# Discussion on Israeli Strategy



## tomahawk6 (17 Jul 2006)

LTC[ret] Ralph Peters weighs in on current Israeli operations. It is his opinon that Israel is afraid to take casualties. However I see the Israeli operation as a page out of US doctrine. Use airpower to prepare the battlefield with limited ground operations to mop up. This has the benefit of keeping ground forces casualties low. This is in fact the way that modern war is waged.

http://www.nypost.com/postopinion/opedcolumnists/israels_new_fear_opedcolumnists_ralph_peters.htm


----------



## Bo (18 Jul 2006)

Interesting article from an alternative news source.

Israel Takes a Stupid Pill
By Larry C. Johnson, Booman Tribune
Posted on July 17, 2006, Printed on July 18, 2006
http://www.alternet.org/story/39081/ 

Apparently not content to let the US do a self-immolation act in the Middle East by itself, Israel decided to set itself on fire by invading Lebanon. Burn baby burn? Like George Bush, Israel's Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, never served in a combat unit and launched military operations without thinking the matter through. In fact, Olmert reportedly never even served in the military. I raise this because there is one simple question Israel cannot answer about the current operations-what is their strategic military objective. Olmert has somehow persuaded the Israeli military to ignore strategy, think tactically, and in the process become really stupid. The events in the next several weeks will expose as myth the canard that you can secure a nation by killing terrorists. No you can't.

Killing "terrorists" has a place in policy but it is not a strategic military objective. It is a tactical objective and may serve political purposes, but achieves little in terms of securing Israel. Israel is attacking targets in Lebanon like a drunken sailor in a bar fight. Flailing about, causing significant damage, hitting innocent bystanders, and generally making a mess of things. This is not the Israeli military that pulled off the brilliant and daring raid at Entebbe.

What about Hamas and Hezbollah?

They are not terrorists. They carry out terrorist attacks, but they are not terrorists. They are something far more dangerous. They are a fully functioning political, social, religious, and military organizations that use terrorism tactics, but they are far more formidable than terrorist groups like Al Qaeda or the Basque Terrorist Organization. They do have the resources and the personnel to project force, sustain operations, and cannot be easily defeated. Unlike the Egyptian and Syrian armies in 1973, Hamas and Hezbollah will not easily fold and cannot be defeated in a seven day war. If that is the assumption among some Israeli military planners it is a crazy fantasy.

While most folks in the United States buy into the Hollywood storyline of poor little Israel fighting for its survival against big, bad Muslims, the reality unfolding on our TV screens shows something else. Exodus, starring Paul Newman, is ancient history. Hamas and Hezbollah attacked military targets; kidnapping soldiers on military patrols may be an act of war and a provocation, but it is not terrorism. (And yes, Hezbollah and Hamas have carried out terrorist attacks in the past against Israeli civilians. I'm not ignoring those acts, I condemn them, but we need to understand what the dynamics are right now.) Israel is not attacking the individuals who hit their soldiers. Israel is engaged in mass punishment.

How did Israel respond? They bombed civilian targets and civilian infrastructure and have killed many civilians. Let's see if I have this right.

The Arab "terrorists" attack military units, destroy at least one tank, and are therefore terrorists. Israel retaliates by launching aerial, naval, and artillery bombardments of civilian areas and they are engaging in self-defense. If we are unable to recognize the hypocrisy of this construct then we ourselves are so enveloped by propaganda and emotion that, like the Israelis, Hezbollah, and Hamas, we can't think rationally. We can only think in terms of tribalism and revenge.

Iran, meanwhile, is sitting in the catbird's seat. They have a well-trained and highly competent surrogate force in Hezbollah. Hezbollah's successful attack on Friday on an Israeli naval vessel is a reminder that Hezbollah is not a bunch of crazy kids carrying RPGs and wearing flip flops. I would be willing to wager that at least one Iranian military advisor was helping Hezbollah launch the missile that hit the Israeli ship. But Iran is doing more than simply engage in tit-for-tat. They are thinking strategically.

The events unfolding in Iraq and Lebanon are going Tehran's way. The United States is being portrayed in the world media as a government that tolerates and excuses attacks on civilian populations. The perception becomes the reality and the ability of the United States to rally support among the Russians, the Chinese, and even the French becomes more impaired. We need the international community to deal effectively with nuclear proliferation in North Korea and Iran. Now, we will be bogged down trying to defend Israel from an angry international community.     

In the past, the United States had enough credibility on both sides and kept enough of a distance during these blood feuds so that we could intervene and prevent the fighting from escalating into a gigantic war. It appears that there is no one in the Bush Administration who can step up and intervene to calm the situation. Hell, with John Bolton and Elliot Abrams leading the charge, we are Israel's enablers.

Former Senator Fred Thompson played a U.S. Navy Admiral in The Hunt for Red October. While speaking about escalating tensions as the United States and the Soviet Union chased a renegade submarine, he said: "This business will get out of control. It will get out of control and we'll be lucky to live through it."

Those words are relevant today. Let's hope and pray they don't come to pass. 

© 2006 Independent Media Institute. All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/39081/ 



True? Left-wing propaganda? Discuss...


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (18 Jul 2006)

Left wing propaganda....and apologist crap.....next question.


Matthew.


----------



## Jed (18 Jul 2006)

I can follow the logic of this article , but; I feel there may be a lot more facts with respect to interaction between the governing powers in Syria and Iran and the Hezbolah that are not widely known and, therefore, key factors are missing in the Estimate of the Situation. I would like to see someone with some insight in this realm comment on this news article.

Jed


----------



## a_majoor (18 Jul 2006)

Since Hezbollah and Hamas are social and ideological movements as well as terrorist organizations, I suspect the Israelis are attempting to tear down the entire social construct which allows these movements to survive and prosper. Past historical examples include the Theban destruction of Spartan society by marching through Laconia, Sherman's "March to the Sea" tearing the heart out of Southern society and the annihilation of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. In all cases, there were attempts to ensure the ruling class paid a disproportionate price, but all members of the society were attacked to the extent they supported the Spartan, Southern, Nazi or Imperial regimes.

So long as the "social construct" exists, then there will always be new Imams and new recruits for these movements to re occupy the Gaza strip and Southern Lebanon and carry out renewed attacks against the population of Israel. Israel is in an almost impossible situation. They know that Hezbollah and Hamas need to be so thoroughly smashed and humiliated that few people would ever attempt to reconstitute them again, but lack the resources to do so.

Since Hezbollah is a creature of Iran, the overthrow of the Iranian Theocracy and toppling of the Syrian Ba'athist regime (which provides material support) are needed to break the ideological and logistical underpinnings of Hezbollah. All in all, there are multiple layers to this game, and the only overarching strategy which has any chance at all is the American "purple finger" experiment of creating a consensual, free market democracy in Iraq. While some commentators see an Iranian master plan at work, another view is this is an attempt to derail the "purple finger" process by diverting attention to "wars and rumors of war", as demands for reform grow and increase in Iran. (I suspect there is an element of truth to both ideas, the Iranians need to break the "purple finger" box and at the same time realized this is a way of attacking their enemies by proxy).


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Jul 2006)

It's not left-wing propaganda.  Regardless how the author intended it to be perceived, he has made some useful points.

What is Israel's objective?  I doubt Hamas and Hezbollah and their state backers particularly care about the welfare of the people nominally under their control.  Suppose Israel lashes out in this fashion each time someone uses a non-Israeli population as a human shield.  Who do you suppose is going to break first: the anti-Israeli political factions due to a backlash from the innocent populations, or Israel due to international popular and political opinion, not to mention their own domestic disgust at having to behave in such a fashion?

Israel has peace with Egypt and Jordan.  If Hezbollah is extinguished and Israel guarantees the security of Lebanon (ie. against Syrian invasion) without interfering with Lebanon's domestic politics, Israel might be able to buy security on that frontier. (And Lebanon might become a gem of the ME again.)  That would leave only Syria - which can't easily allow a proxy war to be fought from refuges within its borders - and the Palestinian territories.


----------



## Teddy Ruxpin (18 Jul 2006)

You know something - I actually agree with much of what's written here.

I'm hardly an apologist for Hezbollah or Hamas, but I've been watching what's unfolding in Lebanon with a sense of bewilderment - particularly at the sense of proportionality of it all.

It is certainly one thing to go after Hezbollah hammer and tong.  After all, the launching of rockets into Northern Israel is a serious matter and is something that needed to be addressed.  However, I really began to question Israeli tactics as I watched rounds impacting on the runways of Beirut International and as reports (multiple source) began to circulate of bombings of roads, bridges and other infrastructure along with mounting civilian casualties.  After all, Lebanon is a country that is just rebuilding itself after decades of sectarian violence and that has a significant Christian population.

So, what do we make of all this?  First, recent actions play right into the hands of Iran and the Islamic extremists.  With the dramatic TV images, they can, yet again, portray Israel as the aggressor - and as one that will employ disproportionate amounts of force.  Second, Israel may have a serious problem on its hands if it commits substantial numbers of ground troops to S. Lebanon and may find it difficult to conduct a coherent withdrawal after a protracted COIN campaign.

Finally, one wonders what the UN is doing.  UNIFIL has been deployed to S. Lebanon since 1978 (see here for their mandate:  http://www.un.org/Depts/dpko/missions/unifil/index.html), with the specific task of assisting the Lebanese government in establishing control over its southern frontier.  Yet the Lebanese have surrendered virtual control over large parts of the region to Hezbollah and have been unwilling to assert themselves, despite "urging" from the UN.  I can't blame the Lebanese:  Hezbollah has been permitted to range free for years and reining them in would take a significant effort.  However, what is this UN force is doing in the country if it cannot provide even a modicum of control and assistance?

To sum myself up:  I think Israel has gone overboard here.  Instead of targeted military action, we appear to be seeing a broad, disproportionate response - a response that could be counterproductive in the short to mid-term.

Simply because one disagrees with Israeli policy doesn't make one a left-wing terrorism supporter.  Some posters here would do well to remember that.

Coffee's over...back to work.

TR


----------



## Infanteer (18 Jul 2006)

Teddy Ruxpin said:
			
		

> You know something - I actually agree with much of what's written here.
> 
> I'm hardly an apologist for Hezbollah or Hamas, but I've been watching what's unfolding in Lebanon with a sense of bewilderment - particularly at the sense of proportionality of it all....
> 
> ...



+1.

What a mess.  It's hard to lob accusations at Hamas/Hezbollah for its behaviour when Israel is killing more civilians with its military strikes.  You can accuse me of whatever and try to take the moral highground because Israel "doesn't target civilians" (which, incidentally, Hezbollah also claims), but 200 dead civilians are 200 dead civilians.  One would think Israel would have learned something from its first disastrous foray into Lebanon.

The only thing that really helps to explain things is Thomas Friedman's statement that, in the Mid-East, "all things are tribal."


----------



## GAP (18 Jul 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> One would think Israel would have learned something from its first disastrous foray into Lebanon.
> The only thing that really helps to explain things is Thomas Friedman's statement that, in the Mid-East, "all things are tribal."



I agree with most of the last few posts, until I remember what the "Canadian/Lebanese" said about Hezbollah being their protector.


----------



## crazyleggs (18 Jul 2006)

Interesting e-mail transcript from Maj Hess-von Kruedener.  He is serving under UNTSO in Lebanon.

http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20060718/mideast_lebanon_UN_060716/20060718/


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Jul 2006)

>To sum myself up:  I think Israel has gone overboard here.  Instead of targeted military action, we appear to be seeing a broad, disproportionate response - a response that could be counterproductive in the short to mid-term.

Unless the Israelis really are working themselves up to solve the Hezbullah "problem" once and for all and turn out the foreigners fighting Israel from Lebanon's territory.


----------



## Koenigsegg (18 Jul 2006)

> My only comment is, "the last time Jews took the moral high ground it got them one way tickets via the Deutsche Bahn to Treblinka, Bergen Belsen, Treblinka, etc...."



I would not call that Moral high ground, I would call that trickery, treachery, and tyranny.  Toss in a lot of Fear, and some in-action.

Moral high ground would be more along the lines of the king of Denmark throwing on a Star of David, and instructing others to do the same. (please correct me if I named the wrong the country, big mistake I know, and I apologise if I am wrong)

I feel (of course) that Israel has the right to defend itself, but they are pushing it a bit too far now.  What the Israeli's did in the 1980's to shut down the development of the Iraqi nuclear reactor, including  killing the French technicians was "understandable" and collateral damage was kept at minimum while completing the mission.  Now, the collateral damage is out of hand.


----------



## jollyjacktar (18 Jul 2006)

The real losers are the common citizens of both Lebanon and Israel.  Both are being victimized by each side and to an smaller extent their own side as each antagonist tries to hurt the other.  Hezbollah did start this latest round of fighting, and Israel has I agree a right to defend itself.  But I concur with Teddy that Israel is being way overboard in their response.  They seem to be more intent on punishing the people of Lebanon by destroying their infrastructure ie Airport runways etc, than hunting rocket batteries.  They seem almost to be the school yard bully running amok and in frustration punching the lights out of a defenceless smaller kid when they cannot get the one who hit them with the rock in the first place.


----------



## klambie (18 Jul 2006)

Interesting takedown from an alternative opinion source.

http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=21565#comments


----------



## paracowboy (18 Jul 2006)

Go Israel. They have no choice. They have to destroy the entire infra-structure as that *IS* Hezbollah and HAMAS. These two terrorist organizations have, over the past couple decades, taken over as the de facto socio-economic infrastructure everywhere you find a Palestinian neighbourhood.

The only way they can survive is by removing the entire cancer. As for collateral damage, they're doing a lot better than any of their enemies. After all, they're not hitting sky scrapers in a third nation across an ocean, or butchering crippled old men in wheel chairs on a cruise ship.


----------



## tomahawk6 (18 Jul 2006)

This has been a long time coming. Iran and Syria are fully responsible for the war we see raging now and should pay a big price. The article is full of s@#*. Lets look at this situation from a different angle. Israel has never vowed to wipe out the arabs and push them into the sea.The PA,Hamas and Hezbollah have all vowed to destroy Israel. That said if Israel disarmed tomorrow they would be butchered by the islamic fundamentalists. If the arabs disarmed there would be peace. Only the anti-Israel crowd calls for Israel to make concessions to show restraint.

Now those of you who doubt the need for Israel to continue its present course need to remember, that for Israel this is a war of survival. As a result the IDF will take any and all steps to protect the people of Israel. Another thing to remember is that Syria virtually ran Lebanon for twenty years and only last year reduced its presence. It was Syria's policy to support Hezbollah because its far safer to use Lebanon as a safe haven for terrorists avoiding repercussions for the Syrians. Israel must invade southern Lebanon if nothing else to stop the rocket attacks.


----------



## Kat Stevens (18 Jul 2006)

I kind of take a differing viewpoint.  Imagine if, ever since the day of your birth, you were surrounded by people whose sworn mission is to destroy you and your family.  Every time you try to relax in your own home, gangs of local thugs throw rocks through your windows, and set fire to your property.  The police coff*UN*coff are unwilling to intervene, as it may upset the entire neighbourhood if they did.  Do you eventually snap, and lash out in all directions?  I think I might.

*THIS IS NOT TO SAY THAT I DON'T THINK ISRAEL HAS SLIGHTLY GONE OFF THE REZ ON THIS ONE*


----------



## chanman (18 Jul 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> +1.
> 
> What a mess.  It's hard to lob accusations at Hamas/Hezbollah for its behaviour when Israel is killing more civilians with its military strikes.  You can accuse me of whatever and try to take the moral highground because Israel "doesn't target civilians" (which, incidentally, Hezbollah also claims), but 200 dead civilians are 200 dead civilians.  One would think Israel would have learned something from its first disastrous foray into Lebanon.
> 
> The only thing that really helps to explain things is Thomas Friedman's statement that, in the Mid-East, "all things are tribal."



The mention of Israeli warnings to leave certain areas in news stories seem oddly juxtposed with stories listing air strikes on highways and bridges and the pasting of the odd unfortunate motorist.

Whoever's in power in Lebanon after this is going to have one heck of a mess to clean up with respect to infrastructure and economy.  Tourists and businesses aren't too keen on going to places that might get bombarded.

Cribbed from the CIA world factbook



> The 1975-91 civil war seriously damaged Lebanon's economic infrastructure, cut national output by half, and all but ended Lebanon's position as a Middle Eastern entrepot and banking hub. In the years since, Lebanon has rebuilt much of its war-torn physical and financial infrastructure by borrowing heavily - mostly from domestic banks. In an attempt to reduce the ballooning national debt, the Rafiq HARIRI government began an austerity program, reining in government expenditures, increasing revenue collection, and privatizing state enterprises. In November 2002, the government met with international donors at the Paris II conference to seek bilateral assistance in restructuring its massive domestic debt at lower interest rates. Substantial receipts from donor nations stabilized government finances in 2003, but did little to reduce the debt, which stands at nearly 170% of GDP.



Oh, and hey Jolly, fancy seeing you here!


----------



## Koenigsegg (18 Jul 2006)

> As for collateral damage, they're doing a lot better than any of their enemies. After all, they're not hitting sky scrapers in a third nation across an ocean, or butchering crippled old men in wheel chairs on a cruise ship.



I concur.
But doing a lot better then them is not exactly something to be proud of...
Just like having 100 people killed in a terrorist attack is nothing to look down on, or belittle compared to 9/11.


----------



## tomahawk6 (18 Jul 2006)

IDF ground forces are now in Lebanon.


----------



## jollyjacktar (18 Jul 2006)

Well hello yourself Chanman.  I do prefer a Canadian site, and find this more to my liking.  I honestly have not gone back to the other once I came here.


----------



## Brad Sallows (18 Jul 2006)

>Now those of you who doubt the need for Israel to continue its present course need to remember,

I doubt the utility of Israel continuing its present course unless it intends to make a serious effort to remove Hezbollah from Lebanon.


----------



## GAP (19 Jul 2006)

Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> >Now those of you who doubt the need for Israel to continue its present course need to remember,
> 
> I doubt the utility of Israel continuing its present course unless it intends to make a serious effort to remove Hezbollah from Lebanon.



I understand what you are saying, but to achieve it requires Isreal to occupy approx 20 km of southern Lebanon.


----------



## paracowboy (19 Jul 2006)

Koenigsegg said:
			
		

> I concur.
> But doing a lot better then them is not exactly something to be proud of...
> Just like having 100 people killed in a terrorist attack is nothing to look down on, or belittle compared to 9/11.


you missed my point entirely. The Israelis are whacking civilians as collateral damage. Their enemies do it AS POLICY.

I fervently hope the Israelis burn Hezbollah and HAMAS out. Destroy them as completely as they can.


----------



## tomahawk6 (19 Jul 2006)

I have not read about a single Hezbollah member being killed in the air strikes. Yet the media trumpets all the civilian dead. My guess is that most of the dead are Hezbollah followers. The US released info on the 25,000 US "nationals" in Lebanon and many are Hezbollah sympathizers.


----------



## Bill Smy (19 Jul 2006)

A couple of points:--

The deliberate targeting of civilian targets (whether the terrorists are hiding there or not) is a war crime. No matter how the arguments are put.

One thing that the last 50 years of history in this struggle demonstrates is that military action (by either side) will not resolve this conflict.


----------



## GO!!! (19 Jul 2006)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> I have not read about a single Hezbollah member being killed in the air strikes. Yet the media trumpets all the civilian dead. My guess is that most of the dead are Hezbollah followers. The US released info on the 25,000 US "nationals" in Lebanon and many are Hezbollah sympathizers.



Canada has 50,000 passport holders (I use the term "citizen sparingly" - but that is another thread) in Lebanon right now. All of the ones who have troubled themselves to speak to the media uniformly condemn Israel's "aggression". 

Funny how all of these "citizens" crawl out of the woodwork when the $hit hits the fan, or they need medical care. Methinks we are a bit too loose with the passports.

Israel is acting with restraint - they have not stooped to the level of the current Lebanese administration, which by allowing Hezbollah to exist as a political entity and gain 23 seats in their national party, have in fact validated it's activites; namely the bombing of markets, malls and bars in Israel.

To the suffering people of Lebanon - you reap what you sow - *you* elected Hezbollah - they acted as they always have. Lay your blame where it lies - *your* choices at the ballot box. You chose this war with Israel at election time.


----------



## chanman (19 Jul 2006)

> To the suffering people of Lebanon - you reap what you sow - you elected Hezbollah - they acted as they always have. Lay your blame where it lies - your choices at the ballot box. You chose this war with Israel at election time.



Wouldn't that also imply that all of the Lebanese who voted against Hezbollahare on the receiving end of something they didn't sow?

Anyway, it looks as though if Hezbollah isn't wiped out this time around, the post-conflict Lebanese government will be even less able to tackle Hezbollah after this than before with the damage done to the economy and infrastructure.

An obervation and some speculation from a currently subscriber-only _Economist_ article



> The Lebanese, unlike the Palestinians, can at least clearly blame Hizbullah for lighting the fuse after several years of relative calm. But Israel is treading a fine line between alienating the Lebanese from Hizbullah and uniting them against their outside aggressor. And if Israel cannot achieve a decisive victory against Hizbullah with air power, and has to add ground forces, it risks getting bogged down in southern Lebanon once again.





> On the other hand, the timing of Hizbullah’s kidnap may have been designed precisely to trigger an Israeli backlash: having gone in so heavy in Gaza in response to the first kidnapping, Israel could hardly stand by and watch as two more soldiers disappeared. Many suspect Hizbullah wants to drag Israel into a war on two fronts, perhaps with the backing of Syria and Iran. These two countries provide financial and material help to both Hamas and Hizbullah and they benefit from chaos and instability in the region. If the fighting prompts not Hizbullah’s capitulation but a breakdown in the fragile balance of power in Lebanon, triggering another of the country’s periodic civil wars, the conflict could spread wider.


----------



## bilton090 (19 Jul 2006)

Anyway, it looks as though if Hezbollah isn't wiped out this time around, the post-conflict Lebanese government will be even less able to tackle Hezbollah after this than before with the damage done to the economy and infrastructure.

        WTF,  The Lebanese government hasn't done a thing for 20 yrs + about the Hezbollah, they are part of the government of that country, so the hole place is going to pay. The 50 000 or so Canada pastport holders saying the Hezbollah are there protectors, if we can't be live some of these people here in Canada, what to say this crap
there saying, about poor Innocent people ( that cheer the bombing on the other side of the border ) 
                LIVE BY THE SWORD, DIE BY THE SWORD !           :evil:

        Israel needs to wipe out this cancer of the Hezbollah,& Hamas !
     
       P.S-  Innocent people in the middle east


----------



## Koenigsegg (19 Jul 2006)

OK, Paracowboy.   In that case I concur twice...once for what I thought you meant, and once for what you really meant.


----------



## chanman (19 Jul 2006)

bilton090 said:
			
		

> WTF,  The Lebanese government hasn't done a thing for 20 yrs + about the Hezbollah



It hasn't even been 20 years since the normally accepted end-date for their civil war (1975-1990 or 1975-1991 depending on the source)


----------



## paracowboy (19 Jul 2006)

chanman said:
			
		

> It hasn't even been 20 years since the normally accepted end-date for their civil war (1975-1990 or 1975-1991 depending on the source)


well, that doesn't invalidate the statement, though does it? Still holds true. ;D


----------



## GO!!! (19 Jul 2006)

chanman said:
			
		

> It hasn't even been 20 years since the normally accepted end-date for their civil war (1975-1990 or 1975-1991 depending on the source)



True, but there was a Lebanese authority in Lebanon when it was occupied by Syria - and they did'nt do anything about Hezbollah either. At best they were ineffective, at worst, complicit.


----------



## chanman (19 Jul 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> True, but there was a Lebanese authority in Lebanon when it was occupied by Syria - and they did'nt do anything about Hezbollah either. At best they were ineffective, at worst, complicit.



I thought that we've already established that Syria is one of Hezbollah's supporters along with Iran.

Anyway, my comments on the Lebanese gov't has to do with the Israeli conditions for a ceasefire. 





> On Tuesday, Livni said a ceasefire could happen if the two Israeli soldiers are released, _Lebanese troops are deployed along the border _and with a guarantee that the Hezbollah militia would be disarmed.


 (from http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2006/07/18/lebanese-soldiers.html

Those second and third conditions seem like they would be harder to achieve if they weaken the Lebanese government (or at least the non-Hezbollah portions of it as someone will be bound to suggest).  If anything, wouldn't they need a stronger government in power in Lebanon to be able to impose or forcibly disarm the Hezbolla militia?


----------



## GO!!! (19 Jul 2006)

chanman said:
			
		

> Those second and third conditions seem like they would be harder to achieve if they weaken the Lebanese government (or at least the non-Hezbollah portions of it as someone will be bound to suggest).  *If anything, wouldn't they need a stronger government in power in Lebanon to be able to impose or forcibly disarm the Hezbolla militia?*



Yes - one with Merkavas.  >


----------



## bcbarman (19 Jul 2006)

My real concern here is the battle for public opinion that is being played in Europe and North America.  Israel is the only "home" of the Jewish nation. There are a lot of very powerful people around the world, some that control massive empires, that are Jewish.  No matter what happens in the middle east, Israel will be seen as the "good" guys.  I am not anti-Semite in the least, but it will only take one major attack against Israel, such as a significant force to roll over the border (larger than a battle group) from either front to cause a huge backlash that will prompt every Jewish business, lobby group or political aide to raise hell at the respective European or North American government to come to Israel's aid.  

My question is will Hamas or Hezbollah take that step? If yes, they are the new Iraq. The US and EU are going to go in and pacify.  If you thought that Iraq was not thought out thoroughly, at least the US knew for about 8 months that they were going in.

It will not be a 7 day war, but what will be the next step in this.  There is a lot of escalation potential. I do not see a world war happening, but go buy some stocks in the Oilsands.

I do not see this one fizzle out.  Israel has been ready for this since the end of the Yom Kippur war, they want a fight, and this nation is better prepared for a fight then anyone.


----------



## vonGarvin (19 Jul 2006)

bcbarman said:
			
		

> Israel has been ready for this since the end of the Yom Kippur war, they want a fight, and this nation is better prepared for a fight then anyone.



I doubt that they want a fight.  Nobody wants a fight.  Are they prepared?  The answer is in the proof that in spite of all the rhetoric, Syria, Jordan and all other nations surrounding Israel are doing nothing about this (militarily)


----------



## Shadowolf (19 Jul 2006)

Once Israel has finished its smash and bash in Lebanon and Gaza (and hopefully brings its boys home), I figure the islamic people in the area will be too busy and broke trying to rebuild, and therefore unable to 'donate' to the good cause of Hamas and Hezbollah.  The average citizen might also be a little more willing to make an anonymous phone call to the authorities if they overhear their neighbors talking about bombs/weapons/terrorist acts, and a little less supportive.  Its all well and good to chant and cheer when you hear about some jews killed in a suicide bombing, but when such information is followed up by a personal visit from the IDF, its a different story.

A slight secondary effect of this might be a drop in foreign fighters in Iraq as they go back to defend home territory, and fight Israel as opposed to the US.


----------



## acclenticularis (19 Jul 2006)

I find it interesting to note that Hezbollah decided to act when they did.  They saw the reaction of Israel to Hamas murdering soldiers and abducting another.  They must have known full well what Israel would do if Hezbollah conducted the same operation as Hamas.  Therefore, Israel is likely behaving exactly as Hezbollah expects.  So, what is Hezbollah's aim?  

I don't know how Israel can completely destroy Hezbollah, when it's leadership does not exist in Lebanon and the more Israel pushes, the more there would be volunteers to fill the void left by Hezbollah members killed.  As Lebanon's fragile infrastructure and elements of commerce continue to get destroyed, it gets less and less likely that they would be able to get rid of Hezbollah soon, even if they wanted to.  And, unfortunately I am a bit ignorant of some facts here, but, with Syria holding much political sway in Lebanon up until very recently, how is it that one could expect those in the Lebanese government to even begin to successfully tackle the eradication of Hezbollah from Lebanon?  Assuming they wanted to of course.

I know that Israel is not the darling of the middle eastern world, but, these actions are likely to further stoke the anger of the muslim world against Israel (and against the west by continuing to not intervene).  Would it not push back the peace process ever farther?  I agree that if I had neighbours that were committed to the destruction of my state and murdered scores of my people on an ongoing basis, there would be temptation to just lash out.  And having never been in the situation, I cannot say what I would do.  But, is there a viable long term plan here?  However, having said the above, I believe that the middle east Israeli/muslim problem is a lot more complicated than I understand, despite the temptation to quick judgments and opinions.  And I also wonder at what we don't know that goes on beyond our scope that might sway our opinions.

Just my two cents.


----------



## bcbarman (19 Jul 2006)

Von Garvin, you are right, nobody wants a fight, but when you get pushed too far, you fight back.

To quote my favorite book of all time:"doesn't matter whether it's a thousand — or just one, sir. You fight"
Johnny Rico to Lt-Col Dubois.

IM me if you do not know the book


----------



## CanadaPhil (19 Jul 2006)

acclenticularis said:
			
		

> I find it interesting to note that Hezbollah decided to act when they did.  They saw the reaction of Israel to Hamas murdering soldiers and abducting another.  They must have known full well what Israel would do if Hezbollah conducted the same operation as Hamas.  Therefore, Israel is likely behaving exactly as Hezbollah expects.  So, what is Hezbollah's aim?



Maybe I am giving them too much credit but  I believe that this incident has been planned for a LONG TIME (right back to the departutre of the Syrians) and it is no accident that it is coinciding with the Hamas operation. 

I have to say that I was literally stunned when Syria pulled out in '05. It was almost like, "Dont worry Hezbollah...we can create an issue for us to come back in soon and next time we will have a firmer grip".

