The Middle East Continues...

[Az]

I've told you my opinion on the issue multiple times. This is a non-threat for me.

However one should have the common decency of not doing the following: dogging an ally to make a certain step, only to change your opinion on the issue 180, leaving us looking like fools.

but that's ok because you throw us cash every now and then.

[lord of the mark]

I wont judge the UNSC resolution at least till its been made public, which wont be for several hours yet I think.

Certainly it must be borne in mind that the US has to deal with larger political realities. Still, thats no reason not to point out weaknesses in the resolution, if weaknesses one sees.

[Arrian]

Goddamn right it is, ***** If you don't like it, gimme my money back.

By the way, is there any sort of proof that the US "dogged" Israel to invade Lebanon? I noticed that we weren't exactly falling over ourselves to stop you, but that's another thing...

-Arrian

[RGBVideo]

A resolution simply condemning Israel won't do anything, so why get all worked up about it? Words are words.

USA would veto a resolution approving something actual action against the state of Israel in an instant.

[lord of the mark]

its not a question of condemnation. Its a question of a ceasefire being established, and what follows that. If theres a ceasefire, Israel will almost certainly follow it (as they did in 1973, even though it hurt them militarily) the cost of defying the UNSC on a ceasefire would be too high. If the UN establishes an international force with a sufficiently strong mandate, to back up a Lebanese army force, to keep Hezbollah from reentering areas left by withdrawing Israeli forces, that wont (IMO) be bad for Israel. The questions now are about the nature of the mandate of the international force, direction to Lebanon to stop resupply of Hezb forces, etc.

[Az]

By the way, is there any sort of proof that the US "dogged" Israel to invade Lebanon? I noticed that we weren't exactly falling over ourselves to stop you, but that's another thing...

It has been mentioned by many prominent washington analytics, IIRC.

its not a question of condemnation. Its a question of a ceasefire being established, and what follows that. If theres a ceasefire, Israel will almost certainly follow it (as they did in 1973, even though it hurt them militarily) the cost of defying the UNSC on a ceasefire would be too high. If the UN establishes an international force with a sufficiently strong mandate, to back up a Lebanese army force, to keep Hezbollah from reentering areas left by withdrawing Israeli forces, that wont (IMO) be bad for Israel. The questions now are about the nature of the mandate of the international force, direction to Lebanon to stop resupply of Hezb forces, etc.

QFT.

[Ecthy]

Question: a resolution has been agreed on (also by Olmert) that recommends the installation of 15,000 UN forces in South Lebanon to help the state establish itself. Since the resolution doesn't mention disarming Hezbollah, such an agreement is surely not in the interest of Israel? In my understanding this provides time for Hezbollah to regroup, rearm and whatnot. One day, when the peacekeeping forces are gone, they could just re-establish themselves in the south, so this seems a short term solution only.

What possibilities does Israel now have to get rid of Hezbollah?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ecthy
Question: a resolution has been agreed on (also by Olmert) that recommends the installation of 15,000 UN forces in South Lebanon to help the state establish itself. Since the resolution doesn't mention disarming Hezbollah, such an agreement is surely not in the interest of Israel? In my understanding this provides time for Hezbollah to regroup, rearm and whatnot. One day, when the peacekeeping forces are gone, they could just re-establish themselves in the south, so this seems a short term solution only.

What possibilities does Israel now have to get rid of Hezbollah?

From what ive heard Olmert agreed to the UN force, and also 15000 Leb troops, but they were just delivering the final text of the resolution to Israel and Lebanon. I havent seen the text, but I thought they were going to include something about the long run, but not immediate disarming of Hezb.

As for the South, the presumption is the UN forces stay there till the Leb army is ready to fully takeover. Again the devil is in the details, as we say in G-ds country.

[Ecthy]

What do you reckon will be done about Hezbollah? Will the retreat to some area in the East of Lebanon and wait for their day? Will Israel fund Lebanon to fight them off? Another civil war?

(PS: Are you abbreviating it to avoid ALLAH as you avoid GOD in your posts? )

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Az
In any case, it seems that the americans have stabbed us in the ass.

Sorry. We gave you a month and you pissed away a real chance to damage Hezbollah by thinking you could accomplish your goals on the cheap. Your failiure will have negative effects on our own efforts in the region by strengthening the hand of the very people you wanted to damage.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ecthy
What do you reckon will be done about Hezbollah? Will the retreat to some area in the East of Lebanon and wait for their day? Will Israel fund Lebanon to fight them off? Another civil war?

(PS: Are you abbreviating it to avoid ALLAH as you avoid GOD in your posts? )

Oh, no, may peace be upon him, Im just too lazy to type out Hezbollah each time.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ecthy
What do you reckon will be done about Hezbollah? Will the retreat to some area in the East of Lebanon and wait for their day? Will Israel fund Lebanon to fight them off? Another civil war?

Well thats the $64,000 question, as we say here in the last, best, hope of mankind. Ideally they move their military forces north to the Beqaa, and are forced to become more of a political and less of a military force, the Leb state gains stature, maybe even new political forces arise among the Shia in areas where Hezb military is no longer present. OTOH Hezb, depending on how confident they are of their future as a strictly political movement, how much they feel they have to lose by opposing the Leb army and the UN force, and how much they value the money and suppor they get from Iran, may decide not to be so cooperative. In which case one hopes it the entire West, and even some of the moderate Arab states, who support the Leb state.

[Ecthy]

I find it hard to believe they won't just continue b!tching and attacking Israel. Are 15,000 peacekeepers enough to stop them from overrunning the UN force? Israel had 30,000 in there during the last days and it was not a cakewalk.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
One of the "lebanese prisoners" hezb wants to free

Begin orchestrated the murder of over one hundred people (more than twice that depending on which accounts you believe) and Israel elected him Prime Minister. You can't claim the moral highground in a fetid swamp.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ecthy
I find it hard to believe they won't just continue b!tching and attacking Israel. Are 15,000 peacekeepers enough to stop them from overrunning the UN force? Israel had 30,000 in there during the last days and it was not a cakewalk.

You might want to listen to that interview before you continue making youself look like a fool.