelis, there is no hope for a peaceful settlement.

The LA speech was vintage Blair but he seemed undecided which of his two favourite roles he was playing, world leader or preacher. Ultimately, his words, though full of sound and fury, signified nothing. The Lebanese, Palestinians and Israelis - all of us - deserve better and more honest leadership.

John McCarthy was kidnapped in Lebanon in 1986 and held for five years

Right now I am embarrassed to be a British Citizen...

I never realised my opinions of Israel could plunge far lower than they already were - but then this is the first time I have fully followed the murderous and barbaric nature of an Israeli campaign based on the terror and destruction of innocent lives...

[BlackCat]

Nice articles MOBIUS, but you forgot to give links to them. Without those, it is difficult to see if it's just your hyperactive imagination that are in work or some other wich may have something solid.