I am beginning to think that this whole thing has been orchestrated as a pre-text for the Syrian military to re-occupy parts of Lebanon under the guise of bringing "security" back to Lebanon once the Israeli's have battered the crap out of it (Which is exactly what they knew would happen if Hezbollah were to attack Israel)


----------



## Infanteer (19 Jul 2006)

For the eager fellows in these parts, stop to think for a moment.

We have a series of actions by Hamas/Hezbollah that have provoked a massive response by Israel.  Is this really going to help our cause?  Is this really going to convince most Middle Eastern people that the West really wants to help?  The Cedar Revolution has been one of the West's only real successes in the region to date, but now we have a Western state with American weapons shelling Beirut again - now you're going to see the Shi'a, Sunni, Druze or Moronite drop their differences in the light of Israeli presence (redux), thus ruining any progress we have made there.

You guys speak of "wiping Hezbollah out" as if it was a matter of driving a Merkava to Beirut and knocking on the office door.  This is a mass movement of over a million people.  Pick up the history books for a second gentlemen - look at what went down in Lebanon from 1982-2000, when Israel pulled out after 2000 dead, essentially losing a war of attrition with Hezbollah (casualty ratios would go from 6:1 to nearly 1:1 by the end; the Islamic guerrillas consistently got better).  And now, we have an even stronger Hezbollah, one equipped and prepared to an extent that even Israel and the US were unaware of.  Big time tactical underestimation here - this is the same reason we in the West are so f**ked up in Iraq right now - "Oh golly, we'll role in with our Information Age weapons and overload their network nodes!".

Furthermore, the level that a regional conflagration could descend to is not a particularly appealing one.  We have went from what should have been the task of chasing some asshole Salafi radicals through the mountains of Afghanistan to this, now having Iran firmly ready to join the fray.  Iran is a factor we don't even want to consider when you see how stretched we are in Afghanistan and Iraq.

So, to expound on my "+1" to Teddy's earlier comment and to support the logic of the original article, this is a FRIGGEN DISASTER.  A major regional contingency does us no favours.  These guys are getting exactly what they wanted - major retaliation by the Jewish state in order to further hinder Western strategy and support in the region and enhance the goals of the Islamic Insurgency.  A Shi'a state that was at one point in the hands of moderates (ie: in Al Qa'ida's _apostate_ column) is now led by a firebreather and is ready to get right into the middle of things.  The capabilities of Iran far outweigh anything we've seen to date; they have the capability to turn our whole Southwest Asia adventure into a huge shitshow.  Add to this the specter of a nuclear weapons exchange, and it really gets scary.

This seems to be exactly what Al Qa'ida was hoping for 5 years ago.  We seem to be doing just as Sheuer warned and playing into their hands.  Initiative is a key here, and we're going to lose more of it.

Infanteer

PS:  Don't give me the "Hezbollah" supporters crap and the "we do less damage then them" line.  We all know what MLRS, 155mm guns, and 1000 lb bombs do.  Does the fact that we state that we will avoid civilian casualties make a dead Lebanese child any less than a dead Israeli one?  The lethality of the technology we in the West possess will ensure that we will always inflict more civilian casualties then a lesser equipped foe.  Do these look like Hezbollah to you?


----------



## GAP (19 Jul 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> For the eager fellows in these parts, stop to think for a moment.



What you said make good sense, which leads to the question of what to do. You cannot NOT respond, nor can you OVER respond. 

Essentially, what I get from your points, is the Israel should have continued playing the balancing game. Should we continue to do that until the next generation? There's a lot of manipulation in the background, and it's only going to get worse, not better. 

BTW, I don't pretend to have an answer....the above was a question.


----------



## Infanteer (19 Jul 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> What you said make good sense, which leads to the question of what to do. You cannot NOT respond, nor can you OVER respond.
> 
> Essentially, what I get from your points, is the Israel should have continued playing the balancing game. Should we continue to do that until the next generation? There's a lot of manipulation in the background, and it's only going to get worse, not better.
> 
> BTW, I don't pretend to have an answer....the above was a question.



I don't pretend to have the answer either - I only posted the above as a counterpoint to the "RA-RA, drive over the muthf***ka's" posts that really don't seem to consider many of the important facts.

To me, I would think that steps on the grand-strategic level essential to achieving a suitable outcome would include:

-  Acknowledging the fact the Middle East isn't going to become an extention of the western liberal democracy anytime soon; probably not even in the next few decades.  Trying to make it so one the end of the bayonet is only going to lead to more problems - the neo-Cons like Wolfowitz in the current US administration have been forced to eat their socks over Iraq, which they stated would be easy and which would embrace liberation and US help.  That's what you get when you let ideology and the wrong friends (Chilabi) guide your policy.  Looks like Colin Powell with the clay pot analogy was on target.  (Hopefully, that fact is being recognized now.)

-  Acknowledge that Iran, whether we like them or not, is going to be a player in any resolution.  They are the key to the area, and direct confrontation isn't going to help.  Sure, it's like playing cards with the devil, but you got to play with the hand your dealt.  Were better off buying them off then putting another pile of shit on our plate.  Remember that famous story of Churchill (master card player that he was) and the Soviets swapping napkins with percentages on them?

-  Acknowledge that Israel/Palestine is pretty much the root to much of the conflict in the area and that having Israel "go off the rez" (as Kat put it) hurts our goals and our policies.


----------



## chanman (19 Jul 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> What you said make good sense, which leads to the question of what to do. You cannot NOT respond, nor can you OVER respond.
> 
> Essentially, what I get from your points, is the Israel should have continued playing the balancing game. Should we continue to do that until the next generation? There's a lot of manipulation in the background, and it's only going to get worse, not better.
> 
> BTW, I don't pretend to have an answer....the above was a question.



If Hezbollah was trying to provoke an Israeli over-response, they couldn't have picked a better time.  With the size of the Israeli response to the capture of one soldier by the Palestinians, they couldn't play a softer approach without appearing to either be disproportionately harsh on Hamas, or disproportionately soft on Hezbollah.  I think in this set of circumstances, either way, Hezbollah's backers come out ahead, and either way, Israel would have come out behind in this set of events.   :-\


----------



## GAP (19 Jul 2006)

Well, already, Israel has opened with the gambit of being willing to abide by a ceasefire if certain conditions are met. All the powers about, will rush in and it will be a whole bunch of to-ing and fro-ing until Israel has achieved it objectives. I am assuming that it is a spanking (going on now) and the creation of a buffer. Then, I guess, it's back to trying to wait them out. 

Iran, is not going to be so easy to solve. The ruling parties in Iran have successfully turned their populations disillusionment of about a year ago, into anger, etc. against first the West (re: nuclear weapons) and now this. You don't hear much from the reformers in Iran anymore do you?


----------



## teltech (19 Jul 2006)

bcbarman said:
			
		

> To quote my favorite book of all time:"doesn't matter whether it's a thousand — or just one, sir. You fight"
> Johnny Rico to Lt-Col Dubois.



Close - Actually it was to a Maj. Reid, but we get your drift. (Just happened to be reading it right now)


----------



## paracowboy (19 Jul 2006)

I don't see this as a disaster at all. It's merely another step in the Reformation. 

We aren't trying to win militarily, neither us, nor the Israelis. We're trying to apply pressure on the Middle Age nations, in order that they be forced, by their own populaces, to change. The Israelis are just trying to buy some more time and space, and force Hizbollah to back off a bit, while making the Lebanese people realize that supporting Hizbollah blindly has terrible consequences.

Nothing we do will change minds or win hearts in the Middle East. You, with the amount of reading on the area should know that better than anyone else. There is absolutely nothing we can do or say that will have any positive impact on the Muslim mindset in Araby. What we can, and must, do is continue to cause the intellectual ferment that will result in democratic changes. And that includes bitch-slappin' when required.

Go Israel. Rah-rah!


----------



## GAP (19 Jul 2006)

> And that includes bitch-slappin' when required.



So this is just a cosmic bitch-slap.   Works for me   8)


----------



## tomahawk6 (19 Jul 2006)

Israel struck a bunker thought to be the hideout of the Hizbollah leadership with 23 tons of ordinance. The target is just a big hole in the ground Hizbollah said the target was a mosque under construction. However, none of Hizbollah's leadership have made a statement to the media. 8)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1153291951954


----------



## GAP (19 Jul 2006)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Israel struck a bunker thought to be the hideout of the Hezbollah leadership with 23 tons of ordinance. The target is just a big hole in the ground Hezbollah said the target was a mosque under construction. However, none of Hezbollah's leadership have made a statement to the media. 8)



Well, that's easy to prove. When they do get around to making their statements, they should have this golden aura surrounding them. 

BTW...CBC is going on about 27 people killed today and that 1 was a Hezbollah guerrilla


----------



## tomahawk6 (19 Jul 2006)

Wow the Izzies finally killed a tango must have been by accident. ;D


----------



## tomahawk6 (19 Jul 2006)

In a more serious vein the Israelis are intercepting missile shipments from Syria and destroying them.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3278029,00.html


----------



## GAP (19 Jul 2006)

On CTV, they just announced that Israel has offered to let people in southern Lebanon exit via a northern Israeli port.


----------



## jollyjacktar (20 Jul 2006)

Very good points Infanteer.  There should have been a measured response by Israel.  I fear they will in the long run be a better recruiting center for the opposition than they will bargain for.  Just as during the Blitz, and later in Germany stomping the shit out of mostly non-combatants only served to strengthen the resolve to resist their enemy.  This is going to be seen by the Islamic people of another example of Israel being actively suppported by the West in particular the USA.  Like it or not.  From their POV right or wrong, it will again be case of Israel being allowed to take liberties on neighbouring states without any form or censure.

Sure they have a right to self defense.  You too have rights in defense of your home and health, but you are restricted to reasonable force only.  Once you go beyond that you are liable to have the cuff slapped on you instead.  I have a background in Law Enforcement.  If this was a citizen subduing a criminal breaking into his dwelling, or defending himself in say a bar fight.  I would be giving serious consideration and futher investigation into the possibility of laying charges of excessive force against the original victim.


----------



## Infanteer (20 Jul 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> I don't see this as a disaster at all. It's merely another step in the Reformation.



What reformation - I'm watching news footage of some pissed off Maronite who is angry that Israel has now targeted targets in the Christian area of Beirut along with a mother stating she will send her children to fight Israel.  What progress was made with Lebanon's political progress will be undermined with this action.  I saw it best described as acting tactical with a complete lack for any strategic thought.

Was 1982 and Operation Peace for Galilee also merely another step in the Reformation (since it led to the creation of Hizbollah and the subsequent Palestinian Intifada's in the first place)?



> Nothing we do will change minds or win hearts in the Middle East. You, with the amount of reading on the area should know that better than anyone else. There is absolutely nothing we can do or say that will have any positive impact on the Muslim mindset in Araby.



Well, I guess we've already lost if we're going to admit that.  What reading I've done has convinced me that nobody is innocent in this affair. 



> What we can, and must, do is continue to cause the intellectual ferment that will result in democratic changes. And that includes bitch-slappin' when required.



Cause intellectual ferment?  You just said that we cannot change their hearts and minds, so what is it?

I remain suspect of the notion that democracy is the key to this conflict.  We managed to inherit a stable democracy that evolved from about a century's worth of political evolution.  How democracy is supposed to take root inlight of the forces of history at work here is beyond me, especially when we encourage it with a "bitch slapping".

People tend to view democracy with suspicion when the other democracy in the area has just destroyed their house with a 2000 lb bomb.


----------



## tomahawk6 (20 Jul 2006)

I would take the comments seen on TV with a big grain of salt. If you notice the arab governments have been very muted in their response to the Israeli-Hizbollah conflict. The fact is they are concerned by Iran and its proxy terror groups and have decided that its in their interest for Israel to crush Hizbollah.


----------



## paracowboy (20 Jul 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Was 1982 and Operation Peace for Galilee also merely another step in the Reformation (since it led to the creation of Hizbollah and the subsequent Palestinian Intifada's in the first place)?


entirely different, and you know it. The entire world shifted in 2001. 



> Well, I guess we've already lost if we're going to admit that.  What reading I've done has convinced me that nobody is innocent in this affair.


 nobody is. But we all know who the bad guys are, and we all know how to deal with bad guys.



> Cause intellectual ferment?  You just said that we cannot change their hearts and minds, so what is it?


there's no contradiction there, don't try to creat one. *We* can't change their minds, we can't tell them what to think, but we *can* create circumstances that lead them to think.  



> I remain suspect of the notion that democracy is the key to this conflict.


 democracy is the key to ending all conflict. It's just gonna take a very long time. Which is fine, since it's job security for me.


hmm... "quote" button, "bold" button, you'd think I could recognize the difference.


----------



## Remius (20 Jul 2006)

Paracowboy brings up an interesting point. _ We can't change their minds, we can't tell them what to think, but we can create circumstances that lead them to think.  _ 

I believe this phrase to be the way to go.  Now, I don't think that democracy is the be all end all to solving the problem.  Nor do I think Paracowboy is implying that either.  Real democracy is a just one of the circumstances needed.


----------



## paracowboy (20 Jul 2006)

Crantor said:
			
		

> Real democracy is a just one of the circumstances needed.


precisely. As democratic reforms started to work their way through the feudal system of Europe, so did secularism, and quickly upon it's heels followed leaps in science, philosophy, art, exploration. And over-shadowing it all was the threat from the economic/military powerhouse of Islam.

Now, the situation is reversed.

Since 2003, we've seen Syria lay off it's own population and pull out of Lebanon, Ghaddafi found God, Egypt has opened up it's electoral system (unwillingly), Kuwait has elected women to it's parliament, Afghanistan and Iraq have held elections, Yemen and Algeria have clamped down on militants, Saudi Arabia has tightened down on Wahhabism, Iran is facing another revolution and is terrified of it, Islamic terrorists in the Phillipines are on the defensive instead of attacking at whim, Thailand has squashed Islamic fundamentalism, Europe has woken up to the viper in it's bosom, Pakistan has taken steps to crush the insurgency in 3 of it's territories and made peace with India, etc.

Why? Because pressure is being applied for the first time in centuries. It's causing the people in those nations to think for themselves, and once they start doing that, they start demanding a voice, demanding power, and voila! Representative, secular government which requires the will of the people to remain in power, and so does what is in the best interest of the majority, which always means peaceful solutions.

Another 6, maybe 9 centuries,and we should have worked ourselves out of a job.


----------



## probum non poenitet (20 Jul 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> Another 6, maybe 9 centuries,and we should have worked ourselves out of a job.



By that time we'll be at war with those dickheads from Neptune.


----------



## vonGarvin (20 Jul 2006)

probum non poenitet said:
			
		

> By that time we'll be at war with those dickheads from Neptune.


I hate those Neptunian Dickheads!  They think that they are SO COOL!


----------



## Brad Sallows (20 Jul 2006)

>And now, we have an even stronger Hezbollah, one equipped and prepared to an extent that even Israel and the US were unaware of.

The longer they exist relatively unhindered, the more powerful they grow.  Does that suggest something?

Here are some planning assumptions:
1) Israel is not going to return the West Bank or Golan territory it holds without a fight.
2) Israel is not going to grant right of return to exiles without a fight.

If those assumptions hold true, then the only option for someone who wishes to attain those aims is to defeat Israel in war.  Ethnic cleansing might or might not follow.

What are the purposes of organizations such as Hamas and Hezbollah?  Do they exist to govern the people they nominally claim to protect, or do they exist to ultimately defeat Israel?  If the former, there's no reason for them to attack Israel; and, if they can control the populations (ie. exercise responsibilities of sovereignty) there's no provocation for Israel to attack them.

If they purpose to defeat Israel in war, then they only need to get it right or get lucky once.  That has always been a significant factor driving Israel's estimates of the situation throughout the Arab-Israeli conflicts.  What would be prudent for Israel to do: pull each weed before it strongly takes root, or trust the gods of war to always remain on Israel's side?


----------



## probum non poenitet (20 Jul 2006)

Bo, I've been reading your posts in this thread and in the '8 Canadians Killed Thread' and I am not sure what you would have Israel do?

They have been condemned over and over again by international organizations, but for some odd reason SURVIVAL matters more to them than what other people like you and me think.

For reasons inexplicable there are millions if not hundreds of millions of people on this planet who wish a person dead for being Jewish. Not Zionist, not Israeli, just Jewish. Thus the rockets.
You can hide it behind a noble political agenda (right of return!), but it's mostly religious/racist fanaticism.

You can dismiss that or counter it with some glib comment, or say it doesn't matter, but I rather think it does. You are on trial the second you are born Jewish, and would face a _de facto _death penalty in many parts of this world for your 'crime.'
Authoritarian governments have been feeding the anti-Zionist frenzy to distract their populations from their own failures, and 'blame the Jews' has been a great salve for tyrants from the Fall of Rome to the Black Plague to 2006.

The Jews have learned over and over again what happens when you don't have a state. Hitler is only the latest example.
One overlooked fact that most pogroms/attacks/genocides committed against Jewish people are done by populations and governments who originally invited them in:
Germany, Russia, Spain, England (Edward I), Iran, France ... and on and on and on.

Historically Jews have learned that friends are temporary and they have to trust in themselves.
Right now life is (relatively) good for Jewish people in the liberal West, but if history is any kind of teacher, the pendulum may swing in a few centuries and Jews may find themselves fleeing another disaster.
There is no other group on the planet that I can think of that has been laid into to consistently for the past 2,000 years.

Finally - FINALLY - they have a country where they make the rules, and dude, they aren't going to give it up because of some UN Resolution.
Funny thing, they use the rules to serve their own ends, and not anyone elses. That's what 2,000 years of getting the crap kicked out of you will teach you.

Whether their current actions will *serve their own ends *in the long run is an interesting debate.
It is only in the interest of _realpolitik_ that Israel should consider restraint. Morality is easy when your existence is not threatened.
And despite their precarious position, they are usually quite moral at what they do (by no means perfect). That's not to say they haven't done some ugly things in the past, but again, they have one mission: SURVIVAL.
It's that simple. Not conquest. Not conversion. Not riches or glory. Just good old 'continuing to exist.'

Take it as given that there are many in the Islamic world who will not rest until Israel is destroyed and all Jews are dead. A significant portion of the Islamic world - not just the lunatic fringe, sadly.
Israel's main concern is destroying them when they can, lest they are destroyed. Almost all of Israel's 'aggressive' actions in the past are motivated by that tenet. Some are more effective than others.

How their current move plays on CNN is of a major concern only when Western Aid is threatened. THEN Israel plays nice. But I suspect they couldn't give a rat's tail otherwise.

Cases in point:
Once Egypt and Jordan stopped being aggressive, Israel stopped messing with them.
In other cases where Israel has held out an olive branch (withdrawal from Lebanon, handover of Gaza) they've been screwed. By who? By the intractable racists that will not rest until every Israeli is dead or forced to flee.
Right of Return = Israel is gone

Is Israel being heavy-handed or excessive? Here's the anecdotal Israeli answer - when you pledge unequivocally that you will defend my nation and people from annihilation, then you get a vote.
Otherwise, join the long, long 2,000 year old list of nations and leaders who watched Jewish people get massacred and only sent diplomatic regrets.
If you want to send aid, fine. Otherwise shut the hell up and get out of the way.

Remember, Israel will only lose one war. It's not a game to them. They truly don't care if the rest of the world judges them 'fair' or not. 

Are the Israelis white-hat wearing Boy Scouts? No way. They fight dirty. They hit you when you aren't looking. The curb stomp you and take your bike.

Tough. Next time don't launch rockets at them.

That may get Amnesy International upset, but I didn't see any of the coffee-house critics sending tanks in '73 when the whole country came damn close to destruction. 

Israel may tone it down if and when it is advantageous to do so, but photos of dead civilians won't affect them too much; they've seen too many of their own.

Rant off.


----------



## CanadaPhil (20 Jul 2006)

Excellent rant Probum


----------



## Infanteer (20 Jul 2006)

paracowboy said:
			
		

> entirely different, and you know it. The entire world shifted in 2001.



Further proof that you're refusing to leave your frame of reference when considering this conflict.  Think of this statement.  Was September 12, 2001 any different than September 10, 2001 for either an Israeli soldier or a Lebanese guerrilla?  I didn't think so.



> democracy is the key to ending all conflict. It's just gonna take a very long time. Which is fine, since it's job security for me.



Are you sure about that?  How is democracy supposed to be the cure-all.  The Palestinian Territories had elections and they put Hamas in charge.  Remember that Ahmadinejad fellow, yup - elected as well.  Democracy will do no good when popular opinion is firmly against the West (for whatever reason).



			
				Brad Sallows said:
			
		

> What would be prudent for Israel to do: pull each weed before it strongly takes root, or trust the gods of war to always remain on Israel's side?



Do you firmly believe that Israel will be able to "pull the root" - especially inlight of their 18 year failure to do so the first time?  I don't know - stumbling around like a drunken frat-boy at a party doesn't seem very productive in achieving a desirable end state here.  We should have learned that after the first invasion of Lebanon which led to the creation of Hezbollah in the first place (and, subsequently, Hamas, which it trains and supports).

So Israel pulls out?  What's that do for the Lebanese government and it's ability to nurture democracy in Lebanon and act as an alternative to the Hezbollah?  Now that the country has been pounded to dust, not much.  Pulling the weeds or simply furrowing the ground for a new crop?


----------



## Ty (20 Jul 2006)

probum non poenitet said:
			
		

> Are the Israelis white-hat wearing Boy Scouts? No way. They fight dirty. They hit you when you aren't looking. The curb stomp you and take your bike.
> 
> Tough. Next time don't launch rockets at them.



A better analogy is that "they" curb stomp you, take your bike, and burn your house down wtih your family in it.

No one can argue that Jewish people have been victimized.  But Israel isn't the Jewish people- no more than Hamas, Al-Qaeda, or Hezballah constitute the Muslim people.  Acts of terror are not justifiable.  Ever.  It's hypocracy to critisize Hezballah while defending Israel's current actions or vice versa.


----------



## probum non poenitet (20 Jul 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> Do you firmly believe that Israel will be able to "pull the root" - especially inlight of their 18 year failure to do so the first time?  I don't know - stumbling around like a drunken frat-boy at a party doesn't seem very productive in achieving a desirable end state here.  We should have learned that after the first invasion of Lebanon which led to the creation of Hezbollah in the first place (and, subsequently, Hamas, which it trains and supports).
> 
> So Israel pulls out?  What's that do for the Lebanese government and it's ability to nurture democracy in Lebanon and act as an alternative to the Hezbollah?  Now that the country has been pounded to dust, not much.  Pulling the weeds or simply furrowing the ground for a new crop?



A point well made Infanteer ...

That's the apparently unsolvable riddle isn't it?
Every time you go cut the head off the hydra, more heads grow.
On the other side of the coin, if you do nothing, that one fricking head still attacks you.

However, Egypt finally came to the bargaining table after being defeated at least four times ('48 '56 '67 '73) - am I forgetting some? (I'm not being sarcastic).

It was only after the Israelis handed them their asses AGAIN that they decided to 'give peace a chance' - and essentially have ever since.

I imagine the reasoning is (as brutal as it sounds) that if Lebanon gets smashed enough, eventually they will figure out that it's easier to kick out Hezbollah _et al _ by themselves than wait for the Israelis to do it.

Will it work? Who knows. Certainly not in the short term. And it won't win Israel any friends. 
But, as I stated above, Israel doesn't care much for what others think, just so long as they are giving the beating and not taking it.

Not pretty at all, not by any means ...


----------



## Nemo888 (20 Jul 2006)

In a few years they'll settle it with nukes. Then it won't be pretty.


----------



## probum non poenitet (20 Jul 2006)

TA said:
			
		

> But Israel isn't the Jewish people- no more than Hamas, Al-Qaeda, or Hezballah constitute the Muslim people.



I get that.

Here's the big difference. When the PLO, Hamas, AQ, etc. get chased from one country, they flee to another one, where they are generally welcomed with open arms and are free to practise their violent interpretation of Islam. Shall I list the countries ... ? Lebanon, coincidentally, was one.

If the Israelis lose, where do they go? You could list some countires that accept Jews *for now*, but the predominant Israeli mindset is that deep down they can't count on anyone but themselves.
Unfortunately, history bears them out.

If a nation decides to persecute Jews, Israel is the only place on the planet that is guaranteed to accept them. That makes it different from any other country on the planet. There is no falling back, and it makes their situation more desparate than any other nations I can think of.

They are not playing by our rules, because nobody has ever played by their rules, not for centuries.
I'm not saying it's great, but I understand why they act the way they do.



> Acts of terror are not justifiable.  Ever.  It's hypocracy to critisize Hezballah while defending Israel's current actions or vice versa.



I'm not saying what they are doing is morally wonderful.
But here's the amazing thing: when the Israelis are left alone, they leave those countries alone.
When countries either:
a) attack Israel
b) build up forces to attack Israel
c) harbor forces that attack Israel
the Israelis strike first, strike hard, and generally win.

Countires that don't do one of the three above things have not been attacked by Israel. Can you give me an example?
More importantly, some countries who have been attacked by Israel and beaten several times get the message and stop the insanity. (Egypt, Jordan)
PERHAPS that is what is happening now. PERHAPS Israel has just gone nuts.
But by and large Israelis do things for a reason, even when they appear off the wall at first look.

On the other hand, Hezbollah and the gang will attack Israel and continue to attack Israel until it is destoyed. *They will not stop until the state of Israel is destroyed*. 
That is their _raison d'etre_. That limits your options somewhat when dealing with them, wouldn't you agree?
Israel could release every prisoner and give every Palestinian an olive farm, and Hezbo would still be out to destroy Israel. They don't think of victory and defeat in the same way Western countries do.

Once again, faced with the thought of seeing Israel destroyed, or doing horrible things to protect it and facing moral outrage, most Israelis pick the latter.
You can call them terrorists if you want, that's your luxury.

Al Qaeda will never destroy the United States or Canada ... they can damage us, hurt us, kill us, but the chance of them destroying our countries is pretty small.

There is a considerable possibility that if Israel were to let down its guard at the wrong time, it would be destroyed. If they let the groups on their borders fester, they can grow and do MAJOR damage as opposed to symbolic damage.
In the minds of many Israelis that justifies whatever they do ... you may not agree with it, and many Israelis don't either. 

But if Israel loses a war, to us it will just be another topic for discussion, another chapter in history.
For them it's game over.

I respect your horror at this, I am just a bit more jaded I suppose.


----------



## Kirkhill (20 Jul 2006)

> Do you firmly believe that Israel will be able to "pull the root" - especially inlight of their 18 year failure to do so the first time?  I don't know - stumbling around like a drunken frat-boy at a party doesn't seem very productive in achieving a desirable end state here.  We should have learned that after the first invasion of Lebanon which led to the creation of Hezbollah in the first place (and, subsequently, Hamas, which it trains and supports).
> 
> So Israel pulls out?  What's that do for the Lebanese government and it's ability to nurture democracy in Lebanon and act as an alternative to the Hezbollah?  Now that the country has been pounded to dust, not much.  Pulling the weeds or simply furrowing the ground for a new crop?



I have the same problem in my backyard.  The wife won't let me use chemical warfare or pave the place over so every year we expend a lot of energy and weed-eater line chopping down the dandelions, pulling up the thistles and generally keeping the mess down to a manageable level.

As paracowboy said: job security.

By the way Infanteer it is not 18 years of Israeli failures. Its millenia of everyone's failures everywhere.  Methinks I detect a pattern.

I am probably at least as jaded as Probum.

Anybody got a timeline on the second coming yet? There's a good movie coming out I don't want to miss.


----------



## Infanteer (20 Jul 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> By the way Infanteer it is not 18 years of Israeli failures. Its millenia of everyone's failures everywhere.  Methinks I detect a pattern.



Yup.  Pretty much.

My solution is to invite Israel wholesale to Canada.  We could use the infusion of 7 million good citizens.  If people there are truly interested in a liberal democratic home they can call their own, we've got two perfectly good ones here in North America; neither with a history of any real anti-Semitism.  Real liberal democracies don't need established churches anyways.  Plus, no worries about rocket attacks or anything.  Let the Arabs have their pile of sand.

If they want to stay because of some religious reason, then so be it, leave 'em there.  Let them fight it out over some 2000 year stones; I don't give a shit.  A pox on both their houses.  I'm not particularly interested in dying in a ditch over competing claims to Jerusalem....


----------



## a_majoor (20 Jul 2006)

Part of the problem is the different time-lines each player is working on.

The State of Israel needs to end attacks against it's civilian population NOW.

Iran needs a few years to finish its nuclear program and make a bid to become regional hegemon.

The United States needs decades to get a consensual, free market democracy with strong civic institutions going in Iraq, and the influence of that to spread throughout South West Asia.

Iran has to derail the purple finger strategy, but has the element of time on its side (the American play takes a generation). They can continue to unleash and reign in its creatures Hezbollah and Hamas (and their allies/partners in crime/partners of conveinience Syria) to keep the situation in the region confuesd long enough to realize their ambitions. I suspect the Saudis and Syrians, who also harbour regional ambitions based on Wahabbi authoratarianism or Ba'athist secular rule are realizing they are also in a very hard place; the purple finger is also raised against them (hence their not so subtle support for Iraqi insurgency), but Shiite theocratic rule is probably not part of their master plan either.

The mismatch of goals, ambitions and timelines are enough to make a grown man weep, and certainly far beyond the ability of mere mortals to untangle. Cutting throught the Gordian knot really means confronting Iran, with all that implies.


----------



## probum non poenitet (20 Jul 2006)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> The mismatch of goals, ambitions and timelines are enough to make a grown man weep, and certainly far beyond the ability of mere mortals to untangle. Cutting throught the Gordian knot really means confronting Iran, with all that implies.



Agreed on all points.

I propose we forget about it and get drunk.  :blotto:

Has that been tried?


----------



## Infanteer (20 Jul 2006)

probum non poenitet said:
			
		

> Agreed on all points.
> 
> I propose we forget about it and get drunk.  :blotto:
> 
> Has that been tried?



Hey, best post yet.  My best friend just got to town and I'm going to see his newborn, so we'll drink to that!

:cheers:


----------



## tamouh (21 Jul 2006)

> Think of this statement.  Was September 12, 2001 any different than September 10, 2001 for either an Israeli soldier or a Lebanese guerrilla?  I didn't think so.



I think it did alot, after Sept 11, Hezbollah was labeled as a terrorist organization so is Hamas...etc. I agree though with all your other points, this is a problem will not be solved today.

If the Israelis really wanted to stop Hezbollah attacks from the south, they should have bombed southern positions more, entered south lebanon, then gave the Lebanese government the chance to go after Hezbollah for putting Lebanon in such an awkward situation.

Instead, Israel has chose an all out war against Hezbollah and Lebanon which in the end Hezbollah will continue to merge the savior of Lebanon, regardless of the war outcome. Israel didn't stop the PLO when it entered Beirut in 80s, nor it will be able to stop Hezbollah now.

That part of the world needs some serious peace work and full time, empowered UN force on the borders. All the problems are linked together, you can't solve Israel-Lebanon without solving Israel-Palestine , Israel-Syria ...etc.


----------



## couchcommander (21 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> If the Israelis really wanted to stop Hezbollah attacks from the south, they should have bombed southern positions more, entered south lebanon, then gave the Lebanese government the chance to go after Hezbollah for putting Lebanon in such an awkward situation.



I wasn't aware that Hizballah had all their men and equipment nicely lined up in along the border. You really think the Lebanese government would, not to mention even COULD, go after Hizballah?


----------



## KevinB (21 Jul 2006)

:blotto:

Anyone really think Israel cares about European opinion?

In reality do you think we (the western gov'ts) really care how much collatoral damage gets inflicted?  Part of the problem these days is everyone (especially the whinny western public) forgets to win you really must be prepared to burn the other motherfuckers out -- in this case Syria and Iran.
 I have no doubt that Israel will if they beleive it is in their best interest.

I'm all for Israel driving to the Sea - and North and West.  It would sure solve the timeline for us.  

I'm getting to the point that I see the 4th Crusade as the only viable option.


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Jul 2006)

Interesting comment from a 6 year old evacuee on CTV last night.  The reporter asked him what the most scary sound he had heard was.  The answer he gave:  "The sound of the rockets going to the moon."

I am no ordnance expert.  Nor have I heard incoming our outgoing missiles so I put this to the congregation.  Is it likely that a 6 year old would confuse the sound of incoming and outgoing rockets? I didn't think that rocket powered missiles drove all the way to the target, that they went ballistic early on in their trajectory. If he was hearing outgoing rockets exactly where was he evacuated from?


----------



## Spr.Earl (21 Jul 2006)

The only comment I will make is our Steve has let his religious belief's cloud his judgment as PM.

 Yes Hezbollah struck first by the kidnapping of 2 Soldiers but the Israeli reaction is above and beyond the norm and verging on War Crime's.
Yes Israel has a right to exist but the reaction is unacceptable from both side's.

Israel will not crush Hezbollah,all's they have done is created a bigger fighting force with in Lebanon and even though they may have only AK's they will not wipe them out and end up in a Vietnam type of War.
It's already been proven when the Hezies ambushed a Israeli special force,2 killed 8 wounded on the border.

They are not the old sand bandit's of yore,they are trained guerrillas now, as they have learned from lesson's past and may also have the weapon's to take on a conventional army.

If it was me just Nuke the whole Middle East and pave it make it into one big drive in Movie Theater
Jew and Arab a like,I'm tired of this part of the world,both are becoming a curse on the rest of the world.

Before you make comment I still remember 68 War and I was 15 when all hell let lose because I remember on the Tube about our own Peace Keeper's.

Yup I'm tired of the whole thing,Nuke them all and then we may have peace untill then we won't!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## probum non poenitet (21 Jul 2006)

With a lack of reliable facts to go on, I throw out these speculative questions to those of you who are reading books when I am drinking beer:

a) What do you think the chances are that Syria and Israel start a conventional war over this?

b) If such a war happens, what are the chances the U.S. will stay out of it, seeing as they are next door, and a lot of the Iraqi insurgents are entering from Syria? Especially if Israel starts to lose badly?

c) If Syria does nothing to Israel and hangs Hezbollah out to dry, what damage will be done to Syria's pride and reputation? Hezbollah's effectiveness?

d) On what pretext less than open war with Israel could you see the U.S. invading Syria? Perhaps open support of Hezbollah? Would there be a strategic reason for the U.S. to invade Syria?

Yes, it sounds like John Le Carre meets Tom Clancy meets tinfoil hat meets paranoia meets not enough coffee ... but it could explain why Israel is being so aggressive.
I HAVE no facts to back this up - and never cry conspiracy when simple human ignorance will do.

But I do have to wonder if this Lebanese thing will spill over  a few borders before it is done.

I'm trying to look a few steps ahead which is like predicting the weather and baseball scores ... sounds simple enough, but you usually wind up guessing wrong and looking foolish. Bless the Internet.

I'm not even going to mention Iran ... yet.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Jul 2006)

Let's put it this way; with the Americans and other Coalition Forces in Iraq, it would not be long before they are drawn into this conflict, even if they declared Neutrality.  With the current attitudes of the Hezbollah, Hamas, al Qaeda, and other radicals in the region, the Americans and all who are with them are looked upon as being Israeli sympathizers and the enemy.  It would not be long before Coalition Forces in Iraq would be attacked.  This would escalate the conflict to a much higher level and bring in all the Western Nations, not so much to defend the Israelis, but to put down the Radical Islamic Terror Organizations that are the cause of the conflict.  Will it mean the destruction of several nations in the process?  Most likely.  When the dust settles, we will have seen another "Crusade", not necessarily against the Muslim peoples of the Middle East, but as a Police Action to put an end to Terror.


----------



## CanadaPhil (21 Jul 2006)

probum non poenitet said:
			
		

> a) What do you think the chances are that Syria and Israel start a conventional war over this?
> 
> b) If such a war happens, what are the chances the U.S. will stay out of it, seeing as they are next door, and a lot of the Iraqi insurgents are entering from Syria? Especially if Israel starts to lose badly?



I have felt from the beginning that this IS going to lead to another war with Israel & Syria. Hezbollah made a serious miscalculation, and its only a matter of time before Syria does the same. Israel is NOT going to back down.

I don't think the US is going to involve itself with sending in US troops to directly fight, but that we are going to see a poopload of C-17 and maritime traffic funnel as much hardware and fresh ammo to the IDF as they can spare.


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Jul 2006)

How about Moqtada al Sadr as pretext?

According to the guys over at Iraq the Model some fairly interesting "end of days" signs have been seen sprouting in Sadr City.  They apparently went up when the two Israeli soldiers on the Lebanon border were kidnapped.   The same day that Iran was to get its knuckles rapped by the Security Council.  12th Imam, Second Coming stuff.  http://iraqthemodel.blogspot.com/  Take that for what its worth.  Probably all CIA propaganda but the pictures of the banners look interesting.

Same site has speculation that the Iranian mullahs may be feeling a bit more heat at home than we might think likely and that this, together with the UN stuff, and a desire on the part of some there to set the stage for the "Final Battle" has perhaps caused them to jump the gun a bit.

Anyway, back to pretext:

Iranians promote a general rising of Sadr's Militia, Hamas and Hizbollah in an attempt to keep the pot boiling. Two out of three are the Israelis problem but Sadr is the Iraqi/American problem.

If Sadr rises in support of Hezbollah and suicide attacks continue in Iraq then what might the odds be that the Iraqi government points the finger at the Syrian supply route but with the additional support of the Sunni arabs in the Western Provinces?  They seem to be willing to accomodate a government now, especially when the alternative is Sadr and the 12th Imam.

Next step, Iraq and the Western tribes request/demand more American support on the borders ("You have left us defenceless.  You have a responsibility to protect.... You aren't needed in our towns... You are doing more harm than good there...... Go make yourself useful etc.")

Americans and Iraqis have already resorted to the old border legal defence of "Hot Trod" to continue pursuits over the border.  All it would take is for the next incursion/fire-fight to provoke a pursuit and for the pursuing force to maintain contact all the way to Damascus or Aleppo or the Coast etc.  Reinforce as required.

But this is all idle speculation of course....never happen.  We have a much too well ordered world for that.

Although,  seeing as how we can't be seen to be wanting to start another war with Islam it would be another matter entirely if Islam invited us to a party.

It's kind of funny.  When this whole mess broke out into the open in 2001 the discussion was about clash of civilizations, the West versus Islam.  Then the discussion became not about all Islam but Arabs not Persians, etc.  Then not all Arabs but only Sunnis not the Shia.  Then not all Sunni but only Wahhabi.  Then not all Wahhabi but only the most puritanical sect of Wahhabist.  Then not even them but just Al Qaeda.

Meanwhile, on a parallel path, prior to 2001 all Islam was conflated in the minds of most Westerners and the image of Islam was the Ayatollah Khomeini in Iran.  That suited the Iranians just fine.  Even if it meant that they were brigaded with the infidel Sunni - although it seems that the Sunnis generally are more negative to the Shia than the reverse (my impression only).  When the Towers fell they were probably as happy as the next fanatic.  But the process of stripping out the trouble-makers from the general population has led to Tehran being separated from the general herd and thus made it a less obvious central rallying point for disaffected Islam.  Now instead of looking at the prospect of Islam, and ultimately the world, gravitating to them and their line of communication with God they are finding themselves more isolated and reduced to the true believers like Hamas, Hizbollah and Sadr outside their country. 

Their association with Al Qaeda doesn't seem to have gone well, perhaps due to the belief of folks like Zarqawi the Shia are no better than Christians, Jews, Hindus, and other pagans.

Their association with other Shia doesn't always seem to be as solid as it might be.  The Israeli/Lebanese Border zone is also home to the Druze. They are Shia but, as I understand it, Ismaili Shia and thus just as bad as Christians, Sunnis and Jews.  So much so that Druze volunteered for service in the Israeli Army as far back as 1948 and took the fight to the Arabs.

On their borders they have America and NATO to the East and America to the West and the perennially unstable Turkish, Caucasus area to the North.  To the South they have some very hostilely inclined Sunni Arab monarchies.  

Internally they have troubles with the kids, with minorities like the Azeris and Kurds and people like Ayatollah Khomeini's grandson in Qom asking for an American invasion and for Iran to renounce nuclear weapons.  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/06/18/wiran18.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/06/18/ixnews.html

And to cap it all off they were just witness to a resounding failure on a North Korean missile they were kicking the tires on.

It sure doesn't seem like they are sitting on a particularly strong hand.  Is it time for them to push all their chips into the pile and dare the rest of the world to call them on it?  One shot at letting the 12th Imam know that now would be a good time.


----------



## Jed (21 Jul 2006)

Kirkhill, Could you briefly enlighten me on the 12th Imam, Second Coming Comment? With my limited knowledge in these matters, I miss the main jist of your comments, without understanding this particular matter.

Jed


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Jul 2006)

I am pretty unclear on the details of this as well beyond the fact that apparently Ahmedinajad either believes or professes a belief (not necessarily the same thing) in the reappearance of an Imam that disappeared sometime about the time the Brits were ruled by Danes (900-1000 time frame?).

Apparently when this chap shows up there will be one final battle and good will prevail and we will all live/die happily/unhappily ever after.  It'll be interesting to see who makes it here first: the Jewish Messiah (they didn't like the last one), Jesus on his second trip (the Second Coming) or this 12th Imam.  They all presage the end of days and ultimate victory.  I wonder what happens if they all turn out to be the same woman?

Here's a recent Telegraph article on the 12th Imam and our friend Ahmedinajad.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/14/wiran14.xml&sSheet=/news/2006/01/14/ixworld.html


----------



## Jed (21 Jul 2006)

Thanks Kirhill. Scary stuff wrt your posted article.


----------



## muskrat89 (21 Jul 2006)

Sorry, but I guess I don't understand the whole "proportionate response" thing....  You mean to say that if another country fired 6 missiles into Canada, then we should only fire 6 missiles back at the offending country? 6 missiles of similar size, weight, power, etc.? Is that really what our citizens would expect? Or would they expect the Government of the day to use sufficient force to remove the threat - period?

Should one country apologize becasue they are better at waging a war than the other country?

I guess - regardless of the whole history of this mess - one would *expect* their country to wage war in a disproportionate fashion..

If someone enters my home at night and threatens my family, and he's carrying a knife - too bad - I owe it to my family to pull the 12-gauge out of the closet, and remove the threat.

During the Gulf War (pick one) the coalition didn't limit themselves to armament, technology, and numbers _proportionate_ to that of the enemy...

 ???


----------



## tomahawk6 (21 Jul 2006)

Stratfor article about Hizbollah's Iran connection.

Red Alert: Hezbollah's Iranian Connection

Prior to the rise of the Shia in Iraq, Hezbollah -- as a radical Shiite Islamist organization -- was Iran's main asset in the Arab world. In fact, it likely will continue to be used by Tehran as a key tool for furthering Iranian geopolitical interests in the region, until such time as Shiite power has been consolidated in Baghdad and Iran's interests there secured. 

In its earliest days, Hezbollah was a classic militant organization -- the creation of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), the elite unit of the Iranian military. It was founded as a way to export the ideals of Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini's Islamic revolution to the Shiite community of Lebanon, and served as a model for follow-on organizations (some even using the same name) in other Arab states. It did not take long, however, for Hezbollah to emerge in Lebanon as a guerrilla movement, whose fighters were trained in conventional military tactics. 

In the mid-1980s, Iran's premier intelligence agency, the Ministry of Intelligence and Security (MOIS), assumed the task of managing Tehran's militant assets -- not just in the Middle East but in other parts of the world as well. This allowed the Iranians, through a special unit within MOIS, to strike at Israeli interests in places as diverse as Latin America and Southeast Asia. 

The relationship between MOIS and Hezbollah remains a subject worthy of study in light of the current situation in Lebanon. Of course, Iran has been Hezbollah's chief source of funding and weapons over the years, and the Iranians continue to supply extensive training in weapons, tactics, communications, surveillance and other methods to the militant wing of Hezbollah in Lebanon. The relationship is sufficiently close that the Hezbollah branch in Iran proper recently declared it would unleash militant attacks against Israelis and Americans around the world if given the order by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. (Tehran insists that Hezbollah is not an arm of official policy.)

We have previously discussed the possibility that Hezbollah might be moved to seize hostages or engage in other militant acts, given the pressure the Israelis now are bringing to bear. There is some question, of course, as to whether Iran might be involved in future militant operations -- and if so, what assets it might use and the modalities that would apply. 

An Organizational Model

There is a division of labor of sorts in the way that Iran manages its foreign assets: The IRGC (which is led by a professional military officer with strong ideological credentials as an Islamist) oversees the Lebanese Hezbollah, while MOIS (which almost always is headed by a cleric) manages militant operatives and groups in other parts of the Muslim world -- Afghanistan, Pakistan, Azerbaijan, India. Moreover, MOIS also maintains contacts among the Shiite immigrant populations in non-Muslim countries, including those in the West. 

It also is important to note that radical Shiite Islamist ideology is only one factor that shapes Tehran's decisions. Ethnicity and nationalism also play an important role in Iran's dealings with Shiite allies of Arab, South Asian and other descent. The Persians claim a rich cultural heritage, which they view as superior to that of the Arabs. This attitude impacts the level of trust and cooperation between the Iranians and other Shiite groups -- including Hezbollah -- when it comes to sensitive international operations. It is little wonder, then, that the Lebanese organization's sphere of operations does not extend much beyond the Levant.




It follows that Hezbollah is a useful tool for Iran in its dealings with Israel, but in few other areas. However, Iranian intelligence has cultivated numerous groups that can serve its interests in other parts of the world, and it maintains contact with these groups through MOIS operatives placed in diplomatic posts. 

A History of Cooperation

Though it has been many years since Hezbollah carried out significant attacks beyond the Middle East, the participation of MOIS agents in some of those attacks is worthy of note. Investigations into the 1988 hijacking of Kuwait Airways Flight 422 out of Bangkok and two bombings in Buenos Aires -- in 1992 and 1994 -- both revealed involvement by MOIS, coordinating with local Hezbollah operatives. However, to provide plausible deniability, the hijacking and bomb teams were deployed from outside the targeted country; the assets in place were used to conduct preoperational surveillance on potential targets. 

Up close, what this would mean is that the MOIS officer at the Iranian embassy in the target country or city would maintain close contact with the Hezbollah cells in his area or responsibility. Given the rules of intelligence work, an "official asset" like a diplomat is usually under suspicion and surveillance as an intelligence officer (or IO); therefore, less-prominent Hezbollah members can be used to case potential targets. In a situation where a MOIS agent is believed to be under such tight surveillance that he cannot function effectively, the Iranians might call on the services of a clandestine MOIS agent instead. In the case of the 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Buenos Aires, the MOIS officer was the Iranian cultural attache, who oversaw the operation from the safety of his embassy office. The Argentines eventually declared seven embassy employees as "persona non grata" due to suspected connections to the bombing. 

Upon receiving a "go" order for an operation -- such as assassinations of Iranian dissidents or the kidnappings of Western diplomatic and intelligence personnel (for instance, CIA station chief William F. Buckley in 1984 and U.S. Marine Lt. Col. William R. Higgins in 1988) -- activity levels at the embassy spike. The role of MOIS frequently would be to provide the cash or supply weapons or materials needed for an attack carried out by its "militant assets." In some countries, such as Britain (where Hezbollah bombed a Jewish charity in 1994), it can be difficult to obtain items like blasting caps and explosives; these can be supplied with the protection of a diplomatic pouch.

Many MOIS intelligence operatives have been educated in the United States or in Britain, wear nice suits, are multilingual and move easily in Western social circles -- unlike the IRGC operatives in Lebanon, who, socially speaking, are rougher around the edges. The combination of their brains and Hezbollah's willingness to pursue martyrdom can produce highly formidable capabilities. 

With Hezbollah under attack in Lebanon and Iran unable to send significant reinforcements, there is some possibility that Hezbollah might resort to staging an attack abroad as a way of countering the Israeli assault. If so, it is highly likely that operatives already are on the move; the organization has been known to use "off the shelf" operational plans in the past, and its targeting information and surveillance would need to be updated -- regardless of whether an order to strike is actually issued. It is reasonable to believe that Hezbollah would find it advantageous to coordinate with MOIS again, as in past operations. Whether the Iranians would see events through the same lens, however, is much less clear. Tehran might cooperate in an attack only if it is willing to seriously escalate the current conflict in the Middle East -- which, given its many interests in the region, does not appear so far to be the case.


----------



## vonGarvin (21 Jul 2006)

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> If someone enters my home at night and threatens my family, and he's carrying a knife - too bad - I owe it to my family to pull the 12-gauge out of the closet, and remove the threat.


+1.  Too bad he brought a knife to a gun fight.  (If you find yourself in a fair fight, something has gown awfully wrong)  Also, should we have just gone to Afghanistan and flew some of THEIR citizens into some of THEIR buildings and called it even?  Blown up some Al Qaeda subways?  Some Taliban Night clubs?


----------



## tamouh (21 Jul 2006)

> I wasn't aware that Hizballah had all their men and equipment nicely lined up in along the border. You really think the Lebanese government would, not to mention even COULD, go after Hizballah?



Militarily, there is nothing called disproportionate response. It is war for God sake! Civilians casualities are expected in any war , though both parties should minimize the impact on civilians life.

Politically, Israel is committing suicide. Hezbollah was sooner or later going to be dismantled (There were already many calls in the Lebanese parliaments to dismantle Hezbollah and merge it with the Lebanese Army). If Israel escalate its attacks on the long run they'll empower Hezbollah. So from Hezbollah's point of view there is nothing to lose. To the Israelis, this is not so good, first the world view , second the after effects of their war on the region.

Some interesting point of view article on Hezbollah dismantle:

http://english.daralhayat.com/opinion/contributors/07-2006/Article-20060711-5d861806-c0a8-10ed-01ce-4de863956488/story.html


----------



## KevinB (21 Jul 2006)

Keep in mind the divisions between Hammas - Sunni ->Syria ,and Hezbollah - Shia -> Iran.
While the the interim goals are similar Neither wants the other to prevail.  Hezbollah is a product of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard (and somewhat intermingled in Lebanon).


----------



## GO!!! (21 Jul 2006)

muskrat89 said:
			
		

> Sorry, but I guess I don't understand the whole "proportionate response" thing....  You mean to say that if another country fired 6 missiles into Canada, then we should only fire 6 missiles back at the offending country? 6 missiles of similar size, weight, power, etc.? Is that really what our citizens would expect? Or would they expect the Government of the day to use sufficient force to remove the threat - period?
> 
> Should one country apologize becasue they are better at waging a war than the other country?
> 
> ...



I agree. 

If we only fought wars proportionately, they would be huge grinders of attrition, because no one could ever win!

You want to win 30-0, not 17-15.

I also dispute the idea that the lebanese people are innocent victims in all of this. They voted Hezbollah into office, they stood by while militants and political activists operated openly in their hometowns, and I really doubt that too many tears are shed in Lebanon when another suicide bomber attacks buses, bars and other large concentrations of civilians within Israel, with no attempt at military objectives.

The Israelis should use grotesquely disproportionate force - as many guns as possible, to end the war more quickly and to demonstrate the consequences of attacking them. A solution and deterrence, all in one deadly combination.


----------



## acclenticularis (21 Jul 2006)

I still don't know what an escalation in the crisis would do to stabilize the middle east.  Israel can bomb the hell out of Lebanon, Gaza, Syria, and Iran if necessary.  But, that won't change a thing.  They could march into Lebanon, Syria and Iran with the Americans and still what would be the gain?  The Iraq situation does not seem to be going sparkling well; why would an invasion of any of these other countries go well?  What would be the economic implications of furthering the battle to these other countries?  What of the U.S. debt/GDP etc. ratio?  How many billions would be needed?  When we talk of disproportionate response militarily, fine, I can see both sides.  But, what of disproportionate response economically to terror attacks etc.  These people believe that they have nothing to lose, what do Israel and allies have to lose?  The whole middle east fiasco is just too complex for this feeble mind.


----------



## tamouh (21 Jul 2006)

> I also dispute the idea that the lebanese people are innocent victims in all of this. They voted Hezbollah into office, they stood by while militants and political activists operated openly in their hometowns, and I really doubt that too many tears are shed in Lebanon when another suicide bomber attacks buses, bars and other large concentrations of civilians within Israel, with no attempt at military objectives.



I guess in the same sense Hamas, Hezbollah and for that matter of fact any `Terrorist` group could argue Israeli civilians are also not so innocent, especially knowing they too have military draft, they elected their governments and support it.


----------



## a_majoor (21 Jul 2006)

acclenticularis said:
			
		

> I still don't know what an escalation in the crisis would do to stabilize the middle east.  Israel can bomb the hell out of Lebanon, Gaza, Syria, and Iran if necessary.  But, that won't change a thing.  They could march into Lebanon, Syria and Iran with the Americans and still what would be the gain?  The Iraq situation does not seem to be going sparkling well; why would an invasion of any of these other countries go well?  What would be the economic implications of furthering the battle to these other countries?  What of the U.S. debt/GDP etc. ratio?  How many billions would be needed?  When we talk of disproportionate response militarily, fine, I can see both sides.  But, what of disproportionate response economically to terror attacks etc.  These people believe that they have nothing to lose, what do Israel and allies have to lose?  The whole middle east fiasco is just too complex for this feeble mind.



In the 1930's, people believed that you could settle disputes with discussion in the League of Nations, until Fascist Italy, Imperial Japan and Nazi Germany decided not to listen anymore. Ultimatly this crisis is a test of willpower, Iran rattles the cages through the use of its proxies and sees what the results are. If they are favorable or at least result in no opposing action being taken, they will continue with the techniques that work. So long as the "West" has the will to face them down, they will not succeed. 

The "West" is currently divided, and potential allies stand on the sidelines (like Russia and China), so Iran has every incentive to continue. If Isreal is forced to back down , then all we will see is a pause for Hezbollah to reconstitute, and they will start the show again. On the other hand, if the blinders are shaken off, then the escalation will continue until the root of the problem is removed. (Remember the "Root Causetm" of terrorism is the desire to rule through intimidation and fear).


----------



## Kirkhill (21 Jul 2006)

acclenticularis - you seem to be working from the supposition that all problems have solutions and if only you look hard enough you can find an answer.  Some problems defy solution.  That doesn't mean that in the real world you don't do what you can with what's available.

All engineering is based on an irrational number.  PI, as in PI ARE SQUARE NOT ROUND, has no solution. Despite that handicap engines work, buildings stand and aircraft fly.


----------



## Brad Sallows (21 Jul 2006)

>Do you firmly believe that Israel will be able to "pull the root"

Somewhat, because I believe that Israel has never really tried.  All that's happened the past 20+ years amounts only to pruning the shrubs.  I have a small bamboo patch in my back yard; bamboo is a hardy plant, and every year I cut it back a little to keep it from taking over too much real estate.  But there's no doubt in my mind that if I upgrade from shears to shovel, I'll have a three-foot deep hole, a pile of dirt to match, and a stack of cut bamboo and bamboo roots.

>We should have learned that after the first invasion of Lebanon which led to the creation of Hezbollah in the first place (and, subsequently, Hamas, which it trains and supports).

I don't mean to pick on your comment specifically, but I read and hear this one a lot.  "Poke them with a stick and they'll only become angrier."  By itself it's true, but everyone overlooks the options beyond poking, such as a metaphorical 10,000 pound hydraulic press.  Amidst all the talk of the dangers of arousing the ire of the fierce warrior sons of the desert, few think to mention  our recent past and the dangers of arousing the ire of the methodical citizen-soldier staff officers of the formation HQs.  We wrote many of the crib notes for total war in the modern era, and I don't believe people today are significantly more enlightened than the "greatest generation" was.  What happens when western nations become angrier?  There was a mighty sharp flip in public opinion regarding acceptable means of war between 1938 and 1942.  The real worry isn't what "they" can or will do; the real worry is what "we" can and will do if pushed hard enough.


----------



## acclenticularis (21 Jul 2006)

You're right, I do think problems have solutions.  And I am familiar with irrational PI.  I am not proposing that one needs to just 'look hard enough' to find a solution, because there must be a solution that all can bear for everything.  However, a solution has to be made and the 'solutions' that are being used just aren't particularly appealing, at least to me.  I only propose that there could be a better way.  Just because no better way has been made public or possibly discovered, does not mean that there is no better solution.  So, are you saying that the middle east problems defy solution?  I remain optimistic.

a-majoor - I just disagree that an escalation will remove the problem.  I agree that ignoring the problem will not cause it to go away.  I understand the 30's League of Nations failure too.  With respect to the middle east problem, I just don't agree with what has been done and proposed to date.  In terms of facing 'them down', I agree that it has to be done, I just don't know how.


----------



## Kat Stevens (21 Jul 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> acclenticularis - you seem to be working from the supposition that all problems have solutions and if only you look hard enough you can find an answer.  Some problems defy solution.  That doesn't mean that in the real world you don't do what you can with what's available.
> 
> All engineering is based on an irrational number.  PI, as in PI ARE SQUARE NOT ROUND, has no solution. Despite that handicap engines work, buildings stand and aircraft fly.


Balderdash!  Cake are square, pi are round, every good chainsaw cabinet maker knows that.


----------



## toddskam (21 Jul 2006)

It will be interesting to see what unfolds in the next several days as Israeli armour currently masses along the southern Lebanese border.  Hezbollah are no longer the rag-tag militia group they once were when the Israelis entered Lebanon in the early 80's.  During that conflict, all told, Israel lost 900 troops in Lebanon and eventually withdrew.  In the south, Hezbollah still holds high esteem among the locals for forcing this withdrawal and victory for the Arab world - hence their support and following there. 

Militarily, there is absolutely no question Israel is superior.  In the end, Hezbollah will lose this imminent battle - but they may also become stronger because of it.


----------



## ArmyRick (21 Jul 2006)

How about calling this "Hezbollah and Hamas have been taking stupid pills for too long" ?


----------



## GO!!! (21 Jul 2006)

toddskam said:
			
		

> It will be interesting to see what unfolds in the next several days as Israeli armour currently masses along the southern Lebanese border.  Hezbollah are no longer the rag-tag militia group they once were when the Israelis entered Lebanon in the early 80's.


True, now they have financial, ideological and military support from Iran. You might call them a well funded and armed ragtag militia group. Cut off their sources of funding and arms, and you are left with what they were 20 years ago. Heezbollah's advances are due to the Iranians, not because of any measure of success in organisation or military superiority.



> During that conflict, all told, Israel lost 900 troops in Lebanon and eventually withdrew.  In the south, Hezbollah still holds high esteem among the locals for forcing this withdrawal and victory for the Arab world - hence their support and following there.


Israel lost 900 troops _cumulatively_ to every Lebanese militia over the period of the entire conflict. I believe their kill ratio was in the neighbourhood of 12:1 as well. They withdrew when an election took place in Israel, and a politician made good on his promises to pull out. This was not due to any military setback, or being "forced out". No arab country has ever forced Israel to do anything but kick the crap out of it.



> Militarily, there is absolutely no question Israel is superior.  In the end, Hezbollah will lose this imminent battle - but they may also become stronger because of it.


Hezbollah becomes stronger when Iran and Syria make it that way, full stop. 

If we want to address the "root causes" that the lefties like you keep talking about, a furious barrage of Tehran would be more successful than one of Beirut. Hezbollah is a puppet of foreign powers.


----------



## George Wallace (21 Jul 2006)

GO!!

Don't argue with her...She has an agenda to keep.


----------



## 1feral1 (21 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> If the Israelis really wanted to stop Hezbollah attacks from the south, they should have bombed southern positions more



Bombing/shelling is never a total success (remember Cassino in WW2), and at the end of the day one needs the 'corkscrew and blowtorch' methods used by the infantry to weed out the well dug in (and in this case finatical) enemy.

Remember Tamouh, these ratbags have had 6 yrs to dig (deep no doubt) in and prepare a rabbits warren of tunnels, caves and the rest of it, and they have almost been wanting or luring the IDF to come in and play in this sector. For all we know the place is wired up with HE and booby traps to the max. If I was a ratbag like these winners (don't get me wrong I do have respect for their overall intelligence and they should never be under-estimated or taken as a untrained ragtag force), thats what I'd be doing. 

These guys are well prepared, well armed, well trained and highly motivated to become martyrs for their cause. The IDF could be in for a nasty and costly fight. Arty and bombs can soften the place up, but thats about it. As morbid as it sounds, what one needs is napalm, HE and flamethrowers, and finally the bayonet to sort them out just like the island fighting campaign during WW2.

Yes, one has to have infantry backed by supporting arms to go in and get the job done right. There is no two ways about it if you want to win.

One can have all the technology you want, but at the end of the day, it's still a 'grunts' job to get in close to do the dirty work! (being a former 'grunt' I can say that).

Its going to be upclose and personal for the IDF should they go in full-on on the ground. They do not really have a choice. This mess is going to get far worse before it starts getting better.

My 2 cents.

Wes


----------



## George Wallace (21 Jul 2006)

Wes

There is one problem with this theory, and it is: If these guys are willing to be martyrs for their cause, then they are falling into a trap.  Like General George Patton said: " It is not our goal to die for our country, but the make the other poor bastard die for his."   If he wants to die for his country, he is admitting defeat.  He will not see any benefits or improvement to his country's situation if he is a martyr.  He accomplishes nothing.


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Jul 2006)

Here is another analysis from a (US based) outfit called Stratfor – 
http://www.stratfor.com/ .  It is reproduced under the Fair Dealings provisions of the  Copyright Act, but *Mods* given their Copyright Notice (see bottom of the page) you may want/need to delete this to protect Army.ca from unwanted legal harassment. 



> Red Alert: The Battle Joined
> 
> The ground war has begun. Several Israeli brigades now appear to be operating between the Lebanese border and the Litani River. According to reports, Hezbollah forces are dispersed in multiple bunker complexes and are launching rockets from these and other locations.
> 
> ...



It’s all grist for the mill; at least _Stratfor_ has the good sense to say: _” An extended engagement in southern Lebanon is the least likely path, in our opinion. More likely – *and this is a guess* -- is a five-part strategy ..."_


----------



## 1feral1 (21 Jul 2006)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Wes
> 
> There is one problem with this theory, and it is: If these guys are willing to be martyrs for their cause, then they are falling into a trap.  Like General George Patton said: " It is not our goal to die for our country, but the make the other poor ******* die for his."   If he wants to die for his country, he is admitting defeat.  He will not see any benefits or improvement to his country's situation if he is a martyr.  He accomplishes nothing.



This is true George, but thats how they operate. Finatical as equal to the Japs or worse. 

Either way, it looks like the IDF is going in full on, non-stop by ground, and if there is one thing we all can agree on, war is truly a four lettered word.

Fight to win! 

No quarter drawn or given.

Regards,

Wes


----------



## Edward Campbell (21 Jul 2006)

This is one (of a dozen plus) _responses_ to an article in _Foreign Affairs_ - http://www.foreignaffairs.org/ - by Stephen Biddle*.  The central issue is Iraq but this author expands the discussion somewhat to include Afghanistan, Lebanon and Palestine so I am adding it here as, once again, grist for the mill.  

It is reproduced here under the Fair Dealings provisions of the Copyright Act.

http://www.foreignaffairs.org/special/roundtable_drum2


> Responses to "What to Do in Iraq: A Roundtable"
> Web Exclusive (posted July 17, 2006)
> 
> by *Kevin Drum*
> ...



First, I agree with Drum and LGen David Richards: we (the Western allies and, specifically, Canada) can lose in Afghanistan – we can fail, militarily, or we can have a national _failure of will_ and withdraw in fear and confusion.

Second: I think Iran (as the leader of the _Shias_) and Saudi Arabia (as the home of _Wahhabis_, the quintessential hard-line, medieval _Sunnis_) are the keys and I think neither can be trusted or, more to the point, be considered as anything but an *enemy* of the West.

I’m not sure I understand what America (and its remaining _coalition of the willing_ partners) should or even can do in/about Iraq.  I remain convinced that we should be provoking internecine wars and revolutions throughout the entire _Islamic Crescent_ (Morocco to Indonesia) for both short term relief (when they’re busy killing one another they are less likely to be busy killing us) and the essential, in my personal opinion, _reformation_ of Islam and _enlightenment_ of the North African/Arab/Persian/West Asia peoples.

Israel may get lost in the shuffle, even sideswiped in the (highly desirable) new Thirty Years War.  We should, as Infanteer suggested -  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/47644/post-415082.html#msg415082 – offer refugee/immigration to Israelis fleeing the inevitable horrors of war on terms at least as generous as those we offered to the Lebanese in the ‘70s when they were fleeing civil war there.

----------
* Stephen Biddle is a Senior Fellow in Defense Policy at the Council on Foreign Relations and the author of Military Power.

----------

PS: *Mods* the Maj. Paeta Hess-von Kruedener item has been posted at last twice, elsewhere, on Ary.ca.


----------



## Jarnhamar (22 Jul 2006)

I have a question.

If Israel wants the civilians to fall back (25 miles?) away from the border and basically get out of dodge so they don't get killed, why then would they bomb bridges?

I understand the tactical value of bridges but given the high profile of this battle wouldn't it make sense to try and come across like the good guys and keeping civilian escape aids such as bridges intact??


----------



## tamouh (22 Jul 2006)

> If Israel wants the civilians to fall back (25 miles?) away from the border and basically get out of dodge so they don't get killed, why then would they bomb bridges?



IDF is very popular for these tactics of bombing the hell out of their enemy's infrastructure to send a point.....we'll make it very costly for you to even ponder at attacking us.  Kinda the bully approach if you want my opinion.


----------



## Remius (22 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> IDF is very popular for these tactics of bombing the hell out of their enemy's infrastructure to send a point.....we'll make it very costly for you to even ponder at attacking us.  Kinda the bully approach if you want my opinion.



Really?  I don't know.  If a dog tries to bite you and you hit him with a stick hard enough he will think twice about biting you.


----------



## couchcommander (22 Jul 2006)

heh.

*WHACK* BAD ISLAMIC MILLITANT!... NNNOO......NNNOOO!


----------



## KevinB (22 Jul 2006)

Plus bombing bridges make it very awkward to bring heavy equiptment up to the front...

IF I where trying to limit missle attacks on my homeland I'd bomb the bridges too...
 (I'd have burned the damn country [and anyone I thought may support them]  down too -- but I dont run the IDF)


----------



## 1feral1 (22 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> IDF is very popular for these tactics of bombing the hell out of their enemy's infrastructure to send a point.....we'll make it very costly for you to even ponder at attacking us.  Kinda the bully approach if you want my opinion.



I don't think denying the EN access to bridges is bullying, I call it good common sense tactics which work. We would be doing the same thing, and did such in previous conflicts ourselves.

Its always the innocent who get the shyte end of the stick, that we can agree on Tamouh. 

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## FastEddy (22 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> IDF is very popular for these tactics of bombing the hell out of their enemy's infrastructure to send a point.....we'll make it very costly for you to even ponder at attacking us.  Kinda the bully approach if you want my opinion.



I thought it was Strategically to prevent supplies and rearming from Syria. Or so the reports say.

As for the IDF Bullying tactics you base this on what experience ?.


----------



## M (22 Jul 2006)

For anyone interested, there is a very busy forum with near real-time updates from web users in Lebanon at: 

http://lfpm.org/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=6 

"Lebanon Under Attack - Day 11" has the most current information.


----------



## GAP (22 Jul 2006)

M said:
			
		

> For anyone interested, there is a very busy forum with near real-time updates from web users in Lebanon at:
> "Lebanon Under Attack - Day 11" has the most current information.



This is such a wonderful site...(now where is that sarcasm icon?) Sign a petition against the Israeli's, donate money, donate more money, oh, and I shouldn't forget...



> Re: Lebanon Under Attack - Day 11 - News and Updates Only
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ...



Yup, I can see that this site is for me....why, I'll just run out and help this poor fellow along....now, how much seed did you want to donate?


----------



## muskrat89 (22 Jul 2006)

> Kinda the bully approach if you want my opinion.



Well, I am no Field Marshal, but it seems far easier (and more practical) to warn people away from a large zone, for a general prolonged attack, than to warn people away from a specific bridge, at a specific time  :  "Don't be in these 50 miles2 the next 2 weeks" vs "Don't be within 200 yards of the east end of the McLintock bridge between 6:30 and 6:36 tomorrow morning". Yeah - that ought to give them time to get the AA in place


----------



## ArmyRick (22 Jul 2006)

Tamouh, give it up. 

Seriously, too bad most of us here are not sympathetic to Lebanon.

I hope Israel bombs the ever living day lights out of their enemy's infrastructure. 

If they harbour terrorist knowingly and do nothing? Then they too become enemy...


----------



## bilton090 (22 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> IDF is very popular for these tactics of bombing the hell out of their enemy's infrastructure to send a point.....we'll make it very costly for you to even ponder at attacking us.  Kinda the bully approach if you want my opinion.


    
               Your opinion ! , well let's see, do you have any military experience ? you keep talking about the terrorists point of view, they have no point of view except to KILL,KILL ,KILL all the Innocent people they can, and now this unprovoked attack on Israel ! you don't know what you are talking about, as a 1'st GULF WAR VET I'am getting tied of your BS, WHAT ARE YOU DOING HERE ? your mental opinion is the same as the cancer over there ! .
               Bombing the enemy's infrastructure is not a point, but it has been going on for a 1000 yrs + so the enemy can't resupply ( but they are bullies ), you hit them hard & fast with all you can , this is not a school yard fight ! this is WAR !
               Good luck to the IDF kick some ASS ! wipe them off the map !
 :gunner: :evil: :fifty:


----------



## vonGarvin (22 Jul 2006)

The thing that really bothers me about Western Society (in general) is that the philosophy of minimal force is so prevelant, that it may one day undo us all.  It is best represented (in my opinion) in pop-culture films, such as, yes, get ready for it, "Independance Day".  Think about it.  These really big frisbees have just wiped out New York City, Washington and Los Angeles, and they are getting ready to wipe out more cities.  What do the Americans do?  They send up a squadron or two of F18s with miniscule missiles.  Only after the President realises that they intend on exterminating man kind does he say "Nuke the bastards".  Now, this is just a movie, but think about it.  People even now in the media have said "just kidnap two Hezbollah and call it even".  Sorry, that doesn't do it.  Just imagine after 11 September, the US looking for some Al Qaeda sky scrapers to bring down, or Taliban Subways or Afghani Night clubs!  
So, Isreal has been attacked, soldiers captured, others killed.  All unprovoked.  What to do?  Hit back, and hit back HARD!  After all, if Isreal finds itself in a fair fight, then something has gone wrong.  After all, Hezbollah has only brought unguided rockets to a PGM* fight (*Precision Guided Munitions).  Good on the IDF to standing up!


----------



## bilton090 (22 Jul 2006)

+100 Van Garvin,
                           In a war if you use minimal force, you are out of the game !
           Lets nuke them, with there 2000 yr old F'D up way of thinking, they are going to pull the hole world into WW 5, rid the world of the cancer NOW ! , before it's to late !


----------



## tamouh (22 Jul 2006)

Yes IDF is a bully, and their tactics have always and will remain this way. I can see bridges in Southern Lebanon to be blown up to prevent the move of heavy equipments, there is no need to bomb the Airport at this stage, north Lebanon power stations, dairy farms, Greek Orthodox Church, Saint Therese Hospital, and pharmaceutical plant .  

Or ohh.....let me see, Hezbollah is hiding their Zelzal-2 missiles in a bunker under the church! 

There were stories during the 1967 and 1973 war that when Israel withdraw from a region, they'd destroy every building standing before handing the region back to the Arabs. When I read these stories, I though to myself these must be Arab Propaganda.

Yet, Israel prevailed itself again with such tactics when it withdraw from Gaza. It destroyed every single house, building in that area so the Palestinians won't be able to use it.

You want to convince me these are the actions of a government seeking Peace ?  Opposite, these are the actions of a bully and Israeli government and IDF is a major bully in the region.


----------



## vonGarvin (22 Jul 2006)

Tamouh:
When surrounded by potential enemies, sometimes it is due to wisdom that one acts as Isreal has.  Isreal is not the only power in history to conduct so-called "scorched earth" policies, so I don't think it is fair to single them out for that.  
As for the factories, farms, "chicken factories" as one place in the media mentioned, well, I don't know what their targetting policy is, but I highly doubt that their policy is indiscriminate (as the RCAF's policy was when bombing Germans in World War Two).
I can only suppose that Isreal is not at all pleased with the way in which Hezbollah has been able to freely operate in Lebanon.  They have how many rockets in that sovereign nation?  Where is the blame for Beirut to allow this?  Perhaps the lesson they are trying to give here is "don't let these guys operate within your country, lest you also feel the brunt of our wrath"


----------



## bilton090 (22 Jul 2006)

Tamouh
                     YOU DON"T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT !

                   

      You blow up everything before the pull out,
   
        You sir took a stupid pill the first day on here !


----------



## vonGarvin (22 Jul 2006)

bilton090 said:
			
		

> Tamouh
> YOU DON"T KNOW WHAT YOUR TALKING ABOUT !


Don't attack the man, attack his post, which I felt was reasonable, though I didn't agree with it.


----------



## tamouh (22 Jul 2006)

> When surrounded by potential enemies, sometimes it is due to wisdom that one acts as Isreal has.  Isreal is not the only power in history to conduct so-called "scorched earth" policies, so I don't think it is fair to single them out for that.



They're trully then the champion of these tactics.....lets give them the thumbs up for a job well done!!!!!



> I can only suppose that Isreal is not at all pleased with the way in which Hezbollah has been able to freely operate in Lebanon.  They have how many rockets in that sovereign nation?  Where is the blame for Beirut to allow this?  Perhaps the lesson they are trying to give here is "don't let these guys operate within your country, lest you also feel the brunt of our wrath"



Lebanon has nothing to do with this, and that is what has been said since day 1. If Israel wants to go after Hezbollah after these attacks, they were welcome to do so......they'd at least save Lebanon the struggle to dismantle or merge Hezbollah. But No, Israel wants to make a show, lets the bomb the hell out of Lebanon so any nation in that region knows that if you hit Israel with any force, whether or not the people who hit Israel were acting on behalf of your government or not,  we'll bomb the s$## out of you.

You know what i see in the future ? I see small group of people obtaining light weaponary, crossing the border, killing couple of Israeli soldiers just to provoke war between two countries. What Hezbollah did right now will eventually become a path, a mission for other organizations wanting to provoke a war between the Arabs and Israel.

These organizations don't care whether Israel kills civilians, bomb infrastructure and surely Israel itself doesn't care. So what is the purpose of peace talks if at every moment in time an incident like this will occur ?


----------



## bilton090 (22 Jul 2006)

von Garvin said:
			
		

> Don't attack the man, attack his post, which I felt was reasonable, though I didn't agree with it.


   I'am not attacking the man, just his way of thinking. I'am going over to Afgh. in 07 and his way of thinking is making me sick !


----------



## Kat Stevens (22 Jul 2006)

Out of curiosity, tamouh, what would your opinion be if the shoe was on the other foot?


----------



## vonGarvin (22 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> Lebanon has nothing to do with this, and that is what has been said since day 1. If Israel wants to go after Hezbollah after these attacks, they were welcome to do so......they'd at least save Lebanon the struggle to dismantle or merge Hezbollah. But No, Israel wants to make a show, lets the bomb the hell out of Lebanon so any nation in that region knows that if you hit Israel with any force, whether or not the people who hit Israel were acting on behalf of your government or not,  we'll bomb the s$## out of you.


Actually, the award for "Champion" should go to the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics for their Scorched Earth in 1941, including the evacuation of their industry.

As for the quote above, I think you perhaps misunderstood me.  Hezbollah was husbanding rockets and other weaponry in Lebanon.  Imagine if the "Michigan Militia" had training camps in Ontario, with the full knowledge of Mr. McGuinty (or however you spell that loser's name), and the Michigan Militia forayed across the St Clair river and captured two Michigan State Troopers and returned to Ontario.  Now, the OPP does nothing about this, and neither does Mr. McGuinty.  Michigan is totally upset, and they go after the Michigan Militia (in Ontario), but not only that, they also go after the OPP.  Being a former Upper Canadian, yeah, I'd be quite upset, but more so for Mr McGuinty for allowing those Michigan Militia freaks to do as they please in my province.
So, Lebanon, a sovereign nation with its own armed forces and police, do NOTHING about Hezbollah in the south of its land.  Perhaps they turned a blind eye.  Perhaps they were intimidated by Syria.  I don't care.  If they were getting picked on by Syria and Hezbollah, perhaps they could have gone to the US, or even Isreal, and said something to the effect "Listen, we've got these yard apes over here, doing stuff.  I think they want to fire some missiles your way.  We can't do anything about it, but they are located at grids 12569876 and 57439657.  Oh, we have no SAMs or forces in the area.  Please, feel free to go visit them".  Heck, Lebanon could have done this "under the table", lest they pee off Syria et al.  They could also have told Isreal, in advance, that they were going to lodge some useless complaint at the UN, but it was a total "wink wink, nudge nudge, know I mean, gov'ner?  Does she like photographs?  You know, Photos?  Taking pictures?" affair.  Instead, Lebanon did nothing, and sometimes doing nothing is a culpable act.


----------



## vonGarvin (22 Jul 2006)

bilton090 said:
			
		

> I'am not attacking the man, just his way of thinking. I'am going over to Afgh. in 07 and his way of thinking is making me sick !


Fair enough.  It just wasn't clear to me, but then again, that's not saying much


----------



## tamouh (22 Jul 2006)

> I'am not attacking the man, just his way of thinking. I'am going over to Afgh. in 07 and his way of thinking is making me sick !



Congrats! Great for you.....I support you and many do on your missions. What that has to do with Israel ? Are you going to Afghanistan to defend Israel ????!!


----------



## vonGarvin (22 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> Are you going to Afghanistan to defend Israel ????!!


According to some weenies in the liberal media, they think so! (Stupid liberal medi! :threat


----------



## tamouh (22 Jul 2006)

von Garvin : I understand your point. However, take into account, Lebanon has NO ARMY. Literally, Lebanon's army is more of a police force than an army. If Lebanese government wanted to dismantle Hezbollah by force, there will be one of these two outcomes: 1) Civli War (yet again!)  2) Hezbollah becomes the government.

The only way Lebanon could dismantle Hezbollah is by adopting it part of the armed forces, a scenario that doesn't happen overnight , especially in a country where everyone agress to disagree , ravaged by wars for 20 years and recently had its PM assassinated!


----------



## muskrat89 (22 Jul 2006)

Anyway, I'm locking this for awhile......


----------



## muskrat89 (22 Jul 2006)

Re-opened. There are vastly opposing views on this subject. As long as they meet the conduct guidelines, people are allowed to post differing views.

Keep it civil, debate the points, NO personal attacks.

Army.ca Staff


----------



## Edward Campbell (22 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> ...
> If Lebanese government wanted to dismantle Hezbollah by force, there will be one of these two outcomes: 1) Civli _sic_ War (yet again!)  2) Hezbollah becomes the government.
> ...



I agree with you, tamouh.  Lebanon could not and cannot do what much of the world agrees needs doing: _*dismantle*_ Hezbollah (and other terrorist groups, too).  If you accept, as I do, that Hezbollah *is* a terrorist group (despite its well advertised civic services), dedicated to genocide, then it and all of its members need to be _neutralized_.  (I prefer to use the simple, clear English word *'killed'*.)  That, according to _Stratfor_ (see article at http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/47644/post-415531.html#msg415531 above) might be what Israel is, now, intent upon doing.

According to _Stratfor_’s ‘guess’ the Israelis are bombing bridges and destroying infrastructure in order to _isolate_ and starve (for food, replacements and weapons) the Hezbollah forces in South Lebanon.  Next they might drive a major attack up into the Hezbollah stronghold in the Bekaa Valley (accepting (perhaps even welcoming) the risk that Syria might attack) – the aim would be to use Israel’s overwhelming conventional military superiority, including the _shock effect_ of fast, violent armoured/air attacks, to destroy Hezbollah’s bases there.  Finally the Israelis might use special forces and conventional infantry to seek out and kill most Hezbollah members who are ‘dug in’ (in homes, schools, and hospitals, etc) in almost every town and village.  This may require extensive bombing/artillery _preparation_ of the targets with concomitant 'collateral damage.'

Why?

Again according to _Stratfor_, because Israel must remove the constant threat (more than a _threat_ – it’s a fact) of deadly missile attacks on Israeli towns and cities, including Haifa.

Would any nation accept daily rocket and missile attacks on its towns and cities?  Should any nation accept such attacks?

Of course Lebanon can and should fight back, against Israel.  It is, after all, being attacked and invaded.  *BUT*: Lebanon is not _innocent_; it is complicit in Hezbollah’s *aggressive war* against Israel (aggressive war (against anyone) is, by the way, according to the Nuremberg Tribunals, a *crime against peace*) because it has allowed Hezbollah to use Lebanon as a base.  Lebanon (including its roads and bridges, factories and farms, and seaports and airports, too), therefore, is a legitimate target, it is reaping what it sowed.

While neither knowing nor caring who you are or where you are, I think you are a victim of Arab propaganda.  Israel’s actions seem, to me, logical and, as Prime Minister Harper suggested, _measured_.  Hezbollah, so long as it exists, will threaten the very existence of Israel – which is, according to the UN, entitled to exist, within secure borders, where it is, now: smack dab in the middle of the _Umma_.  Israel is entitled to defend itself – even if that might mean that a whole hockey sock full of Arabs are going to meet those 72 virgins in paradise in the very near future – destroying Hezbollah and its friends and protectors (even the unwilling ones) is a reasonable and _measured_ defensive response to Hezbollah’s attacks.

Arabs who wish to live (period) ought to overthrow governments which advocate the destruction of Israel and kill _sheiks_ and _imans_ who peach the same.

This war is not making Israel any new friends but that is not very high on Israel's agenda.  Its response to Hezbollah's rocket attacks is violent and massive but it may be the only useful response.


----------



## 1feral1 (22 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> Or ohh.....let me see, Hezbollah is hiding their Zelzal-2 missiles in a bunker under the church!



Humm, let me see now, its over the news wire now that there has been a large cache of rockets, small arms and ammunition found in....guess now,...... as mosque in this captured vill.

Though they are not Zelzals, they are still rockets, and yes hidden in a house of worship. Who knows whats inside the ambulances which are running around town.

Kind of makes you wonder doesn't it.

As for Tamouh, as much as it really aggrivates me (beleive me he really does), we know he bats for the other side, and we'll just have to get used to his way of thinking, as maybe we can learn something from him. 

As for having his type live and breath the same air as us in our beloved Canada, we'll have to get used to that too, there is many more than him who have come to Canada to live, who feel much more stronger than he does, and those are the dangerous ones. I find his way of thinking akin to a Canadian supporting the nazi's during the last war, so he does not go over too well with me, and this is not a personal attack on him either. 

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## a_majoor (22 Jul 2006)

von Garvin said:
			
		

> The thing that really bothers me about Western Society (in general) is that the philosophy of minimal force is so prevelant, that it may one day undo us all.  It is best represented (in my opinion) in pop-culture films, such as, yes, get ready for it, "Independance Day".  Think about it.  These really big frisbees have just wiped out New York City, Washington and Los Angeles, and they are getting ready to wipe out more cities.  What do the Americans do?  They send up a squadron or two of F18s with miniscule missiles.  Only after the President realises that they intend on exterminating man kind does he say "Nuke the bastards".  Now, this is just a movie, but think about it.  People even now in the media have said "just kidnap two Hezbollah and call it even".  Sorry, that doesn't do it.  Just imagine after 11 September, the US looking for some Al Qaeda sky scrapers to bring down, or Taliban Subways or Afghani Night clubs!
> So, Isreal has been attacked, soldiers captured, others killed.  All unprovoked.  What to do?  Hit back, and hit back HARD!  After all, if Isreal finds itself in a fair fight, then something has gone wrong.  After all, Hezbollah has only brought unguided rockets to a PGM* fight (*Precision Guided Munitions).  Good on the IDF to standing up!



Actually, it is even worse. In the movie "The American President", the Libyans have attacked and destroyed an American installation and killed American servicemen. The President (played by Michael Douglas) orders an attack against Libyan Intelligence HQ, but specifies the attack during the night when the fewest people are in the building. Rather than attack the ringleaders of the operation against the United States, the President is unleashing the power of the American Military against....the night shift janitor.

Although the inner circle of the Bush administration certainly does not think in this fashion, the MSM, the Democratic party and the left wing Blogosphere certainly does employ rather crude moral relativism (they killed one person at randon, so seeking and destroying the people who planned and executed this is a "disproportionate response".)

As a BTW, Hezbollah is represented in the Lebanese government, and received cooperation (even if just passive avoidance) of the Lebanese government, since the government has done nothing to stem the flow of arms from Syria via road and air (hence bombing bridges and the airport), nor carried out the UN resolution to disarm Hezbollah and occupy southern Lebanon to prevent these rocket attacks. As a BTW, the missile attack against the Israeli corvette required radar guidance, which needed to be provided by the Lebanese military, or have the Lebanese government turn a blind eye to the establishment of a radar unit on the shoreline. This is a substantial pile of kit, not an adapted hand held traffic radar unit.


----------



## tamouh (22 Jul 2006)

Edward: I agree with your comments, though we're missing the point, if we agree Lebanese government could not disarm Hezbollah prior to the Israeli invasion, then Israel has no right to bomb Lebanon infrastructure. I also agree Israel is surrounded by their enemies who wish to erase it off earth, yet, the Israelis are not doing any better compared to their enemies.

Lets also assume Israel invades Lebanon, reach Beirut, the Syrians drawn into the conflict, Israel annihilate the Syrian army, Israel reaches Damascus.....and then what ? It will change nothing, in fact, it will just make things worse for Israel. 

The Arabs governments are not the problem Israel face. The problem Israel has to deal with is the Arabic street, the people, the nations. If Israel occupies area from the Mediterranean to the Euphrates, they'll still be under severe attacks from guerrilla fighters and ordinary people. Therefore, war is not the answer. War for Israel is pretty much to keep the status quo in the region, hence, no peace is possible.

---

Wes: I'll just choose to ignore your comments because they're baseless. I believe everyone has the right to express their opinion both on the left and the right. I usually attempt to fair my self in the middle line while I consider your ideology an extreme right propaganda at best.

---

a_majoor:


> since the government has done nothing to stem the flow of arms from Syria via road and air (hence bombing bridges and the airport),



While true, the reality on the ground is completely different. Lebanon "was" a democracy in progress, as I stated earlier and don't be fooled by the bragging Lebanese about their army, or their armed forces website, the Lebanese army next to doesn't exist. The army is compiled of sectarian groups to ensure each religion has an equal proportion representation in the forces, most equipments obsolete and training is limited to police force scenarios.

As for the border, between Lebanon and Syria it is really quite easy to smuggle things back and forth avoiding all check points. Even the Syrians couldn't prevent the rush of illegally imported goods into Syria mid-1980s.


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> Wes: I'll just choose to ignore your comments because they're baseless.
> ---



So what about the rockets found in the mosque? How about your views on this?

As for my comments, extremism, or red blooded patriotism? I guess its up to the individual, but if thats the case, I guess the majority on this website are extremists in your eyes. 

Regards,

Wes


----------



## Kirkhill (23 Jul 2006)

> Edward: I agree with your comments, though we're missing the point, if we agree Lebanese government could not disarm Hezbollah prior to the Israeli invasion, then Israel has no right to bomb Lebanon infrastructure.



Tamouh you probably should have stopped at "I agree with your comments".    Then you, Edward and I would have been in accord.

I am unaware of any law that prevents the targeting of inanimate objects.  They can be rebuilt.  And if Lebanon plays its cards right it will probably find its bombed out hill roads replaced with 4 lane highways after this latest unpleasantness.  That seems to be working understanding of how things work these days: from the Marshall Plan to Canadian engineers in Afghanistan replacing a bridge that was destroyed a week earlier in a firefight that killed a Canadian.  Westerners have apparently been taught to play nice, tidy up the mess and put away their toys after they have finished playing.

The attack on infrastructure is understandable, necessary and entirely moral.  I shall be very surprised if somebody turns up a law someplace that calls it illegal.  Destroying dams and water supplies in time of war, even in the middle east, is a tried and true formula geared towards getting the enemy to the table as quickly as possible.

Israel does not face a problem with the Arab street.  It faces a problem with the Arab governments.  Israel, nor any other country, doesn't negotiate with the "street" but with the "street's " agents, its government.  Perhaps the "street" doesn't like its agents or the deals they negotiate.  That is a problem between it and its choice in agents.  Israel can only negotiate with the agents the street supplies.

If Israel doesn't like the deals on offer it doesn't have to accept them.  If the street doesn't like the job their agents are doing and the deals they are not making then perhaps they ought to find other agents to represent them.

Realtors are pretty easy to come by as are lawyers.  Politicians are even easier.

My regards to the "street".


----------



## tamouh (23 Jul 2006)

Kirkhill: I love your piece. I think if the 'street' had to choose , they'd have chosen continuous war with no end. That is why I believe Israel has a better chance now of making peace with the governments because sooner or later that whole area will be ran by the people.

Geneva convention prohibits the explicit targetting of civilians and civilian infrastructure, but that is another subject.......

What I'm trying to point here, while I agree that roads,bridges, dams, power plants, and pretty much everything civilians will be caught in any type of war, Israel shouldn't expect the 'street' to be anxious for peace after they've destroyed everything the 'street' would need to survive.

One of the more reasons why I continue saying there is little to no hope in that part of the world! So for the victor goes the spoils!


----------



## Kirkhill (23 Jul 2006)

> Kirkhill: I love your piece.



Thank you for the kind thoughts. There will be a Sunday Matinee for the children.  Please remember to tip the doorman on the way out.



> I think if the 'street' had to choose , they'd have chosen continuous war with no end.



If that is a true reflection of the "street" then it matters not who the agent is.  The result will be the same.  Perhaps it is time to wish you a joyous war and pray for the civilians.


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Jul 2006)

Tamouh, you are still not commenting on today's rockets in the mosque incident? This would not be the first time weapons have been stashed in one of these places, would it now.

Wes


----------



## Roy Harding (23 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> ...I also agree Israel is surrounded by their enemies who wish to erase it off earth, yet, the Israelis are not doing any better compared to their enemies....



Funny - I don't recall the Israelis making it a policy to "erase" their enemies "off earth", although I think they may have the means to do so.

Seems to me that Israel is "doing better" compared to their enemies - at the VERY least, morally.


----------



## couchcommander (23 Jul 2006)

Ah, no, you are all missing the REAL story. heh.

My girlfriend and I were walking down to the Opa!, and we came across this rather large gathering. It took me a few seconds to clue into the "ISRAEL: WAR CRMININAL" signs, but eventually it became apparent it was a pro-Lebanon rally.

Given that yelling out "Israeli's have a right to exist as well!" would have ended in me getting far more exercise that day than my poor birkenstocks could handle - we ignored it and walked on.

Well, in Opa! is when we really got the inside scoop. The friendly Lebanese owner informed us all that the hizballah actions has simply provided a convenient pretext for an already planned Israeli invasion, the people in his village had told him so... scoop #1

scoop #2... while walking back we noticed that there was a rather large group of rather angry looking, Lebanese flag carrying, men all gathered around an either incredibly large balled (or possibly just not too smart... haven't decided what yet) individual engaged in a "debate" with another gentleman. The Lebanese gentleman's point, and I quote was, "How can you justify what Israel has done? Hizballah captures TWO, just TWO guys, and look at everything they do, all the people they kill!". 

So, the real story? Israel was going to invade, this was only a pretext. Even if this isn't true, all they did was capture two soldiers, what's the big deal?

*Edit* The above is satire, based on true events. It does not convey my personal viewpoint.


----------



## KevinB (23 Jul 2006)

The kidnapping showed the Israeli's that not only was their populace vulnerable (the rocket attacks) but that detailed operations where being done on their soldiers to attemot to leverage the government.

Since the Lebanese gov't cannot/will not patrol their coountryside to ensure it cannot be used for attacks the onus fell on the IDF.


----------



## ArmyRick (23 Jul 2006)

Tamouh, to the victor go the spoils huh? OK fair enough. Maybe Israel should bomb lebanon senselesss until they have absolutely destroyed them.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (23 Jul 2006)

I'd like to add one other facet to this debate and have Tamouh chime in....

If those in Southern Lebanon are there because they support Hezbollah (as witnessed by the elections) in part because they believe in  Hezbollah's declaration of war on Israel and in the long-term plan to exterminate the Jews in general, do the civilians who support them deserve any more consideration than the Nazi population who supported Hitler?  

My answer would be "no".  I would contend that if you're a racist genocidal prick, whether male or female and support violent acts against those that you believe your religion justifies the extermination of, then you are no different than the combatant who fuses the rocket prior to launch....and the fact you voted in a democracy does not in any way validate or legitimize your worldview.

Thoughts?


Matthew.


----------



## tamouh (23 Jul 2006)

Wes: Unfortunate if proved true, yet not an execuse to bomb mosques, churches and other infrastructures.

ArmyRick: Whatever makes you happy, just don't come after to blame the Arabs for suicide bombing!!!

Blackshirt: while true, so is the Israelis with their 4 class citizenens, and supreme beings theories and believe Messiah will come down to wipe out the non-believers.

After all, I liked the post someone made on this forum.....lets just wait and see whose Messiah, Imam, Prophet will come first as it seems everyone is waging their war on that basis of they are the chosen people.


----------



## a_majoor (23 Jul 2006)

The Laws of war protect churches, schools and hospitals from military action UNLESS they are being used for military purposes, whereupon they loose their protected status. Hezbollah makes use of this since they are well aware most of the media knows point one, but rarely explain or expand on point two. Using mosques, schools, houses, apartment blocks etc. as bunkers, arsenals and launching sites and ambulances as supply vehicles is both an attempt to hamstring the IDF (and by extension, Western forces who might become involved in the conflict) and as a information war tool against Western public opinion.

Of course Hezbollah thinks nothing of targetting hospitals, schools, synagogues or residential areas, and have modified their rockets by filling the warheads with ball bearings to create a cloud of shrapnel in order to maximize civilian casualties (even though it minimizes the rocket's destructive power against hard targets). If the IDF thought that way, their air force would be using iron bombs and carpet bombing Lebanon, not attacking targets with smart bombs and other PGM's.

Your remarks about Israel is very interesting. *All* citizens have the right to vote and serve in the IDF, sit as members of Parliament etc. and the religious beliefs about the coming of the Messiah apply to a very small fraction of the population (about the same proportion as Christian fundamentalists who believe the last days are upon us in Canada). The ruling parties are secular and fairly socialist in nature, the religious parties only have power to influence the government through the use of Proportional Representation as the voting mechanism in elections. This is an interesting contrast to the majority of the Arab nations surrounding Israel.......


----------



## KevinB (23 Jul 2006)

tamouh - your not directly linked to Hezbollah are you.  A VAST majority of your posts make me believe you are their poster boy.


----------



## big bad john (23 Jul 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> tamouh - your not directly linked to Hezbollah are you.  A VAST majority of your posts make me believe you are their poster boy.



Temper, Temper, Play nice now!


----------



## KevinB (23 Jul 2006)

Simply an honest question  ;D


----------



## GO!!! (23 Jul 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> Simply an honest question  ;D



No room for honesty here.

I'd still like to hear tamouh's reaction to a mosque being used to store Hizbollah weapons.

I suspect that he will continue to ignore this though, as it does not support his painfully obvious sympathies.


----------



## ArmyRick (23 Jul 2006)

tamouh, arab suicide bombers? How about we DON'T BLAME ISRAEL for bombing the daylights out of those who support terrorist?


----------



## tamouh (23 Jul 2006)

a_majoor: Israel probably has better democracy than most of the mid-east, yet, they continue an aggressive and racist agenda against their counter part Israeli Arabs and even further to Eastern European Jews who immigrated after 80s:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=293813

Infidel-6 & all those follow ur ideology: I'll leave u gentlemen to enjoy your Neo Con wars against the East and the West until (forsure it must happen one day!) Neo Cons prevail in the face of Evil and bring peace to our world.....and live happily ever after. 

What I know is little, what I've learned from here was tremendous and some of the conversations were great. I've no interest in the right nor the left. I'll be on the sidelines watching humanity descend to its final doom (or so they claim this will happen).

c ya around!


----------



## GO!!! (23 Jul 2006)

ArmyRick said:
			
		

> tamouh, arab suicide bombers? How about we DON'T BLAME ISRAEL for bombing the daylights out of those who support terrorist?



Nonsense!

We all know it is Israel's fault that religious zealots convince middle class youth to kill themselves, by creating the "root causes" of terror.

Conveniently, it is Israels fault both when it is attacked *and* when it attacks, and even if the attack is justified, it will be criticised as "disproportionate"

Where were all of the Lebanese in the streets screeching for peace when Israelis were being killed on buses and in bars by deranged suicide bombers?


----------



## Scott (23 Jul 2006)

tamouh said:
			
		

> What I know is little, what I've learned from here was tremendous and some of the conversations were great. I've no interest in the right nor the left. I'll be on the sidelines watching humanity descend to its final doom (or so they claim this will happen).
> 
> c ya around!



Awww, still gonna ignore the questions you don't like, eh?

Buh bye then.


----------



## KevinB (23 Jul 2006)

:

tamouh - why drop into "IM speak" now.  I had a serious question, since you tend to ignore or deflect pointed questions about the Hezbollah using the rules of land warfare as their own "pick-a-part" to use when needed and casually discard when not needed yet to cry foul when attacked.

I personally am not a "Neo-Con" a word that I find gets tossed around an inordinate amount of time.  No one is perfect in this matter.

I for one back the horse that I have most in common with - thus I will continue to support Israel in that endevour until they start hiding weapons in synagogues and sending in suicide bombers into civilian areas.


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Jul 2006)

Tamouh has ingored everthing we have asked him, from backing up his words, to his personal experiences and qualifications (his profile is simply EMPTY) and the only answers I personally get is that I am a rightwing extremist, or my response is baseless  :. Yes, I find it quite frusterating. Judging by his last post, and last few words, it looks like he is finally leaving us. A littel bit of group pressure, and he folded like a cheap house of playing cards! Implosion!

Although at times I find his points interesting (the enemy's view or denial of the truth), what really shytted me off was his failure to answer direct questions in depth, for example the last one I asked him about the rockets and weapons stashed in the mosque at the vill taken yesterday. I have now seen that on CNN, BBC and FOX, with some video of the items in question. I am sure he beleives this is untrue, and its file footage from someplace else.

Well, it looks like we are all a bunch of rightwing extremists, at least in his eyes. Its also possible he was a fraud, and just got sick of role-playing. He could have been some '40 something unemployed WASP fat boy' living in Milk River Alberta,  for all we know.

In reality if the enemy is using any building as a magazine or weapons cashe, its open slather. Even if its a church of my own religion.

Well fellow extremists, its just before 0700h, here on a winter's Monday morning in tropical paradise, and this hopeless infidel is going to have, yes you guessed it, some BACON and eggs. Thankgoodness I am on leave til Friday! 

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## couchcommander (23 Jul 2006)

Infidel-6 said:
			
		

> The kidnapping showed the Israeli's that not only was their populace vulnerable (the rocket attacks) but that detailed operations where being done on their soldiers to attemot to leverage the government.
> 
> Since the Lebanese gov't cannot/will not patrol their coountryside to ensure it cannot be used for attacks the onus fell on the IDF.



....it was a bit of satire, meant to show the thought process of some of these people.


----------



## George Wallace (23 Jul 2006)

He'll be back.  I am sure that once he figures everyone has forgotten their unanswered questions, Tamouh will be back.  I am sure the Army.ca Monkey on his back will not let him give up this addiction for long.


----------



## 1feral1 (23 Jul 2006)

You are right George, but since he has cut and run with his tail between his legs, he knows his credibility is now zero with us. 

Now to the bacon and eggs!

Regards,

Wes


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Jul 2006)

Don't get all down on Tamouh, now.  He was likely raised in hatred soup,and has been taught to hate Israel since he could first talk.  Even in the face of facts and reality, it is hard to forget your upbringing.  His ICQ profile used to have significantly more info, with info indicating he had been in the reserves,  and that he is from Jordan.  Oddly, his time spent in the CF has not brought him any closer to understanding us "Neo Cons".  Perhaps "time spent on recce" was closer to the motivation?  

If there is anything encouraging coming out of the middle east, it's that they are more western than we realized.  Think about it.  What greater bastion of western liberal thinking is there than to conduct yourself poorly, then complain when someone sorts you out?  Next, if we see Palestine or Lebanon try to sue Israel we can start getting excited.  They will be showing that they are almost there!  All we need to do is airlift in a bunch of iPods and set up HBO, fund a bunch of special programs for special interest groups (other than terrorism) and create a social welfare state that encourages handouts.  
ITS FLAWLESS!!  
Then, there won't be a shooting war, because Palestine and Lebanon will be sitting back making phone calls and expecting somebody else to do the work for them.  "Hey, Kofi!  WTF?!?!?  Where is my poured concrete driveway?  Get on it, man".  

Seriously though, how hard is it to figure out that if you are lingering in an area in southern Lebanon, you have a pretty good chance of getting fragged.  Time to leave.  Period.  At such time a Hezbollah sets up a missile battery on top of your building, and dumps a bunch of spare ammo in your living room, perhaps you may want to go for a little trip with the family up north.  And can you really bitch about getting bombed when they are sending out warnings first?  (not to say that being bombed isn't a bitch)
Can anyone indicate why the semi-legit government in Lebanon wouldn't take this opportunity to say "sheesh, thank Allah the Israelis are finally doing something.  Guys, smash through and help us keep those Syrian dinks out of here".  Lebanon would have it made in the shade.  Hezbollah would be screwed, and be trapped in Lebanon before they could screw off to Iran, and be exterminated in that part of the world.  Lebanon would be the new target to fire money at, instead of missiles, and would see an instant injection of money and industry.  What western business wouldn't love to tap that new market if stability could be assured?  From what I have heard, Lebanon used to be a beautiful country with heaps of potential.  Too bad they don't want to pick the winning team.  It's gonna cost them huge.  
Personally, I hope Israel rolls right through Lebanon and Palestine, secures the whole mess then turns it over to the UN NATO ummm, someone who can get the bloody thing sorted out once and for all.


----------



## GO!!! (24 Jul 2006)

So tamouh was a reservist eh?

I suppose he had no problem cashing our country's filthy, blood money cheques in exchange for his service. 

I'd say we should be investing a little more in screening our applicants if this is the type of "loyal Canadian" that slips through the cracks.


----------



## 1feral1 (24 Jul 2006)

You're not wrong, he has been active as of 1630 my time today, so he is still skulking about our AO, and no doubt has read this thread.

So we are not rid of him. I guess he did not have the intestinal fortitude to respond.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## tomahawk6 (24 Jul 2006)

The IDF has degraded Hizbollah's rocket capability and Syria has been unable to resupply them. Syria will either have to write off Hizbollah or ratchet up the fighting by opening a new front.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1153291981244


----------



## GAP (24 Jul 2006)

Even in that article and on commentary I've heard over the weekend, there seems to be a general concensus that Hezbollah shot itself in the foot. The media is having a hayday bashing Israel right now, but I think you will find that people, especially those in Lebanon will blame Hezbollah for instigating this whole thing.


----------



## Kirkhill (24 Jul 2006)

> Hizbullah is organized along military lines, with regional commands in southern, northern and central Lebanon. The unit in the south, called the "Katyusha Unit" by the IDF, consists of some 1,000 fighters who have been responsible for most of the rocket attacks on communities north of Acre and Amiad.
> 
> The unit has been able to recruit reserves, *but MI has noticed that it has run into difficulty convincing members of the terror group who reside in northern Lebanon to travel south to participate in the fighting. *



I think, if this is true, the lack of ability to bring its own "recruits" to the fight within their own borders is more significant than the fact the may eventually run out of rockets.


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Jul 2006)

There are two sides to every story guys.  And "Justice" is not spelled as "Just-us".  Last time I checked this was a free country, with free speech.  Everyone has an opinion, and you will not always agree with what is out there.  That's what makes our society different from one run by a Third World despot.  Why else do we allow a Federal and Provincial party that has the express desire to tear this country apart hold positions of authority within both levels of goverment and work towards this end.  I don't like it, but that is the price we pay to have a free society.

The men of my family have served this country in times of war and peace for over 150 years now and some of them have paid the ultimate sacrifice to ensure we have these freedoms today.  And before you start carping at me as to who the @#$@# am I to stand on the stump and put my two bits in, I am a serving member of the CF in the Reg Force with 5 yrs Res and 17+ yrs Reg and counting.  I continue my family's honour to put myself foreward for this country and all those who are a part of it.  And as a matter of fact am waiting for the word to go to the area as we speak.

Everyone here as long as they abide with the rules and conventions of this forum have a right to speak up, even if you don't agree with where they are coming from.  Tamouh included.  To do so otherwise, negates the sacrifice paid by so many before.  Shame!!


----------



## Kirkhill (24 Jul 2006)

You're right Jack.

Sometimes it is very easy to get drawn along on the tide.  If I got too personal with Tamouh then he/she has my apologies.  

I do not apologize for my comments otherwise. I was particularly bothered by his/her stated belief that the Arab/Muslim community would be in favour of "war without end".   I don't believe that to be likely.  I hope that that isn't the case.  I believe that such a sentiment is likely limited to the Jihadists, superimposing their own views over their community.  Hence my reaction to that assertion by Tamouh.  It is an imperfect link to him/her and jihadism but it is the link that caused my reaction.

Having said that: if Tamouh's assertion truly is reflective of reality then there really is no option other than war to the end and it is best to recognize that and accept it.  Presumably the Jihadists will get joy from their struggles.


----------



## ArmyRick (24 Jul 2006)

jollyjacktar, why shame? Explain? Its a debate. simple as that. We are letting Tamouh have his say and we are having ours. We challenge him on his statements and ask him to back them up. So why should we be shamed? Tell me? 
Then Tamouh basically said in one of his earlier post that if i supported Israel then be prepared for more arab suicide bombers. I disagree in a big way with such absolute statements. 

What trade are you? Please do enlighten us?


----------



## KevinB (24 Jul 2006)

+1 to ArmyRick


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Jul 2006)

ArmyRick.  Simply put, I noticed there were some here who expressed the desire to censor access to this forum to only those individuals who shared their particular POV.  From my location in reading the replies it was starting to get ugly and leave the realm of reasoned debate and degrade to the hallmarks of the start of a cyberspace curb stomp on someone who did not go with the flow.  That is not what this country is all about, or should not be.   That is not what I stand on guard for thee for, and I hope it is not in your case too.

( I am sorry but my first reply got screwed up and I lost it.  I hope this will clarify my stand for you.)  I am presently 0124, HT.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Jul 2006)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> There are two sides to every story guys.  And "Justice" is not spelled as "Just-us".  Last time I checked this was a free country, with free speech.  Everyone has an opinion, and you will not always agree with what is out there.  That's what makes our society different from one run by a Third World despot.  Why else do we allow a Federal and Provincial party that has the express desire to tear this country apart hold positions of authority within both levels of goverment and work towards this end.  I don't like it, but that is the price we pay to have a free society.
> 
> The men of my family have served this country in times of war and peace for over 150 years now and some of them have paid the ultimate sacrifice to ensure we have these freedoms today.  And before you start carping at me as to who the @#$@# am I to stand on the stump and put my two bits in, I am a serving member of the CF in the Reg Force with 5 yrs Res and 17+ yrs Reg and counting.  I continue my family's honour to put myself foreward for this country and all those who are a part of it.  And as a matter of fact am waiting for the word to go to the area as we speak.
> 
> Everyone here as long as they abide with the rules and conventions of this forum have a right to speak up, even if you don't agree with where they are coming from.  Tamouh included.  To do so otherwise, negates the sacrifice paid by so many before.  Shame!!



Thanks for the big lecture on freedoms.  Maybe try a little more "Jolly" and a little less "jack".  
Tamouh is an agitator and enjoys taking a very contrary view.  I don't think it's unreasonable that on a website full of soldiers that somebody that argues on the side of our enemies is going to draw heat.  I think we can all agree that Israel will not be winning any popularity contests in the middle east any time soon.  However three things from that.
One, they don't give a crap what anyone thinks other than their own people.
Two, the "do nothing" tactic has proven time and again to not be effective.  These terrorists have consistently vowed to destroy the nation of Israel, and anytime they aren't actively killing, they are planning and rearming.  Remember the collective thinking with regards to the Taliban pre 9-11?  The idea that "if we attack them, we make them martyrs and play into their plans" didn't really stop that attack then, did it.  
Three, every time Israel tries to make things right, some clown pulls a suicide bombing or some sort of attack and burns them for their efforts.  
The fight has to run it's course.  No diplomacy, no UN intervention.  A big, bloody fight.  Maybe if the normal people from Palestine and Lebanon get the idea that they are the only ones that can get themselves out of a jam, and don't want to see their homes and families brewed up, they will stop harbouring these terrorist clowns and get with the program.  
Seems the left didn't get this ramped up about Israeli civilian and child casualties.


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Jul 2006)

Well thank you, Sir, for your input.  So what if someone has a contrary view.  TFB.  That is the price you and I pay for enjoying the ability to have this view.  You don't have to agree with it.  I don't agree with extremist views from either camp, but they are out there.  Sorry fact of life I'm afraid.


----------



## KevinB (24 Jul 2006)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> I don't agree with extremist views from either camp, but they are out there.  Sorry fact of life I'm afraid.



and I'm looking for them...






 ;D


----------



## vonGarvin (24 Jul 2006)

Infidel-6:  ;D


----------



## 1feral1 (24 Jul 2006)

Hey Jolly, Tamouh cut his own throat on here. Opinions are simply that, but to hear the same crap spewing from his mouth without backup and deliberatly refusing to answer direct questions is what arced me up, which tends to have me thinking he was a fraud or at best a troll, looking for an audience. 

Before you go barking at us, read ALL of his posts. Although some have kinda some of merrit, look at the action he takes when he is backed into a corner. Many here have a different view than myself, and I repect that, but this guy went too far.

So, don't go throwing your TI back and saying SHAME, and go on about sacrifice of others, while comparing what has been said on here to Tamouh. We all know that price of our freedoms many take for granted was paid for with the blood of over 100,000 Canadians in the 20th century alone, and the price is still being paid right now. We all have our fare share of relatives who fought from Passchendaele Vimy, Ortona, Dieppe, D-Day and the rest through to Kapyong and beyond, including mine, some who never made it back, and we don't have to look too far for the recent sacrifices either!

To compare their sacrifice to a lone troll on here is crap, and PERSONALLY I find that in bad taste. I have great respect for our modern enemies (the real ones that is). I have no time for any pisss-pot shyte distrubers, no matter what their claims are on this site.

Regards,

Wes


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Jul 2006)

jollyjacktar said:
			
		

> Well thank you, Sir, for your input.  So what if someone has a contrary view.  TFB.  That is the price you and I pay for enjoying the ability to have this view.  You don't have to agree with it.  I don't agree with extremist views from either camp, but they are out there.  Sorry fact of life I'm afraid.



I guess having an avatar that looks like the Craker Jack guy makes one a little stuffy.  Relax, Tex.  If we all didn't support the right to express views, we wouldn't be on a DISCUSSION FORUM.  However, when someone starts making noises that are sympathetic to the enemy, you can't possible expect that they aren't going to take some heat.  Tamouh is a big boy (?) and can hold his own in a conversation.  He doesn't need you to come to his defence.  I also concur with reading some of his other posts and though lines, and his deliberate avoidance to answer questions put straight to him.  You just got here.  Take a bit of time and figure out the players and how things work.  You're bashing up against the wrong team.


----------



## ArmyRick (24 Jul 2006)

Jack, I wasn't going to say it earlier but why not? Your family has served this country for 150 + years? Interesting considering that Canada isn't even that old.


----------



## jollyjacktar (24 Jul 2006)

ArmyRick, yeah you got me.  Typing fast with poor math skills.  133 years.

Zipper, Wes et al.  I fully expected to feel the heat for opening my gate.  And if I get a well deserved shit kicking, well... then I had it coming.  Yes, I suppose in the grand scale of things I am a very new FNG.  As in real life, at times my mouth (and in this case fingers) can indeed start working before my brain can successfully engage to ensure a rational statement.  And if I am in the wrong, as happens many times, such is life, I pay the cost.  This is just a little more public than usual.

It seems I misjudged the general direction of feeling from some quarters towards posting.  What struck me as wrong, was my impression/interpretation that there should be only one train of thought allowed, period.  If you were to dissent, well doom on you and the swarming could then proceed and forget about having the moderators/directing staff censure.  I guess I still have some leftovers from my previous line of work in LE, and don't like to see anyone getting a shit kicking from a group.  Even if they deserve it.  I am glad to see there is support on the concept of expression of views, from both sides.  As it appears I got the wrong end of the stick and mob rule does not apply, I do most humbly apologise to all here.  

Lastly, Wes.  My TI.  Would not have mentioned it, but to some on these panels it does seem to be an important feature of cred.  Shan't mention it again.


----------



## ArmyRick (24 Jul 2006)

When discussing political issues age, life expiriences, etc, etc are all important if we are taking people's comments seriously.

If you had asked me at age 16 why then Prime Minister Brian Mulroney was bad, why the GST and free trade were not good I would have replied because everybody I know at school and my parents don't like him. I din't follow politics. At age 18 we think differently than say age 30, 40, etc, etc.

Now in my 30s after numerous years in the CF, owning a house, etc, etc I pay very close attention to politics now. Politics affects us all. In the military we see the direct results of poor or good federal leadership.


----------



## tomahawk6 (24 Jul 2006)

The IDF web site is a great source of information on Israeli operations in Lebanon.

http://www1.idf.il/DOVER/site/homepage.asp?clr=1&sl=EN&id=-8888&force=1


----------



## GO!!! (25 Jul 2006)

Jollyjack - tamouh still has'nt answered why he thinks Hezbollah should be allowed to store weapons in a mosque - but the Israelis should not be allowed to bomb it.

Like many supporters of despotic middle eastern kingdoms and savage dictatorships, it is hard to tell where the rhetoric ends and the argument begins, and tamouh is no exception.


----------



## Rey (25 Jul 2006)

I'm going to jump in with my 2c here in regard to the Mosque being bombed.

Just to be above board about this, I'm a Muslim.

If there are weapons being stored at a Mosque, it has (IMO) lost the protection as a house of worship, but with a few points.
Just be prepared for the fallout, most Muslims (myself included) will get p*ssed about this. It's an emotional reaction, not a logical one.

1. Is the intelligence strong, is it a wild a** guess, or is it a bomb it and let see what we find. I think there should be a strong level of proof for this.
2. When are you going to bomb it? At night is probably better, fewer people killed. You want to increase insurgent/terrorist ranks, bomb it during prayers.
3. This does not mean that all Mosques are now open game.


Just my opinion.


----------



## 1feral1 (25 Jul 2006)

Rey said:
			
		

> This does not mean that all Mosques are now open game.



Of course not Rey. War is war, and sometimes our enemies do extreme things to keep their weapons and ammo 'safe' . Over the years this has included the use of not only mosques or churches, but schools, hospitals and even museums as magazines and armouries, and even ambulances, TV marked vehicles and any other ruse they can find. Sadly its the innocent who always seem to pay. Thats the insanity of it all.

Instead of getting pisssed off at the good guys who bombed your mosque, why not get pisssed off at the bad guys who took advantage of your mosque and have a go at them.

Welcome to the website and I hope you enjoy yourself on here.

Regards,

Wes


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Jul 2006)

Welcome aboard Rey.  Look forward to hearing more from you.

Cheers.


----------



## couchcommander (25 Jul 2006)

I am always amazed at the ability of both sides to point fingers, become enraged at acts "beyond the pale", play innocent victim, and, for the most part, completely and utterly ignore anything that doesn't conform to their view.

The mass "death to Israel" demonstrations, cheering when westerners or jews get killed, active, widespread support for terrorist organizations, not to mention promoting them to government, while at the same time calling for war crimes investigations when a shell goes astray, justifying horrible acts because a family was living in a house whos basement was full of rockets, etc. etc. causes me to care less and less for the well being of certain societies. 

At the same time, Israel has been known to stir the pot, and they are not above taking an opportunity if it presents itself, even during a cease fire. 

IMO until BOTH sides have determined they have had enough, and actively choose to live together in peace, nothing will improve. As it's been said before, it almost has to get worse before it will get better.

I have to say though, I think the Israelis had been at that point for quite a while. They unilateraly disengaged, pulled out, and washed their hands of the mess. It could have been over then, Palestine could have been it's own state, Lebanon was free, it was really the best possible situation that could be resonably hoped for. 

The arab societies, however, haven't seemed to collectivly grasp the consequence of their actions yet. Goaded by other powers, it seems, they ruined what could have been their best chance. 

They pushed Israeli society to the point where again they have collectively came to view the resort to arms as an acceptable state of affairs. 

Who knows when they will again return to a point where they are ready to deal. IMO, and I hate to say this, but this was brought on by their own actions. 

Until arab society determines that the restort to terrorist actions in pursuit of unrealistic aims is a deviant action, contrary to the values of their society, and detremental to their well being, this will never end. 

.02 anywho


----------



## Kirkhill (25 Jul 2006)

> completely and utterly ignore anything that doesn't conform to their view.


  unlike people that discuss Global Warming?  ;D

I think that is why the military talks about HEARTS and minds campaigns. Reason and rationality only take you so far in human affairs.


----------



## couchcommander (25 Jul 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> unlike people that discuss Global Warming?  ;D



Well I know there's ONE side.... :dontpanic:

re: the actual topic.. it's more than just making people not hate you. Arab society will actually have change and label involvement in terrorist organizations as contrary to their values, and apply normative pressure to those who are involved in it. 

Once people start being ostracized, and "martyr" starts to be means of societal advancement only in marginal deviant subcultures, then we will see change.

IMO, and the pont of my rant, was that I don't think this will happen until the Arabs are collectively tired of being blown up, forced into refugee camps, and generally having little control over fundamental aspects of their lives - and then, most importantly, put pressure on those who perpetuate their state of affairs.


----------



## GO!!! (26 Jul 2006)

couchcommander said:
			
		

> IMO, and the pont of my rant, was that I don't think this will happen until the Arabs are collectively tired of being blown up, forced into refugee camps, and generally having little control over fundamental aspects of their lives - and then, most importantly, put pressure on those who perpetuate their state of affairs.



The biggest challenge will be simply convincing them that the ones who bear the most responsibility for their miserable lot in life are the elites who control their countries - not Jews, Americans or anyone else.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Jul 2006)

Rey said:
			
		

> I'm going to jump in with my 2c here in regard to the Mosque being bombed.
> 
> Just to be above board about this, I'm a Muslim.
> 
> ...




Well having been press ganged into being a Muslim (married a Malay) I have had a chance to study Islam a bit from the inside. I find it interesting how quickly Muslims degenerate other Muslim not of the same sect and excuse hundreds of mosque bombings by other Muslims by claiming they are not “real Muslims” 

Most of the Muslims I met oversea are decent people, but to quick to take offence. I have often said the problem with Islam like Christianity before, is that it has one foot in the physical world and one in the spiritual. It is time for Islam to let go of Shaira law and allow people to be spiritual on a personal level and not because they will be punished for stepping out of line.


----------



## FastEddy (26 Jul 2006)

Rey said:
			
		

> I'm going to jump in with my 2c here in regard to the Mosque being bombed.
> 
> Just to be above board about this, I'm a Muslim.
> 
> ...




Yes indeed there should be anger and fallout as you have described. But you never seem to vent it towards those who have set the stage, who at every opportunity orchestrate death and distruction of Innocent Men, Women and Children.

If your outrage is such, why don't you tear them out of their hiding places and drive them off as you would any rabid mad animal.

Bear in-mind, that no Military Commander takes any glee or pleasure in directing fire on a house of Worship , Hospital or Sanctuary. And if such action is necessary, the Intel is weighed very heavily. Even you must admit that the Terrorists of the Region are infamously noted for using these structures for military purposes and shields.


----------



## couchcommander (26 Jul 2006)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> The biggest challenge will be simply convincing them that the ones who bear the most responsibility for their miserable lot in life are the elites who control their countries - not Jews, Americans or anyone else.



My hippy self hates to say it, but I am almost in agreement with the phrase "Give war a chance". so +1


----------



## zipperhead_cop (26 Jul 2006)

couchcommander said:
			
		

> My hippy self hates to say it, but I am almost in agreement with the phrase "Give war a chance". so +1



 :rofl:

Somewhere a Beatle is spinning in his grave.
"Alllll we are sayyyying, is give war a chaaaaaaance"


----------



## Rey (26 Jul 2006)

Hi All,

I'm going to address a few points that I read through this thread. I'm working from memory, so please forgive any inaccuracies.


In regard to the post about people saying that Hezbollah being their protector.
I believe that statements shouldn't be taken in a vacum. In that regard I want to throw out a couple of things. 
1. Hezbollah has a very strong community assistance aspect, they supply services that are not otherwise available in certain areas. 
2. Sabra and Shatila are probably still strong in their minds. From my experience, people from the mid and far east have a long memory.


Destroying infrastructure.
A case could be made for destroying bridges, roads and some buildings in southern Lebanon. 
But I've heard reports of bombs falling in norther Lebanon (anecdotal, on radio). I've also read a couple of articles that mentioned attacks on hospitals in Beirut, a pharmaceutical factory (I believe), a papermill (Toilet paper?), Lebanese military barracks (Interesting, esp as the Israeli govt holds the position that they want the Lebanese Army to secure the southern border).
This morning was the news on the UN observation post getting hit - 3 dead 1 missing or 4 dead, also a report of 2 ambulances evacuating injured civilians from Tyre getting shot up - no one killed.

As a civilian, I really cannot see any military necessity to attack these targets


There were some comments along the line of "you elected them, its your fault".
You can't say have a democracy, but you can only have a party that we like. Like it or not, like the IRA, Hamas, Hezbollah and P.L.O. have both a terrorist/paramilitary and a political wing.


Thanks for the welcome, I look forward to the discussions

Stuff in response to my post

Me getting p*ssed about Mosques getting hit.
As I said, it's an emotional response. After I calm down and think about it, I do get p*ssed about insurgent/terrorist using a Mosque as a base for their actions. But I'm never happy with either side in such a situation.


Getting mad at the right people. (comment by FastEddy)
The description that you made (IMO) describes both sides of the conflict. Both sides should take their leaders to task for their actions. Until there is pressure on the people in power, nothing will change.

After I get used to the interface, I'll start quoting like normal people. Thanks for your patience.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Jul 2006)

Keep in mind that Hezbollah was seen by Indian peacekeepers using UN disguises to kidnap IDF soldiers, other sources here and elsewhere report seeing photo’s of armed Hezbollah using ambulances as transports. Plus they have a long history of using protected sites as shields. Your opponent will only tolerate so much of that stuff before saying “to bad”


----------



## Colin Parkinson (26 Jul 2006)

Last update - 19:02 26/07/2006	 	 	 


Canadian-Israeli prof. arrested on suspicion of spying for Hezbollah

By Tamara Traubmann and Yossi Melman, Haaretz Correspondents

A Canadian-Israeli professor has been held by Israeli authorities for 18 days without access to a lawyer, on suspicion of spying for Hezbollah and Iranian intelligence agents. A gag order on the case was lifted Wednesday after Haaretz appealed to Nazareth Magistrates Court. Professor Ghazi Falah was arrested while touring the Rosh Hanikra area, on July 8, four days before the outbreak of the current conflict in Lebanon. 



He was approached by individuals who identified themselves as security officials, and who instructed him to stop photographing. Falah refused, and after an argument, was arrested. Falah, a professor of geography at the University of Akron, said he had taken the pictures as part of his acadmic research.Before Wednesday, Falah had not been permitted to speak to his lawyer, Hussein Abu Hussein. The police and the Shin Bet security service repeatedly refused to lift the gag order placed on this case, despite wide publicity in media sources in Canada, U.S., and Britain. According to security officials, Falah is suspected of "spying for hostile sources, with the goal of harming state security," in reference to his alleged connections with Hezbollah and Iranian intelligence. They said Falah was allegedly sent by Hezbollah and Iran to various locations to photograph and report where rockets have landed in Israel. Security officials said Falah was photographing a military antenna in Rosh Hanikra. He recently took a trip to Beirut, and two years before visited Iran, where the Shin Bet believes he established contacts with Iranian intelligence officials. Falah has denied all suspicions against him, claiming the purpose of his trip to Beirut had to been to organize an international conference on geography in the Arab world. Fatah said his trip to Tehran had been in the company of Alex Murphy, former head of the American Geography Asscociation, and was solely for acadmic purposes. "I am a geographer and an Academic researcher, and I have never made any connections secret or illegal with intelliegence or terror sources," Falah told Haaretz in a statement given by his lawyer. Falah said all the pictures he had taken along the length of the strip outside of Nahariya were designated for his research, and the rest of the pictures were similar to those he took during his visits in Lebanon from Tyre southward until Israel.Falah's remand was extended Wednesday by four days. His lawyer, Hussein, has appealed to the Haifa District Court against the extension.Academics around the world have organized an international campaign on behalf of Falah, led by Murphy, calling on Israel to allow Falah due process, and to either present him with an indictment or release him. "I am greatly concerned by reports that he has not had access to a lawyer or been able to communicate with his family and friends," said Murphy.


----------



## Kirkhill (26 Jul 2006)

> You can't say have a democracy, but you can only have a party that we like.



Actually Rey you can.  Or rather we can say that you can have any party you like but we may not choose to treat with them and you will have to be responsible for the consequences of the decision to elect them and accept their policies.  I tried to say that here.

http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/22129/post-415706.html#msg415706


----------



## Brad Sallows (26 Jul 2006)

>1. Is the intelligence strong, is it a wild a** guess, or is it a bomb it and let see what we find. I think there should be a strong level of proof for this.

There's supposed to be strong supporting evidence.  The most variable factor is the nationality of the targeters.  Some nations hold to stricter standards than others.  As a hypothetical, if there was near-certainty that a location was being used to store munitions and also near-certainty that those munitions would be transferred elsewhere shortly, I'd be inclined to make the attack while they're in transit or at the new location.

>2. When are you going to bomb it? At night is probably better, fewer people killed. You want to increase insurgent/terrorist ranks, bomb it during prayers.

Time is always a factor taken into account by targeters.  If you were able to peruse target lists from prior conflicts, I expect you'd find targets for which no particular time of day mattered and were consequently attacked when they were expected to be least occupied.

>3. This does not mean that all Mosques are now open game.

It shouldn't.  Each target which does not normally have a purely military purpose is expected to be assessed on its own merits, within the time frame for which there is some applicable military necessity.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (26 Jul 2006)

Rey said:
			
		

> In regard to the post about people saying that Hezbollah being their protector.
> I believe that statements shouldn't be taken in a vacum. In that regard I want to throw out a couple of things.
> 1. Hezbollah has a very strong community assistance aspect, they supply services that are not otherwise available in certain areas.
> 2. Sabra and Shatila are probably still strong in their minds. From my experience, people from the mid and far east have a long memory.



With regards to point #1, I'm sure they do nice things for people.  If it was all suicide bombs and starvation they wouldn't be quite as popular.  They are aware of the "hearts and minds" concept as well.  But can you honestly say that Hezbollah or Hamas genuinely act in the interests of their people?  How is getting obliterated by Israel helping the average citizen of those countries?  What they do manage to do, is foment hatred and keep the fight alive, and that plays in to Iran's interests.  You can't honestly say that there was any legitimate reason for the Israeli soldiers to be kidnapped, other than to provoke this shooting war.  
So far as #2, sorry.  I don't know what those two names mean.  



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> Destroying infrastructure.
> A case could be made for destroying bridges, roads and some buildings in southern Lebanon.
> But I've heard reports of bombs falling in norther Lebanon (anecdotal, on radio). I've also read a couple of articles that mentioned attacks on hospitals in Beirut, a pharmaceutical factory (I believe), a papermill (Toilet paper?), Lebanese military barracks (Interesting, esp as the Israeli govt holds the position that they want the Lebanese Army to secure the southern border).
> This morning was the news on the UN observation post getting hit - 3 dead 1 missing or 4 dead, also a report of 2 ambulances evacuating injured civilians from Tyre getting shot up - no one killed.
> As a civilian, I really cannot see any military necessity to attack these targets



Hezbollah is being resupplied through Syria by Iran.  If you take out the bridges and communications, that makes it more difficult for them.  As well, that has the effect of carving the area into more manageable areas to secure.  As far as the soft targets, it is well known that the terrorists use the civilian structures to hide their weapons.  They aren't kidding anyone.  



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> There were some comments along the line of "you elected them, its your fault".
> You can't say have a democracy, but you can only have a party that we like. Like it or not, like the IRA, Hamas, Hezbollah and P.L.O. have both a terrorist/paramilitary and a political wing.



Hey, Hitler was elected, and he did some great things for Germany.  Nice highways and such.  However, I don't think that anyone would like to see that party come up for re-election again.  
I think it was Couchcommander who made a point about Arabs having to change their way of thinking in that they need to see suicide bombings and martyrdom as being bad things and socially unacceptable.  If the general population of Lebanon and Palestine supports these terrorist groups, then they have some serious perception problems.  Israel did what it promised and pulled back.  Those countries had a pretty good chance at getting sorted out, and they blew it.  That's where the "you made your bed, lie in it" sentiments come from.  There is no place for sidelines here.  You are for, or against.


----------



## Lost_Warrior (26 Jul 2006)

> Hezbollah is being resupplied through Syria by Iran.  If you take out the bridges and communications, that makes it more difficult for them.  As well, that has the effect of carving the area into more manageable areas to secure.  As far as the soft targets, it is well known that the terrorists use the civilian structures to hide their weapons.  They aren't kidding anyone.



But at what point do you stop and say "wait, if we destroy too much of the infrastructure, we are causing more than just a little collateral damage"

Israel can drop as many bombs as they want. These bombs have caused the loss of  200+ civilian lives so far and there is no sign of letting up, so you have to ask yourself how many lives are too much before Israel has to start changing tactics?

How many buildings have to be destroyed because a few Hezbollah militants are hiding inside?

It's a shame that Hezbollah uses civilian buildings to hide in, but at some point there will be no buildings and civilian infrastructure left standing, and then what are the Lebanese people supposed to do?    The excuse "Hezbollah uses people as shields" can only last so long.   They can't destroy the country and use that excuse to get away with it.

Every day innocent people die, and every day hatred for Israel grows.  All they are doing is recruiting more people who might one day walk on a bus in Israel ad blow him/herself up.


----------



## GO!!! (26 Jul 2006)

In regards to the targets being selected by the Israelis, it should be noted that Hezbollah's infrastructure is not limited to military and humanitarian interests.

Hezbollah is well known to operate a variety of legal business interests, and to profit greatly from them. This money is then used to support the terrorist wing of the party. 

The bombing of various factories and plants (IMHO) is an effort to hurt Hezbollah's ability to raise money within Lebanon, although we won't know this for sure until years after the fact. 

Why would the Israelis randomly bomb various private interests within Lebanon with no reason to do so? Most posters would agree with me here that a suffering populace is not a strategic goal in and of itself.


----------



## tomahawk6 (26 Jul 2006)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153292001539&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The news reports of the fighting inside Lebanon is very interesting and in some respects is somewhat like the tactics we have seen in Iraq. The Israelis are MOUT experts and yet they seem to have been caught by surprise. The lessons learned stuff I have read today indicates politicians are hamstringing the army. The  politicians are not satisfied with the generals in Northern Command and may bring back MG Ashkenazi former GOC Northern Command. The battle for Bin Jubeil was a setback for the IDF which took alot of casualties during the battle. Hizbollah has been able to build tunnels and command centers throughout southern Lebanon. It is a very tough slog. This type of battle is not something the IDF likes, rather they prefer mobile warfare which they are very good at. By the time Hizbollah is defeated and Israel is sitting on the Littani river they will have taken 400-600 killed and thousands wounded. For a small nation like Israel this is a very high price but one the nation will pay for its survival.


----------



## GAP (26 Jul 2006)

Is that not what the bunker buster bombs are for? Those tunnel systems can be pretty extensive.


----------



## FastEddy (27 Jul 2006)

Lost_Warrior said:
			
		

> Every day innocent people die, and every day hatred for Israel grows.  All they are doing is recruiting more people who might one day walk on a bus in Israel ad blow him/herself up.




So whats your point !, they've been doing that anyway for decades (without provocation).

Maybe its time to pay the piper.


----------



## 1feral1 (27 Jul 2006)

Lost_Warrior said:
			
		

> Every day innocent people die, and every day hatred for Israel grows.  All they are doing is recruiting more people who might one day walk on a bus in Israel ad blow him/herself up.



Every single child or innocent person killed by the Israeli's collateral damage is admittedly regretful by the IDF, and their government. Meanwhile every rocket fired into Israel, and every child or innocent person KILLED is deliberate and is seen as a victory and a trimuph to the Hezbollah. After all Hezbollah's main mission in life is to wipe Israel off the planet.

Masked Hezbollah gunmen walk around built up areas, kids and families near by, the UAVs pickup the gunmen, and fire a Hellfire at them. Thats one example alone. Then to have a purpose built room in houses dedicated for ammo/wpns/rocket  storage and a deliberate concrete pad on ones roof, or in one yard for launching rockets, etc makes things a target.

The Hezbollah are USING the locals (thats a crime in itself, but remember they don't think like we do, life is cheap over there), and have bought their way in with the 'hearts and minds' practice, plus I am also sure intimidation and pressure tactics have been used to.

One sees the gunmen going about their normal business as locals of all ages saunter by without care. Why are they staying and not leaving? or at least not indoors? Hummmm. The locals have been warned, adn have made their choice.

Now Hezballah ups the anti saying they will strike deeper into Israel with bigger rockets. Of course the IDF will respond, Wouldn't we if we were in thesame situation? You better believe we would.

Thats war!

Again a few cents from the old dog,

Wes


----------



## GAP (27 Jul 2006)

this on CNN
Al Qaeda: War with Israel is 'jihad'
Says Arab and Islamic governments complicit; Muslims must fight
http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/07/27/zawahiri.ap/index.html

Thursday, July 27, 2006 Posted: 1233 GMT (2033 HKT) 

CAIRO, Egypt (AP) -- Al Qaeda's No. 2 leader issued a worldwide call Thursday for Muslims to rise up in a holy war against Israel and join the fighting in Lebanon and Gaza until Islam reigns from "Spain to Iraq."

In a taped message broadcast by Al-Jazeera television, Ayman al-Zawahiri said the terrorist organization would not stand idly by while "these (Israeli) shells burn our brothers.

"All the world is a battlefield open in front of us," said the Egyptian-born al-Zawahiri, second-in-command to Osama bin Laden.

"The war with Israel does not depend on cease-fires ... . It is a Jihad for the sake of God and will last until (our) religion prevails ... from Spain to Iraq," al-Zawahiri said. "We will attack everywhere." Spain was controlled by Arab Muslims until they were driven from the country at the turn of the 16th century.
More on link


----------



## Lost_Warrior (27 Jul 2006)

> So whats your point !, they've been doing that anyway for decades (without provocation).
> 
> Maybe its time to pay the piper.



Since when were your average Lebanese civilians blowing themselves up every day in Israel?


----------



## Rey (27 Jul 2006)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Keep in mind that Hezbollah was seen by Indian peacekeepers using UN disguises to kidnap IDF soldiers, other sources here and elsewhere report seeing photo’s of armed Hezbollah using ambulances as transports. Plus they have a long history of using protected sites as shields. Your opponent will only tolerate so much of that stuff before saying “to bad”



I have seen the article, but in how many instances were Hezbollah dressed as UN. How many UN patrols have travelled along the Lebanon/Israel border. If it has been 1 instance in 100, it doesn't seem to me to be a reasonable action to attack them randomly, especially if the patrol is on the Lebanese side of the border.
The position that was attacked was an unarmed observation post, in fact another person had posted a link to a CBC interview with the Canadian from the very position that was attacked. 
The same position called the IDF about the fact that bombs were falling near their position

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0726-05.htm

IF they are setting up a rocket pointing at Israel, then yes, it's probably wise to act.
My point is that if a only a minority of UN patrol/units have been Hezbollah in UN uniform, you can't say to bad and attack randomly

I hold the same position on attacks on ambulances. Out of all the attacks on ambulances, how many were documented to have carried arms. Again, if it's only a small percentage, I can't see targetting ambulances as being a moral action.

Are protected sites being targetted due to intelligence or hit and lets see what we find.

Saying that there is a long history of a certain act is not proof. 

At what point are these three thing you mentioned considered safe.
I'll use the ambulance as a an example. An ambulance is attacked and found to have been carrying arms, the next 30 are not, how much longer do you keep attacking ambulances? How can you differentiate between explosives or oxygen tanks exploding in an ambulances.


----------



## Ty (27 Jul 2006)

Rey said:
			
		

> I have seen the article, but in how many instances were Hezbollah dressed as UN. How many UN patrols have travelled along the Lebanon/Israel border. If it has been 1 instance in 100, it doesn't seem to me to be a reasonable action to attack them randomly, especially if the patrol is on the Lebanese side of the border.



I don't believe that Israel should have ever bombed a UN position knowingly (still not proven they did)  

But, even if they felt that militants were using the UN base as cover, they still did not (based on infromation thus far) warn the UN members to vacate the area- even after repeated calls from an Irish Lt-Colonol stationed there.  

*If* this was a deliberate action and *if* the IDF did not warn of this action, then I hope Canada will demand that all ranks (military or govermental) that knew and acted in the attack are brought to justice.


----------



## Rey (27 Jul 2006)

Kirkhill said:
			
		

> Actually Rey you can.  Or rather we can say that you can have any party you like but we may not choose to treat with them and you will have to be responsible for the consequences of the decision to elect them and accept their policies.  I tried to say that here.
> 
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/22129/post-415706.html#msg415706



I read the posting, I can't disagree with it. In fact I agree with it.

My original intent, in a broad way, was to reply to the person who had said that becuase Hezbollah was elected to the Lebanese govt, the Lebanese people had to accept the attacks on them as a result.

I agree govt's can choose who to treat with. 

But if you're trying to encourage democracy, shouldn't you at least keep an open line of communications with democratically elected govt's you don't like? In the case of Lebanon, shouldn't the international community (esp USA) do there best to be even handed. It would be a difficult (but necessary) task, I think, to support the Lebanese govt but show displeasure with Hezbollah's militant arm. Something for those far wiser than myself to figure out.

Allowing a newly re-emerging democracy to be, in essence, destroyed will not advance the call for democracy.


----------



## GAP (27 Jul 2006)

> But if you're trying to encourage democracy, shouldn't you at least keep an open line of communications with democratically elected govt's you don't like



The have...communication with the legitimately elected Lebanese government has never stopped, they were just ineffective


----------



## Rey (27 Jul 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> ...cut...
> So far as #2, sorry.  I don't know what those two names mean.
> ...cut...



Honest, I'm not trying to flood the thread. Just a slow day at work.


Some information on Sabra and Shatila

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabra_and_Shatila_massacre
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2255902.stm

I found both articles (IMO) to be fairly neutral, you could probably find more information by Goolgling the names.

Something I just read, thought it might make an interesting counterpoint to the original post on the thread.

Hezbollah surprised by onslaught
Wednesday 26 July 2006, 2:26 Makka Time, 23:26 GMT  

A senior Hezbollah official has said that he did not expect Israel to react so strongly to the group's capture of two Israeli soldiers two weeks ago.
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/3FB0807A-DA38-455C-BDCB-C1A47655E8B7.htm


----------



## GAP (27 Jul 2006)

Interesting Read

In the heat - and stupidity - of battleThu, July 27, 2006  By RACHEL MARSDEN Toronto Sun
http://www.torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Marsden_Rachel/2006/07/27/1704239.html

As the Israeli military continues to kill Hezbollah Islamic terrorists in Lebanon, finally a country other than the U.S. is taking a turn at doing the heavy lifting in the terror war. 

But where there's war, there's also idiocy. Here are just a few examples from the past week: 

* Some media commentators are saying Lebanon is an innocent victim. Hezbollah bombed the U.S. Embassy in Beirut, with the support of Syria and Iran, back in 1983. Lebanon has repeatedly been asked, most recently via UN Resolution 1559 in 2004, to disarm Hezbollah. Instead, it has allowed the terrorists to sit in the Lebanese parliament. That's like having Tony Soprano as a houseguest. One day, someone will inevitably bust down your door and trash the place, with you in it. 

* A few analysts say this is the start of World War III. Where have these people been? World War III began when Islamic terrorists ventured out of the Middle East and perpetrated an act of war on nearly 3,000 people from 87 countries on 9/11, and continued with last year's London subway bombings. 

* Thousands of Canadians were in Lebanon when the bombing started. Here's a press release the UN issued: "The Secretary-General condemns the continued bombings in Lebanon, where an explosion in Beirut late Saturday killed two people and injured at least eight others. He is especially saddened that this latest attack, the third in Lebanon in only a week, was carried out on the eve of Easter." The thing is, this notice was from March of last year. How freaking thick do you have to be to not notice people being killed around you, or the five State Department warnings issued since November 2004? Maybe investing in a basic Internet connection would have saved some of these folks (and us) all that whining about the lack of air conditioning during the evacuation. 

* Critics here and abroad complained about the speed of evacuation efforts. Sorry if we don't rush right over there on demand! Heaven forbid we take our time to prevent potential terrorists from catching a free flight to our country. I don't think we should be using Canadian passports to determine whom to rescue. The chief weapons buyer for the Tamil Tigers, and several al-Qaida terrorists, have fake Canadian passports. Instead, we should be checking for Shoppers Drug Mart or Safeway points cards as proof of Canadian residency. 

* Exiled hate preacher Omar Bakri, to whom the 9/11 suicide bombers are bigger than The Beatles, now wants the Brits to bail him out of Lebanon. Hey Omar, this is your Super Bowl Sunday and the Israeli Defence Forces are waiting for you. Get in the game, big guy! 

* Britain's Sun newspaper reports that 27 Iranian suicide bombers are heading to Lebanon. The group's spokesman says that the wannabe martyrs "were picked from 55,000 who registered in Iran. They were briefed and have completed the 'relevant courses.'" I'm guessing they were at the bottom of the class, because the star students at self-detonation school wouldn't have survived the final exam, would they? But in a war rife with idiots, they'll fit right in.


----------



## Brad Sallows (27 Jul 2006)

>I don't believe that Israel should have ever bombed a UN position knowingly (still not proven they did)  

>But, even if they felt that militants were using the UN base as cover, they still did not (based on infromation thus far) warn the UN members to vacate the area- even after repeated calls from an Irish Lt-Colonol stationed there.  

>*If* this was a deliberate action and *if* the IDF did not warn of this action, then I hope Canada will demand that all ranks (military or govermental) that knew and acted in the attack are brought to justice.

Where is it written that the UN should receive considerations which would not be due to a farmer whose property was misused by combatants?


----------



## Lost_Warrior (27 Jul 2006)

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2235354&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312


> METULLA, Israel July 25, 2006 — On the Israeli border today diplomacy meant very little as troops prepared to expand the war into southern Lebanon.
> 
> On one road in the north, we counted 20 tanks lining up and more on the way.
> 
> ...




Is anyone else troubled by the last few lines?


----------



## GO!!! (27 Jul 2006)

Lost_Warrior said:
			
		

> http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2235354&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
> 
> Is anyone else troubled by the last few lines?



Not really. 

There has been heavy fighting in that area for in excess of two weeks now, and the locals have been warned to leave more than once. 

I would contend that;

1) people who stick around for military engagements are probably involved and;

2) In the common manner of the press, they took the quote from the thickest looking guy they could find, and presented it in such a way that it supported the editorial aims of that paper. Sensationalistic quoting, nothing more.


----------



## Lost_Warrior (27 Jul 2006)

That’s true, although speaking to a buddy of mine who returned from Lebanon not too long ago, a lot of people have not been heaving to the warnings to leave.  The roads are too badly damaged and public transportation is non existent in that part of the country right now, and many are afraid to even step foot outside with all the fighting and artillery dropping.   

There are still a lot of people there who are non combatants, so here's hoping the soldiers attitude is an isolated incident.


----------



## Roy Harding (27 Jul 2006)

Lost_Warrior said:
			
		

> http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2235354&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312
> 
> Is anyone else troubled by the last few lines?



Absolutely.

Go!!  Consider that people who "stick around for military engagements" are, possibly, civilians who live there - and have nowhere else to go.  They're just hoping like hell that they, their family, and their house will make it through.  I have relatives who did the same thing in WWII in Europe.  Just stayed there while the war raged around them.

Whilst I support Israel's strategic direction in this action, I am not so supportive of all their tactics - or at least the tactics which have been attributed to them.


----------



## tomahawk6 (27 Jul 2006)

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153292016359&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

The thing that most impressed Capt. Yisrael Friedler, commander of A Company in the Golani Brigade's Battalion 51, during the bloody battle in Bint Jbail on Wednesday, was the way the junior commanders conducted themselves after their officers had been hit by Hizbullah gunfire. 

"The moment their officers went down," he told The Jerusalem Post Thursday, "the sergeants took their radios and began reporting in and managing the battle, while at the same time taking charge of evacuating the wounded. It was the height of professionalism," he said. 

The firefight began early in the morning when two companies, A and C, began advancing down one of Bint Jbail's streets on parallel routes. Contrary to previous reports, Friedler said, the Hizbullah fighters were not lying in ambush. "Both sides were unaware of each other and it was actually one of our soldiers who saw them first and opened fire." 

But the Hizbullah men were in upper stories of buildings and had a commanding view of the IDF force. In the initial firing, 30 members of C Company, a third of its total strength, were hit, as was the battalion's deputy commander, Maj. Roi Klein. 

Eight soldiers were killed and 22 were wounded in the battle. "It was all so very fast," remembered Friedler, "the shooting, the shouting, cries of the wounded and the warnings over the radio sets." 

Most of the fighting took place at extremely short-range, sometimes only a few meters, with both sides using hand grenades and anti-tank missiles. 

Friedler's company began laying down supporting fire to enable the remaining soldiers of C Company to evacuate their wounded while continuing to shoot at the enemy. Two additional Golani companies were rushed in to help with the evacuation. 

"The real heroism was that of the stretcher-bearers who went in to the killing zone no less than six times to carry the wounded out to the building where we began treating them," said Friedler. 

Hours later, IAF Blackhawk helicopters managed to land under heavy fire and fly the wounded to Rambam Medical Center in Haifa. 

The commanders decided not to risk helicopters to evacuate the dead; they were carried out under cover of darkness by a company from the Golani's Brigade 12. 

Five soldiers from A Company were also wounded in the fighting, including Friedler: A bullet went right through his hand. He continued commanding the force and was only evacuated the next day to hospital, where he underwent surgery. 

"The battle began to their advantage. They were in a much better position, but we won and killed at least 20 Hizbullah fighters. None of the soldiers panicked, they were professional throughout, and that's our advantage over Hizbullah," Friedler said. 

As part of their standard exercises, Golani soldiers practice scenarios where all the commanders and half of the soldiers are wounded, "but nothing can really prepare you for it when it really happens," he said. 

A Company was has been in action for the entire last month, ever since the capture of Cpl. Gilad Shalit at Kerem Shalom on June 25. For two weeks, the company took part in the battalion's offensive against Kassam missile crews near Beit Hanun in the northern Gaza Strip, and they were sent north shortly after the battle against Hizbullah began on July 12. 

Friedler will be 27 in a week. He grew up in Jerusalem after emigrating from Brazil at the age of 11. Before his army service he studied at the Ma'aleh Gilboa Yeshiva. 

His first child is expected to be born in a month's time. His has spent his entire military career in the Golani, mostly with its elite antitank Orev unit, where he was a team commander and the deputy commander of the unit. He took command of A Company nine months ago.


----------



## mcqueen (28 Jul 2006)

Wow.  I was watching Anderson Cooper 360 last night on CNN, and he showed how easy it was to set up one of these Katusha rockets.  You could put one of these things in a backpack and transport it around on a bike.  The launching mechanism makes the Taliban equivalent look pretty primative.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jul 2006)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Go!!  Consider that people who "stick around for military engagements" are, possibly, civilians who live there - and have nowhere else to go.  They're just hoping like hell that they, their family, and their house will make it through.  I have relatives who did the same thing in WWII in Europe.  Just stayed there while the war raged around them.



Except in WWII for the most part the players were in uniform.  This is not the same deal.  I don't buy the "don't have anywhere to go" bit.  Grab your crap, kids and kit and walk, bike, hitch north.  I'm betting if you are on a road with all your stuff you have a better chance of being ignored by incoming ordinance than to watch as the buildings come down around you.  And if there is going to be any humanitarian efforts, it will be in the more secure north.
I didn't buy that line when the hurricane his New Orleans either.  Bad things are coming.  Beat it.  



			
				Roy Harding said:
			
		

> Whilst I support Israel's strategic direction in this action, I am not so supportive of all their tactics - or at least the tactics which have been attributed to them.



Then what do you suggest?  A door to door canvass?  
"Hi, my name is Lyle Herzog, and I'm from the Israeli Terror Cencus Department.  Would there be any Hezbollah members within today?  No?  Do you have any missiles or stockpiled ammunitons here?  No?  Well, super!  Thanks for participating in an ITCD survey.  Please put this blue sticker on your door to indicate that we were here.  Shalom!"  
It is Hezbollah's chosen tactics which require the IDF to do what they are doing.


----------



## FastEddy (28 Jul 2006)

Lost_Warrior said:
			
		

> Every day innocent people die, and every day hatred for Israel grows.  All they are doing is recruiting more people who might one day walk on a bus in Israel ad blow him/herself up.




My point was, Arab, Islamic Terrorist Fractions have been doing that anyway.  

Israel does not have to give any Arab Nation additional reason to promote their total Destruction and Demise from the region, it favourably exists, and has, since their conception.

As for the poor Innocent Lebanese, they are just as guilty as the Hezbollah, by reason of association and for supporting and permitting them to establish in their Country. And if you don't think so, you probilly think pigs can fly too.

As "Zipperhead_cop" said, if the bombs are coming , Run don't Walk , where , to your good friends in Syria.


----------



## KevinB (28 Jul 2006)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> As for the poor Innocent Lebanese, they are just as guilty as the Hezbollah, by reason of association and for supporting and permitting them to establish in their Country. And if you don't think so, you probilly think pigs can fly too.
> 
> As "Zipperhead_cop" said, if the bombs are coming , Run don't Walk , where , to your good friends in Syria.



+1


----------



## Rey (28 Jul 2006)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> My point was, Arab, Islamic Terrorist Fractions have been doing that anyway.
> 
> Israel does not have to give any Arab Nation additional reason to promote their total Destruction and Demise from the region, it favourably exists, and has, since their conception.
> 
> ...



In regard to the Terrorist factions comment. That can be discussed in depth with a lot of finger pointing. Ultimately, my response is, certain groups feel they have a grievance. Until they feel their grievance is being addressed, they will continue to act. *WE* can discuss the offers and counteroffers, but again, unless the parties involved believe the offer is fair, these acts will continue.

A very nebulous comment, but there are so many terrorist/insurgent groups, each with their own goals.

I honestly believe, rhetoric aside, that no Arab or Muslim govt actually believes that the distruction of Israel is possible. It has to strong a military and patron. 
Much of the anger towards Israel (in my experience) is based around the perception in the Arab and Muslim community of inhumane treatment of Palestinians and that it can act "above the law".

Whether this perception is true or false would be an entirely different thread.

Hezbollah was formed in '82 as a reaction to Israel occupying southern Lebanon. Lebanon was in turmoil at that point and the IDF had worn out their welcome, as such, it had the support of the Shia community. After the retreat of the IDF and the civil war, it was too powerfull to destroy. Lebanon does not have a powerfull enough military to forcibly disarm Hezbollah, and to try it by force may put Lebanon into a civil war.

So the Lebanese really could not control the creation of Hezbollah, and at this time cannot force then to disarm.

Hezbollah is now heavily involved with community services including Community Centres, Mosques, Hospitals, and government. With all of these tendrils into everyday society, it is very easy to support and/or associate with Hezbollah.

According to what I've read, Lebanon is 40% Shia, 40% Christian and 20% Sunni. Most of the Shia voted for the Hezbollah party, so are the 60+% who did not vote Hezbollah just as guilty as everyone else?

I don't mean to make Hezbollah look like angels, I just want to show that we are dealing with a country with its own problems and dynamics. Making broad statements without trying to understand these dynamics trivializes the issues at hand.



Finally, about the "Run, don't walk" comment.
We are talking about evacuating a large area with people of different problems, remember this country is just recovering from chaos. To put this in terms North Americans can understand, consider the evacuation for hurricane Katrina. This is in a First world nation with undamaged infrastructure around a mostly urban area. Now consider you are talking about a rural area in a country with badly damaged infrastructure.

Other issues I can think of: 
old, sick - require special assistance to be moved.
no transportation/gas - to poor to own a vehicle or gas shortage. 
Refugee camp - Large mass of people - no mass transportation.
fear. 

To be, possibly, killed at home or on the road. Not a decision I could make

Jets 'incinerate' fleeing family
by Jihad Siqlawi in Tyre
July 16, 2006 06:34am

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,19806454-5005961,00.html


Published on Monday, July 24, 2006 by the Guardian / UK
Blasted by a Missile on the Road to Safety
Family ordered to flee were targeted because they were driving minivan
by Suzanne Goldenberg

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0724-02.htm


The Times  	July 24, 2006
Fleeing civilian vehicles hit by Israeli missiles

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-3-2282992-3,00.html


'Save us,' she screamed as another shell landed
Suzanne Goldenberg in Tibnin, Lebanon
Wednesday July 26, 2006

http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329538242-103552,00.html


----------



## Colin Parkinson (28 Jul 2006)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> My point was, Arab, Islamic Terrorist Fractions have been doing that anyway.
> 
> Israel does not have to give any Arab Nation additional reason to promote their total Destruction and Demise from the region, it favourably exists, and has, since their conception.
> 
> ...



Actually I would argue that Israel has likely saved more Muslim lives than it has taken, it is about the only thing they agree on. Without Israel I suspect that the various countries would have fought some very nasty little wars against each other, just look at the death toll from the Iraq-Iran war, 1.2 million! No Israel would mean that they could focus on their Sunni-Shia feud and go about killing each other off in far greater numbers than they already are.


----------



## GAP (28 Jul 2006)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Actually I would argue that Israel has likely saved more Muslim lives than it has taken, it is about the only thing they agree on. Without Israel I suspect that the various countries would have fought some very nasty little wars against each other, just look at the death toll from the Iraq-Iran war, 1.2 million! No Israel would mean that they could focus on their Sunni-Shia feud and go about killing each other off in far greater numbers than they already are.



So lets give them New Brunswick for 20 years, then they can go back to an empty waste, clean up the clutter, and get on with things.


----------



## vonGarvin (28 Jul 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> So lets give them New Brunswick for 20 years, then they can go back to an empty waste, clean up the clutter, and get on with things.


Hey!  I live in New Brunswick!  Does this mean I have to move, or can I just share the land?


----------



## GAP (28 Jul 2006)

von Garvin said:
			
		

> Hey!  I live in New Brunswick!  Does this mean I have to move, or can I just share the land?



You can share, eh....that is if change to Judaism...


----------



## KevinB (28 Jul 2006)

Rey said:
			
		

> Hezbollah was formed in '82 as a reaction to Israel occupying southern Lebanon. Lebanon was in turmoil at that point and the IDF had worn out their welcome, as such, it had the support of the Shia community. After the retreat of the IDF and the civil war, it was too powerfull to destroy. Lebanon does not have a powerfull enough military to forcibly disarm Hezbollah, and to try it by force may put Lebanon into a civil war.



Hezbollah was formed by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard to create an insurgency in Lebanon.

They are a terrorist org and need to be destoryed - FULL STOP


----------



## Infanteer (28 Jul 2006)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> As for the poor Innocent LebaneseIsraelis, they are just as guilty as the HezbollahIDF, by reason of association and for supporting and permitting them to establish in their Country. And if you don't think so, you probilly think pigs can fly too..



So I guess by your logic, suicide bombings in downtown Tel Aviv are justified, no?  Funny, when the other side uses the same calculus you just used, he is a "dirty savage arab terrorist"....

This thread is rapidly approaching its expiration date.  They should give some of you guys a "virtual lebanon" to battle things out with online islamist supporters.

I'm still waiting, after 16 pages, for someone to convince me that Israel will be capable of uprooting an established guerilla movement, especially when you consider that the US has had quite the time dealing with a not-so-established one in Iraq.  Remember how well flattening Fallujah worked?  I'm all for Israel living peacefully and ending the threat that Hezbollah poses to a peaceful conclusion, but acting tactically and not thinking strategically is not a good way to do so.  I will now look for a Sun Tzu quote to put here....


----------



## Rey (28 Jul 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> ...cut...
> I'm still waiting, after 16 pages, for someone to convince me that Israel will be capable of uprooting an established guerilla movement, especially when you consider that the US has had quite the time dealing with a not-so-established one in Iraq.  Remember how well flattening Fallujah worked?  I'm all for Israel living peacefully and ending the threat that Hezbollah poses to a peaceful conclusion, but acting tactically and not thinking strategically is not a good way to do so.  I will now look for a Sun Tzu quote to put here....



Not going to be me. I don't think you can quash an established guerrilla movement by force.

How about:

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
- Sun Tzu

Or was that a rhetorical question?


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jul 2006)

Rey said:
			
		

> In regard to the Terrorist factions comment. That can be discussed in depth with a lot of finger pointing. Ultimately, my response is, certain groups feel they have a grievance. Until they feel their grievance is being addressed, they will continue to act. *WE* can discuss the offers and counteroffers, but again, unless the parties involved believe the offer is fair, these acts will continue.
> A very nebulous comment, but there are so many terrorist/insurgent groups, each with their own goals.



This fight has been being fought for thousands of years.  Maybe there will always be dissidents, but a decisive victor needs to emerge.  In that Israel has been putting up with horrifying crap for decades speaks to the restraint they have shown in trying to appease the world opinion.  



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> I honestly believe, rhetoric aside, that no Arab or Muslim govt actually believes that the distruction of Israel is possible. It has to strong a military and patron.



Okay, so we agree on that.  So what is the point of smashing up against the wall that you know will not be going anywhere.  These countries need to grab a big slice of "get over it" and get on with the business of living.  Or don't complain about the business of killing.  If they are being seduced by the lure of hatred by Iran, then that brings us back to "why are we holding a torch for these people".



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> Hezbollah was formed in '82 as a reaction to Israel occupying southern Lebanon. Lebanon was in turmoil at that point and the IDF had worn out their welcome, as such, it had the support of the Shia community. After the retreat of the IDF and the civil war, it was too powerfull to destroy. Lebanon does not have a powerfull enough military to forcibly disarm Hezbollah, and to try it by force may put Lebanon into a civil war.
> So the Lebanese really could not control the creation of Hezbollah, and at this time cannot force then to disarm.



So they can still help with intelligence info.  Surely they could make a phone call, or post a note on an internet site?  If there was a steady stream of information about Hezbollah weapon locations and movements, the people there might get a bit more of a nod, for no other reason than you don't want to blow up your intelligence network.  I am fairly confident that some of the strikes we are seeing in the urban areas are as a result of intel developed by contacts that are there.  Guided munitions are expensive, and if for no other reason it does not make military sense to bomb out a place that is just some random living tenement.  



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> Hezbollah is now heavily involved with community services including Community Centres, Mosques, Hospitals, and government. With all of these tendrils into everyday society, it is very easy to support and/or associate with Hezbollah.
> According to what I've read, Lebanon is 40% Shia, 40% Christian and 20% Sunni. Most of the Shia voted for the Hezbollah party, so are the 60+% who did not vote Hezbollah just as guilty as everyone else?



It isn't a case of guilt.  It is a case of complicity.  If 60% of the country is against Hezbollah, then it doesn't make sense that they should be running the show.  If it is a case of fear of taking action, why should that be an issue for Israel.  There will be hundreds of tragic stories out of this, but routing out Hezbollah needs to happen.  Nobody else is getting it done.  



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> I don't mean to make Hezbollah look like angels, I just want to show that we are dealing with a country with its own problems and dynamics. Making broad statements without trying to understand these dynamics trivializes the issues at hand.



I think everyone agrees that the whole area is a tangled web of interests, history and ideology.  However, I would compare it to when your kid gets gum in their hair.  You might try to get it out gently, but ultimately you know you are going to need to take scissors and hack the whole thing out.  



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> Finally, about the "Run, don't walk" comment.
> We are talking about evacuating a large area with people of different problems, remember this country is just recovering from chaos. To put this in terms North Americans can understand, consider the evacuation for hurricane Katrina. This is in a First world nation with undamaged infrastructure around a mostly urban area. Now consider you are talking about a rural area in a country with badly damaged infrastructure.
> Other issues I can think of:
> old, sick - require special assistance to be moved.
> ...



First off, anyone who CHOSE to stay behind in New Orleans kind of made their bed then got to sleep in it.  Yes, potentially getting your stuff looted is unfortunate, but again that is not a consideration to be weighed.  Ones life should take precedence over ones personal belongings.  
As for at home or on the road, of course the road is the way to go.  Perhaps don't travel in a Hezbollah convoy or drive near missile batteries.  



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> Jets 'incinerate' fleeing family
> by Jihad Siqlawi in Tyre
> July 16, 2006 06:34am
> 
> http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,19806454-5005961,00.html



From that article:

It said in a statement that it had targeted the area near Tyre because it was "used as launching grounds for missiles fired by Hezbollah terror organisation at Israel".
"The IDF (Israeli Defence Force) regrets civilian casualties while targeting the missile launching area," it said.
"Responsibility for endangering the civilian population rests on the organisation which operates and launches missiles at Israel from populated civilian areas," the army said.



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> Published on Monday, July 24, 2006 by the Guardian / UK
> Blasted by a Missile on the Road to Safety
> Family ordered to flee were targeted because they were driving minivan
> by Suzanne Goldenberg
> http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0724-02.htm



From that article:

"We put a white flag. We were doing what Israel told us to do," he says. "What more do they want of us?"  

What are the odds that Hezbollah have white flags flying on all of their weapon transports right about now?



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> Fleeing civilian vehicles hit by Israeli missiles
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-3-2282992-3,00.html



From that article:

Dr Ahmad Mrowe, director of the Jabal Amel hospital in Tyre, said: “Today is the day  of the cars. It has been very bad.”  

Would that not suggest that Hezbollah is using civilian transports to maneuver away from the Israeli advance?  Again, brutal tactics, but ones that Hezbollah is forcing.



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> 'Save us,' she screamed as another shell landed
> Suzanne Goldenberg in Tibnin, Lebanon
> Wednesday July 26, 2006
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,329538242-103552,00.html



From that article:  

transport is at a premium: the fare to Tyre has risen to $100 (£54) per person, or $250 for a car.

Nice that there are always opportunists to price gouge when the need is the worst.  

All of those articles have compelling, heart wrenching stories.  There is no happy face to paint on a shooting war, and no good will come of a cowardly enemy that uses civilian human shields.  Unfortunately for those folks, Israel has had it with the unprovoked attacks on it's civilian population.  What about this story?

http://news.netscape.com/viewstory/2006/07/21/hezbollah-attacks-children/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cnn.com%2F2006%2FWORLD%2Fmeast%2F07%2F20%2Fnasrallah.interview%2Findex.html&frame=true

(CNN) -- Hezbollah leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah apologized for an attack that killed two Israeli Arab children in northern Israel, saying the youngsters were "martyrs for Palestine."

Nice crass reply.  Hezbollah would love to be exacting a civilian casualty toll 10 times higher than Israel, but they just don't have as good a weapons platform.  And Israel isn't hiding it's military in with it's civilian population, and it's soldiers are nice and uniformed for easy recognition.  



			
				Infanteer said:
			
		

> I'm still waiting, after 16 pages, for someone to convince me that Israel will be capable of uprooting an established guerilla movement, especially when you consider that the US has had quite the time dealing with a not-so-established one in Iraq.  Remember how well flattening Fallujah worked?  I'm all for Israel living peacefully and ending the threat that Hezbollah poses to a peaceful conclusion, but acting tactically and not thinking strategically is not a good way to do so.  I will now look for a Sun Tzu quote to put here....



But what else are they supposed to do?  Hezbollah will never stop coming at them.  If Israel pulls out now, certainly it will take them a while to regroup and bomb up.  But none the less, they will be back.  The ball is rolling.  This has to play out.  
I would bet the IDF is going to be a lot more successful with it's FIBUA tactics.  They are not concerning themselves with the "hearts and minds" aspect which IMO is part of the problem the US is having.  Certainly in the long run the PR battle will need to be fought and there will be some bitter-for-life individuals as a result of the conflict.  
However, seems that area has been pretty bent at the Jews since there has been written history.  Remember, the "turn the other cheek" stuff is from the New Testament.



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> Not going to be me. I don't think you can quash an established guerrilla movement by force.



Don't agree.  



			
				Rey said:
			
		

> If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles.



I think this one applies.  Israel has had a lot of time to plan for this, and is doing what it knows it needs to do.  Simple survival of the fittest.  

Guh.  The drawn out reply-from-hell.


----------



## Journeyman (28 Jul 2006)

Infanteer said:
			
		

> *Remember how well flattening Fallujah worked? *



....except Fallujah, despite the massive amount of damage, was never "flattened" - - the US still pulled their punches. I think Grozny is the example you want to use. But in that case, it did a pretty good job of gutting the Chechen insurgency there. 

NOTE: I'm not arguing _for_ this tactic; just pointing out some of its parameters.


----------



## CanadaPhil (28 Jul 2006)

Rey said:
			
		

> Much of the anger towards Israel (in my experience) is based around the perception in the Arab and Muslim community of inhumane treatment of Palestinians and that it can act "above the law".
> 
> Whether this perception is true or false would be an entirely different thread.



Ahemmm.....NO NEED to start another thread. 

ITS FALSE.


----------



## a_majoor (28 Jul 2006)

> Not going to be me. I don't think you can quash an established guerrilla movement by force.



Students of military history know of only one force in recorded history which did this: the Romans. There is a legendary quotation which summarizes the strategy

"The Romans create a wilderness, and call it peace"

Other Empires like the Mongols did this pre emptively and avoided the problem of guerrilla warfare althogether. Few Western empires were ever able to solve the problem, the best ones temporaraly solved the problem by co-opting the conquered society.

Now our current Western "liberal" sensibilities won't allow us to create belts of scorched earth, and the idea of co-opting a society is a very long term one (the occupation and reordering of Nazi German and Imperial Japanese societies took several decades after the origional enabling societies were reduced to rubble. In fact the change of Japanese society from Feudal to "modern" also took several decades, including periods of virtual civil war). You can see the problem when you look at the propaganda spin; western forces inserted in SW Asia or East Africa, for any reason at all, are characterized as "Crusader" forces and we in the West are "Jews and Infidels". A bit difficult to wrap people's hearts and mind's around that.

On the other hand, we also know that if "our" schools, medical clinics, internet cafes, coffe shops and so on are being set up in an attempt to win the hearts and minds battle, they will become targets of suicide bombers, drive by shootings, rocket attacks and all the rest, so a military dimension is very much a part of the organizational change. I would almost suggest the best place for a stabilization force in Lebanon is not along the border at all, but to separate southern Lebanon ("Hezbollah land") from the remainder, seal the borders to prevent the influx of arms and terrorist manpower and provide a safe harbour for the Lebanese economy to regrow. (In case you think this is too harsh on the people in "Hezbollah land", they are neither participants nor interested in becoming part of a cosmopolitan Lebanon as existed before the civil wars, but would just as soon turn their rocket batteries north as south). "Hezbollah land" can either remain a closed theocracy and irrelevant to the world outside, or attempt to stir the pot, with the results as we see now.


----------



## mcqueen (28 Jul 2006)

I'm thinking sadly in the Arab world it's true.  Seems like the whole region has OD'd on stupid pills.


----------



## GAP (28 Jul 2006)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> I would almost suggest the best place for a stabilization force in Lebanon is not along the border at all, but to separate southern Lebanon ("Hezbollah land") from the remainder, seal the borders to prevent the influx of arms and terrorist manpower and provide a safe harbour for the Lebanese economy to regrow.



Once established, if any Hezbollah activity (eg: rockets, mortars, etc) come out of the isolated area, Israel can treat it with a scorched earth plan.


----------



## probum non poenitet (28 Jul 2006)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> "The Romans create a wilderness, and call it peace"



I believe that many Israelis would be satisfied with that.
Not a wilderness, but a wide - wide buffer zone, either administered by Israeli soldiers, Israeli proxies, or at a very-distant third, a competent and aggressive international force. The UN is a non-starter, for many obvious reasons.

Most of the shock and outrage directed towards Israel is the lack of concern they show towards non-Israelis. 

But this is their mindset, and it is very different from ours.
Our mission in Afghanistan, for example, seeks to benefit Afghan society, and indirectly, bolster our security.
The Israeli method is almost the opposite: The bolster their security first, middle, and last, and almost as an afterthought consider international opinion or how it benefits or harms non-Israelis.
How you feel about either is a personal and moral judgement.

This makes Israel an easy target in the public opinion world, but it has worked for them since 1948 - 58 years of the foreign policy equivalent of Russian Roulette - you only lose once.

When we apply our standards of moral conduct for fighting wars, Israel can look pretty bad. But, had they been using our methods - who knows what would have happened?
When they did the 'right' thing by withdrawing from Lebanon under Barak, it bit them in the butt, and here they are, back again, nothing solved.

As Edward Campbell said, one of Israel's major concerns is calming the situation down before there is a nuclear exchange one day.
Whether Israel is thinking strategically toward that aim with their current actions, or simply 'off the rez' as has been said, really remains to be seen. I hope its the former.

I PERSONALLY think Israel is seizing the opportunity presented by the fact that both Syria and Iran feel that much of the U.S. Government would be only too happy to start a war with them right now.
Unless Iran or Syria are feeling *martyrlicious* right now they aren't going to do anything overt and substantive to counter Israel.

It's a great time for Israel to set up a buffer zone - and it's not a pretty process.
This is a nasty, nasty religious/ethnic war. There are no easy, and from what I can see, no peaceful solutions in the short term.

In the meantime Israel is going to do what it feels it has to do, and world opinion is just a buzzing fly in their ear. We may criticize them, but does anybody want to switch places with them?
I wouldn't.

The tragedy is, many innocents have died (Maj HvK hits close to home) and many more will.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jul 2006)

probum non poenitet said:
			
		

> *martyrlicious*



I formally request permission to use that term.   ;D

I can also picture a hilarious parody video of Beyonce's song, with booty dancers in burkhas hitting it.


----------



## probum non poenitet (28 Jul 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> I formally request permission to use that term.   ;D
> 
> I can also picture a hilarious parody video of Beyonce's song, with booty dancers in burkhas hitting it.



All I ask is 10% royalties and first right of refusal on movie deals  ;D


----------



## GAP (28 Jul 2006)

+1


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Jul 2006)

I wonder if Hezbollah is stupid enough to use chemical warheads.


----------



## GAP (28 Jul 2006)

Quagmire said:
			
		

> I wonder if Hezbollah is stupid enough to use chemical warheads.



Only if they want southern Lebanon to become a radioactive wasteland.


----------



## Kirkhill (28 Jul 2006)

a_majoor said:
			
		

> .....
> 
> On the other hand, we also know that if "our" schools, medical clinics, internet cafes, coffe shops and so on are being set up in an attempt to win the hearts and minds battle, they will become targets of suicide bombers, drive by shootings, rocket attacks and all the rest, so a military dimension is very much a part of the organizational change. I would almost suggest the best place for a stabilization force in Lebanon is not along the border at all, but to separate southern Lebanon ("Hezbollah land") from the remainder, seal the borders to prevent the influx of arms and terrorist manpower and provide a safe harbour for the Lebanese economy to regrow. (In case you think this is too harsh on the people in "Hezbollah land", they are neither participants nor interested in becoming part of a cosmopolitan Lebanon as existed before the civil wars, but would just as soon turn their rocket batteries north as south). "Hezbollah land" can either remain a closed theocracy and irrelevant to the world outside, or attempt to stir the pot, with the results as we see now.



Earlier on, on one of these convoluted threads I made a similar suggestion, that Lebanon, being unable to control its territory south of the Litani should just relinquish it entirely.  Unilaterally cede it.  Perhaps temporarily but willing to accept it might be permanently, whatever permanent means in Realpolitik.

Turn it over to the UN for the UN to keep the peace, or Hezbollah, or even Syria.  

If the UN is guarantor of the Peace then Kofi has to do some fancy dancing to figure out how to stop the missiles.

If Hezbollah is "guarantor of the Peace" and they fail to keep the peace as a State then every act of war justifies the attacked state in waging unlimited war - Kill my civilians and your civilians will die.  Work by the rules and we will work by the rules.

Personally I favour plan C.  Hand the turf over to Syria and make them responsible for the actions of their people and their clients.  Damascus is out of bounds because Hezbollah is the problem of Lebanon.  If Syria got what it was apparently wanting, hegemony over the area they might suddenly find themselves in favour of digging up Hafez Assad's reconstruction plans for Hama.  The alternative would be missiles in Damascus.


----------



## Cdn Blackshirt (28 Jul 2006)

I love this idea.  Call it "Hezbollah-land".  Make it their dominion.  They're now responsible for borders and any actions taken from within those borders.

"Welcome to grown-up land boys...."



Matthew.   ;D


----------



## CanadaPhil (28 Jul 2006)

I thought I would pass this video along. It is "sort" of relevent. (the STUPID PILL Thing)  

I got tricked but some joker who named his video "Israel Lebabon Hezbollah Fighting FOOTAGE" in order to get people viewing it.

I have to admit it did make me crack a smile.

Maybe these guys should be sent in as a security force. Hezbollah would be running for the hills.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p11d7OluQl4

PS: The MODS can delete this post if they dont think it should be here.


----------



## Infanteer (28 Jul 2006)

Journeyman said:
			
		

> ....except Fallujah, despite the massive amount of damage, was never "flattened" - - the US still pulled their punches. I think Grozny is the example you want to use. But in that case, it did a pretty good job of gutting the Chechen insurgency there.
> 
> NOTE: I'm not arguing _for_ this tactic; just pointing out some of its parameters.



Ok, ok - flattening was the wrong choice of terms; perhaps I should have used "overwhelmed" instead.  The goal of my analogy was to point out that Operation al Fajr involved the systematic encirclement and sweep by the troops of a Division+ and ended with a General stating that he had "broken the back of the Insurgency" only to see that US soldiers and Marines are still dying along the roadside of Al Anbar province.  When I read the "go in and wreck Hezbollah" line, you can see why I get suspicious of this way of combating insurgents.

Is it possible for people to say "Hearts and Minds" and "Burn 'em Out" at the same time?  This is a serious question, because I see it on these forums at times.

Anyways, more on strategy, courtesy of DNI.  Agree or disagree with it, or just find a few interesting points, but it makes for some good gray-matter stimulation - different ways to look at the same bloody news pouring out of the Mid-East:

http://www.d-n-i.net/fcs/fabius_fate_of_israel.htm



> The Fate of Israel
> 
> 
> Part two in a series of articles about grand strategy in a 4GW Era.
> ...


----------



## Kirkhill (28 Jul 2006)

> Is it possible for people to say "Hearts and Minds" and "Burn 'em Out" at the same time?



Yes - but you have to pick your targets.  

Somebody elsewhere facetiously recommended canvasing the neighbourhood to find out if people want to stay or go.  That isn't so facetious. Ultimately, IMHO, that is the job of the Infanteer.  

Advance to contact and if people put their hands up you send them to the rear.  If they don't, you approach with caution and force them to the rear.  If they shoot at you , you kill them.

To discourage people shooting at you it might be, on occasion, appropriate to wander into the neighbourhood in large numbers, with big guns and lots of armour plate.  You will scare the bejazus out of everybody there, probably not make any friends on the day, but you will get a chance to make friends once the frightened are separated from the shooters.

Meanwhile try not to make enemies in places where people aren't shooting at you.  Set up a guard and keep them safe.  Another job for the Infanteer.


----------



## GAP (28 Jul 2006)

I see tonight the UN coordinator for the area is pleading for a 72 hr ceasefire to get people out. 

In addition, There was a Lebanese spokesperson, I missed the introduction, looking really scared that Hezbollah will not be defeated totally. He was saying that they are happy to die, we want to live, so why should we confront them (interpretation of conversation)


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jul 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> I see tonight the UN coordinator for the area is pleading for a 72 hr ceasefire to get people out.
> 
> In addition, There was a Lebanese spokesperson, I missed the introduction, looking really scared that Hezbollah will not be defeated totally. He was saying that they are happy to die, we want to live, so why should we confront them (interpretation of conversation)



Seems like 72 hours would be some pretty nice regroup and reorg time for Hezbollah.  As soon as the first jet dropped ordinance, they should have gotten out of there.  What could it possibly matter if there is three days left in their mandate?  Israel should put a war on hold so UN observers can finish their contracts?   :
As far as the Lebanese spokesman, sorry buddy.  You guys need to make a decision and live with it.  Maybe a little support from the non-terrorist part of Lebanon would help bolster the Israelis to smash through and secure a decisive win.

As far as Infanteers article, I have to imagine that people have been writing Israel doom pieces for fifty odd years, and always come up wrong.  Israel isn't going anywhere.


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Jul 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> I see tonight the UN coordinator for the area is pleading for a 72 hr ceasefire to get people out.



Gee, I wonder what/who they will be smuggling out in burkas, disgused as women, and who knows in ambulances, more cowards and weapons no doubt. Sadly (SOME)  the locals who are really wounded or sick who actually pay the price (thats the insanity of war), and fuel the islamic propaganda war against the west.

Personally, I do not favour any temp ceasefires. All that does is give Ahmed a time to re-org, plot and rest. I say lay it on even more intense, and don't stop til the bad guys are crushed, and have been wiped out.

A victory for Israel against extreme islam is a victory for us all, and in the big picture, that many less we'll (the west)have to tangle with.

Again, just my thoughts.

Wes

EDIT: Hey Zip, look at the posting timings, two great minds think alike, eh


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (28 Jul 2006)

Syria or bust?


----------



## Bruce Monkhouse (28 Jul 2006)

http://www.guelphmercury.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=mercury/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1154082908290&call_pageid=1050067726078&col=1050421501457

City man says Harper right to question UN actions

FIONA ISAACSON
GUELPH (Jul 28, 2006)

A former United Nations military observer says Prime Minister Stephen Harper is right to question why a UN post in Lebanon, where a Canadian is presumed dead after an Israeli air strike, was still manned despite being a war zone.

In such a situation, the UN observers wouldn't have been able to do their jobs properly, Guelph resident Marty Burke said yesterday.
"There's no peace to keep at that point," he said.
In 1988, Burke spent six months at the same UN post where Canadian peacekeeper Major Paeta Hess-von Kruedener of Kingston is missing and presumed dead after an Israeli jet bombed the clearly marked observation post Tuesday night.

The UN post in the town of Khiam, near the eastern end of Lebanon's border with Israel, was the site where four peacekeepers, including a Canadian and three from Austria, China and Finland, were killed during a prolonged bombardment by Israel.

Burke, who retired from the military in 2000, said in 1988 his job as an unarmed peacekeeper was to "observe and report" any infractions on either side of the border.
"It was an unstable situation then, but nothing like what it is at this time," he said of the current conflict between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas in Lebanon that began July 12.

The policy then was that if things "got too hot for us" the UN would pull them out, Burke explained.
"That's a pretty good policy . . . There's no reason in the world why those guys, in my opinion, should have been there," he said of Tuesday's attack.

The observation post itself is only a few hundred yards from the former Khiam prison, one of the most heavily fortified buildings in the former security zone -- a "key tactical target for the Israelis and a key tactical defensive position for the Hezbollah," Burke said.

With a war all around, the UN observers would be spending more time "half underground, covered in concrete," Burke said. Harper questioning why the peacekeepers were still there Tuesday "is the perfect question to be asking at a time like this," he said.
Israel would never deliberately attack the white-washed, clearly marked UN post that has a flag that's illuminated at night, he said.

"Quite frequently" missiles can go off target, he said.
"You can't get it bang on all the time."
When asked why the post may have still been manned, Burke called the UN a "fairly dysfunctional organization in many respects."
"The UN is a great idea in theory, but in practise it needs a lot of improvement," he said.

Israeli officials have vehemently denied targeting the post. A preliminary report from the UN said before the post was hit, peacekeepers had called the Israeli military 10 times in a six-hour period to ask it to halt bombing.

Yesterday, Hess-von Kruedener's wife Cynthia said she believes the attack, which involved precision guided missiles, was intentional. She says her husband, an infantry officer with the Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry for 20 years, told her that the UN site had been fired upon the site for weeks, despite the fact that their vehicles and buildings were clearly marked.

Speaking in Montreal yesterday, interim Liberal Leader Bill Graham called Harper's response an irresponsible one that risks making Canada irrelevant in the region.

"Everybody watching Canada at this time is concerned about whether or not Canada is, by its actions, making itself irrelevant in terms of being able to contribute to the possibility of a long-term peace in the Middle East," Graham said. The former Liberal foreign affairs and defence minister said Harper has signalled a shift in Canadian policy by strongly backing Israel in the conflict.

fisaacson@guelphmercury.com


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jul 2006)

Just as a side though...couldn't someone come up with open or glass top ambulances for these guys?  I know if I was in Lebanon and had to get around in a mini van right now, I would find a chain saw and hack the roof of my ride.  If an Apache gunner can clearly see that there is no cargo in your vehicle, or there is an actual banged up guy or elderly person, then it might not get waxed.  
Yes, I realize it would take about 45 minutes for Hezbollah to start dressing their missiles up as wounded people.


----------



## FastEddy (29 Jul 2006)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Guh.  The drawn out reply-from-hell.




You've answered and said it all, I've got nothing to add, excellent post.

Cheers.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (29 Jul 2006)

Wesley 'Down Under' said:
			
		

> EDIT: Hey Zip, look at the posting timings, two great minds think alike, eh



Maybe we could do something like a "Wonder Twins Power--Activate!" through the power of our minds right through the planet   ;D



			
				FastEddy said:
			
		

> You've answered and said it all, I've got nothing to add, excellent post.



Thanks, Ed.  However, I don't think I'll get the last word on this one...


----------



## tomahawk6 (30 Jul 2006)

Following the Qana building collapse in Lebanon the IDF has suspended air operations for 48 hours. Some observers feel that this development could be a critical point in the 3 week old conflict. Hizbollah might respond with a suspension of rocket attacks which might lead to a ceasefire. If Hizbollah continues operations against Israel this might undermine their position and take pressure off of the Israelis/US.

The article below discusses the possibility of a 2 division thrust up to the Litani river. Over 30,000 reservists have been called up which is an expensive proposition for Israel. Financial considerations may drive Israeli strategy. Whatever happens needs to happen quickly.
_______________________________________________________________
Stratfor article.

Special Report: Shift in Israeli Operations

At this moment there appears to be a major shift taking place in the war. Though the scope of the operation is unclear, it appears the Israelis have shifted to a new phase of the war, focusing on broader and more intense ground operations. It could be that this is the opening phase of a broader raid-in-force against Hezbollah that might go beyond southern Lebanon. We do not know this for certain, but it does warrant alerting our readers to the possibility. Various bits of evidence point in this direction.

For example, early Sunday Israeli time, an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) spokesman was quoted as saying, "We have drawn our conclusions from battles in other areas, we have learned our lesson and are about to embark on another mission. There is no intention whatsoever to occupy this region or any other -- only to arrive, to act, and when we're done, to get out."

There are reports of new areas involved in fighting and new Israeli units being engaged. For example, Israeli forces are now fighting in the area of Qana. This is a few miles southeast of Tyre and deep into southern Lebanon. We have heard that the Qana action consists of engineers, armor and infantry, indicating a more traditional combined arms effort. The engineers would be clearing mines, bulldozing fortifications and clearing roads damaged by Israeli airstrikes. Infantry would be clearing the area of anti-tank teams and opening the way for broader armored thrusts to destroy rear infrastructure and isolate forward Hezbollah positions. There are additional reports of engagements near and to the west of the Israeli panhandle in the Dan-Dafna-Metulla region, along with heavy artillery fire in this region. This would be the jump-off point for an attack both westward along the Litani and northward into the Bekaa Valley. There were extensive reports of a major armored buildup in this area over the past 48 hours. This would also explain the decision to disengage temporarily at Bent Jbail in preparation for the new phase of operations.

Interestingly, the report about Qana that we have says the attacking force is from the Nahal Division. According to Israeli media, the Galilee Division, which normally has full responsibility for the entire Lebanese border, has been given responsibility for the western half of the border, while Nahal Division has been made responsible for the eastern half. If all of this is true and the Qana fighting is being carried out by Nahal, then the action at Qana represents a drive westward from the northern panhandle rather than a northern drive from Galilee division. This is of great importance because it indicates that the armor massed in the panhandle is moving in a broad encirclement as per traditional IDF doctrine. Nahal has been moving rapidly during daylight hours. Ground operations involving the Golani Brigade were also reported in Taibe last night. If Nahal moved west, it would have passed through Taibe. If the division were planning on a move north to the Bekaa Valley, it will need Taibe. The town is in a critical location.

U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has canceled her visit to Lebanon. She is, however, going to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert on Sunday night and return to the United States on Monday. If nothing important were happening, Rice would stick to her schedule. If the United States objected to what is happening, Israel would postpone until she left or she would be on the plane right now. Therefore, a logical conclusion is that whatever is happening makes her trip to Lebanon pointless or harmful but that she wants to signal that there is no strain in relations with Israel. If there is a major attack coming, Washington has signed off on it.

We are approaching nightfall in Israel. If this is indeed a major shift operationally -- and we simply cannot be certain at this point, in spite of pieces seeming to fall into place -- then we would expend rapid movements of Israeli forces through the night, and we should get a sense by morning, Israel time, of just how deep they expect to go. At this point, having made the decision to shift to larger-scale, more traditional operations, Israel will want to proceed as rapidly as possible for operational and diplomatic reasons. If the Israelis are going, they will be going rapidly.

It should also be noted that Israel attacked key roads and bridges along the Syrian-Lebanese border. This indicates that Israel is not intending to use those roads to attack Syria (otherwise they would have wanted them intact) but does want to protect its flank from any Syrian countermove. It is the least intrusive action Israel can take. They neither want to attack nor be attacked by Syria.

At this point, if this should take place, we will get a better sense of Hezbollah's broader capabilities. Its forward troops seemed to be extremely competent. Whether troops in other areas are equally capable remains to be seen. Also remaining to be seen is the effect of the Israeli air campaign on the militants' numbers, morale and coordination. If they are an effective fighting force, we would expect effective attacks against armored columns using anti-tank weapons and mines, and a slow evolution. If they are severely weakened, as some reports we are receiving from Lebanon say they are, the attack will be broader.

Remember that in our view Hezbollah does not expect to defeat Israel's main force, but wants to draw it into Lebanon to impose an Iraqi/Afghan style insurgency. Therefore, an apparent collapse of Hezbollah (as with the Taliban and Saddam Hussein's forces) does not necessarily mean defeat but rather can mean a shift to insurgency rather than conventional resistance. As the IDF statement makes clear, Israel does not intend to occupy and expose itself to such actions. It should also be remembered that both within and outside of Lebanon, Hezbollah has historically used terror techniques to impose penalties on enemies and shape the political environment. Hezbollah pioneered suicide bombing in Lebanon during the 1980s. 

In conclusion, we do not have definitive intelligence that Israel has shifted to a radical new course. This could simply be another phase in a piecemeal operation. However, given Israeli practice in the past and political disputes within the Israeli government, we regard it as reasonable to alert our readers to the possibility of the beginning phases of a major, more traditional Israeli ground offensive designed to destroy Hezbollah in detail. We will know more clearly over the next 12 hours.


----------



## a_majoor (30 Jul 2006)

We will be facing the same intelligence problems as the IDF:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/28/AR2006072801573_pf.html



> *Spy Lessons From Israel*
> 
> By Jim Hoagland
> Sunday, July 30, 2006; B07
> ...


----------



## tomahawk6 (30 Jul 2006)

Unless you have eyes on the ground there is a limit to what technical intelligence can provide. Hizbollah unlike AQ relies on family connections which makes it very hard to penetrate the organization. Unless you are related to someone in the organization you cant get in.


----------



## a_majoor (30 Jul 2006)

Another view....


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (30 Jul 2006)




----------



## Colin Parkinson (31 Jul 2006)

The Israelis have already admitted that it very difficult to penetrate Hezbollah as opposed to the various Palestinian factions, likely hampered by Hezbollah’s close cooperation with Iran and I am sure that they get the support of Iran’s Secret Police trained to watch for spies, plus far less personal contacts between the Israelis and the Lebanese Shia to exploit for resources. Likely their strongest contacts are with the Christians and Druze.


----------



## enfield (31 Jul 2006)

I agree a_majoor; this is a good example not just of the problems and failures of national intelligence, but of battlefield information gathering and the problems with working with info-centric forces and plans. Thinking of the current CF doctrine, and plans for future doctrine and capabilitie that centre on information dominance of the battle space I see the Hezbollah campaign as another (Iraq is a broader example) nail in the coffin of concept victory through information dominance. 

Over the course of years Israel had the full range of technology, platforms, and equipment to gather military intelligence and reconnaisance. Israel also had the full resources to analyze and interpret what it was seeing - translators, experts, first hand experience, etc. I believe its fair to say that Israel knew as much as could be reasonably known about Lebanon and Hezbollah, and probably more than the average Western army could expect to know about its enemy. And still Israel has had problems with finding the enemy, neutralizing his offensive capabilities, and destroying their command and control functions. 

Hopefully the proponents of information-centric warfare are watching. Information is key, but UAV's, Coyotes, satellites and SIGINT will not replace tanks and infantry advancing to contact.


----------



## GAP (31 Jul 2006)

Have you noticed over at least the last decade the drawback in humit intelligence on the part of a lot of countries, especially the US? They keep relying on technology, but that only goes so far. 

An awful lot of the stuff going on today is the result of poor intelligence. The west is being manipulated by lack of information on the ground and the other side seems to have a whole wack of info they shouldn't have. It may be time to reassess these "new" immigrants and their infrastructure, or it may be already too late.


----------



## Edward Campbell (31 Jul 2006)

Even the ‘best’ of the high-tech intelligence gathering systems needs a lot of highly skilled human attention.

There are all manner of wonderful algorithms to tell all the SIGINT stations what words or beeps or signal patterns to watch for – but they all have to be reported to someone who then has to ‘read’ them within some kind of sensible context.  There was, almost certainly still is, a severe shortage of linguist/analysts in most languages – especially Arabic and Asian languages.  I would not be surprised if, in the wake of 9/11, hiring Arab speakers for highly classified jobs got a whole lot harder.

I also suspect that the dunderheads in charge of our Foreign Affairs Department, like their colleagues in Washington, London, Canberra and so on, have gotten all _prissy_ about good intelligence gathering practices like bribery and corruption, sifting through nice peoples’ garbage and exploiting peoples’ _weaknesses_ (like alcoholism or a spouse’s prescription drug problem) and, especially, their sexual proclivities.

My other _problem_ (which I have raised before) is the trend towards _collectivization_ in the intelligence process.  It appears to me that there is  much more _fusion_ at many higher and higher (new) levels so that too little intelligence ever gets ‘out’ (especially in a timely manner) to the people who need it.  Collective farms didn’t work; neither, I think does collective intelligence processing.  (That being said, I appreciate the risks and costs (not just monetary, either) of ‘competitive’ intelligence services; I just think they are worth the risks/costs.)


----------



## probum non poenitet (31 Jul 2006)

Edward Campbell said:
			
		

> ...good intelligence gathering practices like bribery and corruption, sifting through nice peoples’ garbage and exploiting peoples’ _weaknesses_ (like alcoholism or a spouse’s prescription drug problem) and, especially, their sexual proclivities.



I personally approve of these methods ... without them, I'd still be a private and posted to Alert.


----------



## a_majoor (31 Jul 2006)

probum non poenitet said:
			
		

> I personally approve of these methods ... without them, I'd still be a private and posted to Alert.



Um, Edward wasn't talking about your personal exploits.......


----------



## Colin Parkinson (31 Jul 2006)

GAP said:
			
		

> Have you noticed over at least the last decade the drawback in humit intelligence on the part of a lot of countries, especially the US? They keep relying on technology, but that only goes so far.
> 
> An awful lot of the stuff going on today is the result of poor intelligence. The west is being manipulated by lack of information on the ground and the other side seems to have a whole wack of info they shouldn't have. It may be time to reassess these "new" immigrants and their infrastructure, or it may be already too late.



Mind you Israel has the advantage of a smallish regional conflict area and a fairly good idea who they will be fighting. The US depends on expeditionary forces that could be engaged anywhere on the globe, so they will never have the humint resources for each circumstances, however they still depend to much on hi-tech toys and as mentioned here are worried about getting dirty at the ground level.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (1 Aug 2006)

Did anyone think that going into Lebanon was going to be easy?  Is it possible the IDF is just trying to proceed at a reasonable pace, and make sure they aren't rolling past any points that will bite them when they advance and it is their rear ech that will have to deal with Hezbollah.  It must be a real pain trying to determine what tunnels exist, remote hidden bombs to defuse, mines etc.  The IDF engineers have their work cut out for them (just as an aside hijack question, do engineers have ground penetrating radar to look for tunnels?)
Even if this war isn't going quite the way it may have been scripted, IMO once the IDF gets a better feel for the rhythm of the battle, they will adjust their tactics and smash on.


----------



## tomahawk6 (1 Aug 2006)

Israel has to acheive a clear victory in Lebanon or else face further attacks in the future. Updated map from Stratfor of Israeli operations in Lebanon.
http://web.stratfor.com/images/middleeast/map/Israel-Leb_BASE-08-01.jpg


----------



## Colin Parkinson (1 Aug 2006)

Here is a link to Google earth placemarks of major incidents, clearly the IDF had a fairly good idea of targets.

http://bbs.keyhole.com/ubb/showthreaded.php/Cat/0/Number/520017/an/0/page/1


----------



## zipperhead_cop (2 Aug 2006)

Google earth never ceases to amaze me.


----------



## tomahawk6 (7 Aug 2006)

News reports and commentary indicate that the war against Hizbollah has not gone smoothly. Reliance on an air campaign may have cost the IDF 2 weeks that ground operations could have been initated.PM Olmert is seen as less than decisive and the Northern Command gets low marks for poor planning for the ground operation. The news story below indicate deficiencies with reserve unit equipment and planning/execution of the war plan. The terrain and Hizbollah tactics seem to have caught the IDF without a doctrine to rapidly defeat the guerrillas.

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/747356.html


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (7 Aug 2006)

All lesssons learned (hopefully not too late).


----------



## tomahawk6 (7 Aug 2006)

The decision by Israel not to push to the Litani river is a strategic mistake. But it may be one brought on by the government's aversion to casuaties. The current plan to carve out a DMZ of sorts will not solve the Hizbollah rocket problem. If UNIFIL occupies the zone then Israel will be back to square one. If the Lebanese Army occupies the area Israel runs the risk of the Hizbollah militia donning Army uniforms and resumes its campaign against Israel. For the Lebanese PM the fear should be that the shadow government that is Hizbollah becomes the defacto government which will be a serious problem for the druze/chrisitan population. What we may be seeing in Lebanon is the formation of another terrorist state which should be a non starter for Israel and the US.


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Aug 2006)

The Chief of Staff IDF has ordered a change in leadership for the Northern Command detailing his deputy MG Kaplinsky to take over the northern front.

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/747973.html

Stratfor article.

Special Report: A New Phase of the War

We have not written publicly available alerts on the Israel-Hezbollah conflict for several days, simply because there has been nothing to report. This is not to say that nothing was happening; brutal fighting was going on, rockets were being fired and airstrikes were being carried out. However, the basic pattern of the war appeared to be fixed, with Israeli troops fighting well-entrenched Hezbollah forces in southern Lebanon, and with the results of those battles uncertain. The diplomatic process was lurching along without any clear direction.

We are now beginning to detect some changes on the Israeli side. At its meeting Aug. 7, the Israeli Cabinet appeared to have given up on a diplomatic solution -- if it ever actually believed diplomacy would work -- and made it clear that Israeli forces were going to be given a much freer hand in Lebanon. Today, Israeli Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz announced that Deputy Chief of Staff Maj. Gen. Moshe Kaplinsky was to become Halutz's representative at Northern Command -- which owns the Lebanese operation -- for the duration of the war. 

There are political ramifications for this in Israel Defense Forces, but what is essentially being done is that Kaplinsky, an army officer who commanded the elite Golani Brigade, has been put in charge of the Lebanese operation. Halutz, an air force officer who had been criticized for waging an extended air campaign that did not shut down rocket attacks, is ceding authority over the war. Obviously, this is also a criticism of Northern Command's performance over the past weeks -- but the important message, following recent Israeli Cabinet decisions, is that the Israelis are going to unleash their ground forces.

What this means is unclear. It might mean that one or more additional divisions will be thrown into the southern Lebanese campaign, trying to force a decision. It might mean that the attack into the Bekaa Valley that we have discussed is in the works. It could also mean that Israel might move toward Beirut. What seems to be happening, however, is that the Israelis are moving beyond the current phase of the war.

As we have said, Hezbollah has relatively few options. In the south, the militants are committed to a static defense that they seem to be executing well. In the Bekaa Valley, they might opt to resist or to draw the Israelis in and then try to impose an insurgency on them. The same in the southern Beirut area. They might also decide to try and launch some of the longer-range rockets they claim to have, assuming the Israeli air force hasn't taken them out. 

Much is unclear. However, this is intended to alert you that the Israelis are vigorously signaling a shift in their war fighting strategy. This may be intended to induce a new round of diplomacy, but we rather doubt it. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has run out of room on the strategy he was following. A new one is likely.


----------



## Infanteer (8 Aug 2006)

Doubtless, the fact that this regional conflict is important in the eyes of global players plays an effect on both Israel and Hezbollah/Hamas strategy in the region.  More from the Economist:



http://www.economist.com/world/na/displaystory.cfm?story_id=7255198



> Middle East policy
> 
> To Israel with love
> Aug 3rd 2006 | WASHINGTON, DC
> ...



http://www.economist.com/world/displaystory.cfm?story_id=E1_SNGTJSJ



> Iran
> 
> The regional manipulator
> Aug 3rd 2006 | TEHRAN
> ...


----------



## tomahawk6 (8 Aug 2006)

If there were a ceasefire today I would have to give Hizbollah the win as Israel has not yet acheived any of its operational objectives. Olmert and IDF Chief Halutz get low marks for pursuing a losing strategy. Fortunately as with any war plan, if it doesnt work you try something else. Initially the IDF thought they could acheive their aims with an air campaign only. Then it was air campaign and limited ground operation.
As the Stratfor article lays out the iDF may have to go all out and drive to the Litani river or beyond. Because what they are doing now doesnt seem to be achieving the Israeli objectives. The rockets keep falling. The IDF isnt even close to controling the limited zone they have carved out. The IDF needs to cut off southern Lebanon from the rest of the country if they have any hope of rooting out the Hizbollah fighters.


----------



## tomahawk6 (9 Aug 2006)

Today the Israeli government has decided to move its divisions up to the Litani river. This is expected to provide a workable defensive line against Hizbollah. This is expected to result in a decrease of rocket attacks
on Israel to maybe 30 a day, thats the hope anyway.

Hizbollah has used an array of ATW's against both Israeli tanks and infantry. The loss of infantrymen to ATW's is a tactic that the Israelis have now appeared to counter. The ATW team would target infantrymen searching houses or in the open. The Israeli response has been to make use of sniper teams covering the infantry from available high ground.


----------



## Shec (10 Aug 2006)

Not exactly a strategic discussion but the time has come for the  IDF's combat engineers to be recognized as the tip of the spear in this campaign as I have heard from several reliable sources and as exemplified in these 2 JP articles:



> With the combat engineers in South Lebanon
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> ...






> Elite Yael unit clears the way for IDF
> By YAAKOV KATZ
> [
> Hizbullah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah promised hell for the IDF on the ground in southern Lebanon. He may not have heard of the Engineering Corps' elite Yael (Ibex) unit.
> ...


----------



## Rey (10 Aug 2006)

Hi all,

I have a question for those of you who are better informed on Israeli strategy than myself. 

I heard on CBC this morning that Hezbollah claimed to have destroyed 13 armoured vehicles (CBC said tanks, but I find that reporters usually  include APC's in that category). I haven't been able to corroborate that from any news source, so take that claim for what its worth.

I then heard that the IDF was going to hold position (CBC) for a few days to give the diplomatic front a chance.

My question is this:

Is the IDF buying time to regroup, is this a serious offer or a combination of both?


----------



## paracowboy (10 Aug 2006)

I seldom believe anything CBC says on anything remotely military related. I never believe Hezbollah on, well, pretty much anything, really. Combine the two, and you have a gong show of epic proportions.

I'd suggest searching other sources, such as the Jerusalem Post, BBC, & Asia Times.

And, all anyone on this site could provide on Israeli strategic plans is speculation and guesstimation.


----------



## Ham Sandwich (10 Aug 2006)

Re: Moving up to the Litani river.

That's really the only way. There's really no point in stepping foot on Lebanese soil at all if they don't intent to mitigate or eliminate the threat, and the only way to do that is by pushing those rockets outside of their max eff range from Israeli cities. 

I'm interested to see if their strategy for achieving this will work however. They're not going to to advance northwards clearing their way up to the river, rather they're going to move straight up to the river bypassing the enemy and when they get there, they're going to go firm there, and then clear backwards towards Israel. While the benefit of this strategy is obviously that they get to cut off Hezbollah from supply and support, encirclement works best if the ground to your own rear is relatively secure. In this case, Israel is going to have their backs to the litani rive knowing full well that there's Hezbollah reinforcements and supplies piling up on the other side, wanting to pass. Israel should expect to have to fight that position in both directions - south against the Hezbollah forces who are the objective, and north against their friends who are going to be coming at them from the north. 

And there's also the fact that by advancing North to south, they'll be conering their enemy where a south - north advance would allow them to flee. You don't want to fight a cornered enemy. They should be happy with allowing Hezbollah forces to flee north into Lebanon. If they're no longer able to fire rockets at Israeli cities then your objective is met.


----------



## Shec (10 Aug 2006)

Its nearly impossible to deliver a "knock out blow" to a guerrilla group when you yourself do not want to get bogged down in another lengthy occupation.   Nevertheless the consensus is that the last withdrawal from Lebanon just created a vacuum that Hez filled and consolidated.   Given these I suspect that Israel's strategy is to do such damage, including damage to client states, thats its obvious that you dont fool around with the IDF.    Call it  deterrence through demonstrated and raw destruction.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (11 Aug 2006)

Was looking at pictures of the Litani river, basically a large creek for most of it from appearances.


----------



## armyvern (11 Aug 2006)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Was looking at pictures of the Litani river, basically a large creek for most of it from appearances.



Ah then, it is remarkedly similar to the River Jordan, into which we placed an inflatable raft with 4 people in it and as we "white-watered" it downstream...we rubbed the banks continuously. Check out the "Sea" of Gallilee. Very small lake by our standards. Very important strategicly by ME standards however.


----------



## tomahawk6 (12 Aug 2006)

The offensive is in high gear. Debka has a pretty good description of todays events. An Israeli chopper is down. Two soldiers were killed when a tank went into reverse. A number of Merkava's have been shot up by anti-tank weapons. Israel could have the area south of the Litani sealed off by monday morning.

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1200


----------



## paracowboy (12 Aug 2006)

debka = Weekly World News  :


----------



## tomahawk6 (12 Aug 2006)

Perhaps but it is possible to cross check their stories for accuracy. This account of the offensive seems to be accurate.


----------



## paracowboy (13 Aug 2006)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Perhaps but it is possible to cross check their stories for accuracy. This account of the offensive seems to be accurate.


that would require effort, and you know very well that I'm a lazy, *lazy* man.


----------



## Echo9 (14 Aug 2006)

OK, so now there's a ceasefire.

This suggests the next questions: what constitutes a breach in the terms, and what happens when it breaks.

We know that even prior to the kidnappings, Hezbollah was lobbing rockets into N Israel.  Does a recommencement of this signify a breach?  What happens if Hezb tries to re-occupy battle positions?  What happens when they start delivering the next round of Katyushas?

Do the peacekeepers just take note and let it happen?  From what I can tell, their ROE are about as tight as is typical for the UN.  Effectively, Israel has just agreed to adding a Western barrier to their next response, while there's nothing that Hezb has to worry about returning to where they were before this all started.

So, back to the second question- what's the Israeli strat for the next time that missiles fly into Haifa?  With a French Div standing in between them and Hezb, they can't simply call game on and recommence where they left off.

My guess is that the only strategically sound means of responding would be (paradoxically enough) an airstrike against military and political installations in Syria.  The hope at that point is that with the Alawites decapitated, there will be civil war in Syria, and it will cease to be this decade's version of the Ho Chi Minh trail.

thoughts?


----------



## 1feral1 (14 Aug 2006)

I don't think this ceasefire will last. If Hezbollah even twitches on a rocket attack against Israel, they'll be pounded yet again. I don't think Israel gave it enough punch, and I am sure they'll be back at it soon enough. Just watch Fox News for the 'football commentary'.

Hezbollah is still foaming at the mouth to get at Israel, and there is enough Iranian and Syrian money and motivation behind them for Rd 2.

Wait out on this one...

Wes


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (14 Aug 2006)

There will be no ceasation of hostilities until the UN is between the two forces at the very earliest.


----------



## 1feral1 (14 Aug 2006)

Ya, we'll see just how much the Paper Tiger can accomplish. I do not have much confidence in today's UN. Over all 1/10. 

My opinion anyways.

Wes


----------



## paracowboy (14 Aug 2006)

even then, it won't be a cessation of hostilites. It'll be the ref pinning one guy's arms while the other keeps slugging away.


----------



## 1feral1 (14 Aug 2006)

Meanwhile Hezbollah will be stockpiling, resting, planning, trying to win and regain more hearts and minds, and getting g'd up for the next onslaught. The can of worms has just been cracked, not even the lid has come off.

I say Israel should ignore the UN and go in even harder. There is a cancer out there, and the Chemo is now turned off, so it will again grow in power (in this case hatred too).

WEs


----------



## paracowboy (14 Aug 2006)

best case scenario I can foresee is France leads with La Legion, Hizbollah pisses them off, and they clean house. If they do send the Legion, and Hizbollah takes a shot at one of them, they *will* go snakey. The Legion's first loyalty is to the Legion. 

This would achieve the same objective, without Israel further damning itself in the biased eyes of the UN.


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (14 Aug 2006)

Can they use the Legion as Blue Beret's?


----------



## paracowboy (14 Aug 2006)

DueyT said:
			
		

> Can they use the Legion as Blue Beret's?


Somalia, Sarajevo, Cote D'Ivoire...


----------



## Scoobie Newbie (14 Aug 2006)

Oh they did eh.  I had no idea/wasn't sure given how they are put together et al.
And your right they don't put up from too much crap from what little I have heard on them.


----------



## Echo9 (15 Aug 2006)

paracowboy makes a good point.  Perhaps France being the lead nation in this force is a good thing.  For all of the duplicitous reputation that the Quai d'Orsay holds, one thing that is really admirable about how France operates is that they always act in what they consider their national interest to be.

A French force that comes under fire typically reacts overwhelmingly (one might even say disproportionately  ;D ), without the constraints that Americans usually feel.  For a case in point, look at Cote d'Ivoire, where a company level skirmish resulted in the complete destruction of that nation's airforce.


----------

