The Israel-Lebanon conflict

Discussion continued: part I, part II, part III, part IV

i was wathcing BBC News 24 this morning and they were reporting from within southern Lebanon and were interviewing a young Lebanese chap who heavily criticised Hezbollah for the role in starting the conflict and also criticised them for placing military installations right in the middle of residential areas. The report showed a housing block destroyed because the israelis had targetted a weapons arsenal in a house. In the rubble you could see the remnants of heavy machine guns, rocket and grenade launchers etc.

The young man also said that about 90% of the townsfolk blamed hezbollah for the destruction of their town/village because of these military installations.

Apparently the leader of Hezbollah also came very close to apologising for starting the conflict over the weekend. Looks like they might come in for some heavy criticism over this.

Puts a different light on things other than the usual knee-jerk anti-israel sentiment we've been hearing.

I suppose we should really expect a comment like that from you OG. I don't believe anybody was supporting Hizbollah's cause here. The problem was that Israel targetted too much 'collateral', rather than going head-to-head with Hizbollah. The article you link furthers this argument because, whilst the interviewee does not support Hizbollah, his infrastructure, his property, his family and, his way of life were all affected by Israel's unmeasured response. I'm not critical of Israel going after Hizbollah, just in the way they went about it... which, as I have mentioned before, I believe was political suicide for Olmert, and that certainly looks like it will be true.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/27/...llah/index.html

Is this Hezbollahs way of saying..."ooooooops"?

This:


Proves the Israelis did just the right thing, only thing is, they did it too late.
If they had done this the last time Israeli soldiers were kidnapped by Hezbollah instead of going diplomatic, the chances are that the "war" would have been smaller in scale, and this one would never take place.

If you read a little into this political suicide item, you'd understand that most people blaming Olmert for the lukewarm outcome of the war and wanting his head for it claim that he didn't let the army do enough, that he restrained the army too much, so that it would look good on BBC. For them, targeting civilians was something that happened only inside the TV screens of the UK and Spain, brought to you by Adnan Hajj and his fellows in the propaganda machine, never in Lebanon.

Some people in Israel seem to have reached the understanding that no matter what our army does when in conflict, no matter who instigated it and how much restraint we exercise, Israel will never look good on European media. So they say to hell with it, we will lose the media war anyway, at least we can win the war itself. The people who are sitting in the opposition (including some in Olmert's party itself) definately subscribe to this line of thought. Not that I support this point of view (I don't think we should make moral compromises in war, even if this will never be carried over in the media reports).

There is also sharp criticism about the way the war was managed from by the military staff, for example that there seemed to be no clear plan for this war and that the staff let political decisions from the government intervene too much with the military details, as well as lack of equipment and supplies at the front. But, more importantly in this sense, there are also many complaints such as why were ground troops sent into villages that were used by Hezbullah as fortresses without first destroying the fortifications by bombing them. Again a decision meant to look good on the Guardian's first page, again in vain because we already know who the goodguys are and who the badguys are. After the marine commando operation in Tyre, people were asking why was a commando operation used there in the first place, if we knew that the head of the medium-range missile dept. of the party of Allah was using the building as a base of operations, why not level the building? Again the answer was - we knew about civilians in the building, we didn't do that (to look good on CNN, what else?).

These are the complaints you are referring to, Sin, not "OMG they murdered the babies!!!111".

There has been quite a few posts down here stating how legitimate the fight of Hizbollah is and was, how much they support the lebanese people, that they are a part of a democratic Lebanon...

Where did you read his property, family, his way of life was affected? Maybe he wasn't?!? Maybe he was?!? We can't know.

Seen a report on ARD last week shoot in the Beirut mall (one of the, or even the, biggest in the ME) and there was a wide consensus that Hizbollah fucked the whole thing up and they are to blame... OK, this came mostly of women and girls wearing Gucci-glasses, Prada-bags and Armani jeans... maybe not the Hizbollah clientele anyway, but therefore something different.

I think you need to take the blinkers off Genie and take a hard look at Olmert. You are Israeli yourself, are you not? Maybe you would like to post the details of the other half of Olmert's problems, namely the scandals. Or would you like me to post them up? I may have some time free in a while to dig out all the stories of the past week.

Olmert is nothing most than a chest-beating bantam cock, who gained a very weak powerbase within a coalition. In my opinion, in order to make himself look strong I suggest he chose his moment to attack Lebanon unwisely. If he had really wanted to set about the destruction of Hizbollah he should have taken just a little more timing to do some planning, and then to carry out the execution of his military wishes to deal with the problem, rather than attacking an entire sovereign country. An analogy would be like Turkey bombing Tehran because certain members of a Kurdish terrorist organisation may have let bombs off in Istanbul, and may have property in the Iranian capital. It doesn't wash, and Israel will remain to be seen in a weaker position on the international stage for the foolishness in which its attack on Lebanon was carried out. Furthermore, many recent reports have detailed interviews with lower ranks of the IDF, who, I agree, are unhappy at the outcome of the military actions, but I read that they pin the blame squarely with the leadership (as I do).

So, what has Olmert achieved? A large section of non-combatant population within a sovereign state displaced, a number of Isreali and Lebanese civilians killed and wounded, the largest oil-slick ever in The Mediterranean (which will affect both Lebanon's and Israel's fish stocks), a massive increase in the UN presence in South Lebanon (which I heartily welcome) from 1,990 observers to 15,000 better armed and equipt peacekeepers, a demonstration of how to beat the IDF, and Hizbollah being championed by every fuckin' Islamic extremist from Casablanca to Jakarta. Way to go! And congratulations on your success Ehud.


Legitamacy is a strange thing, and needs to be put into context where Hizbollah is concerned. Hezbollah/Hizbollah (however you want to spell the name) is a Shia Islamist political party with a militia attached. Two of its prime aims are listed as, to convert Lebanon into an Islamic state (which I very much doubt is achievable as they only have 14 of 128 seats in the Lebanese Parliament), and to defend South Lebanon from attack by Isreal (which it seems to have had some success with... the IDF has, for the most part, withdrawn). Only 4 nations list Hizbollah as a terrorist organization; USA, Israel, Canada and Holland. The UK and Australia list only Hizbollah's external security organisation. No other country lists Hizbollah as a terrorist organisation. Hizbollah's leadership does not seem to appreciate Israel or Jews.


That is true. In the same way we don't know his personal background, or his allegiances.


There is a large Christian population in Beirut, who I very much doubt are keen on Hizbollah. If you could see more than the fingertips and eyes of these women and girls, I'll wager they were not fully paid up members of The Party of God.

so because they are christians and not supporters of Hezbollah there opionions are worth regarding, is that what you are implying?

Nope, that's what you are implying that I am implying.

Listen, Sin, it's very difficult to run a debate without agreeing on basic facts. Such as who attacked who first. You seem to be stuck onto that Lebanese police report that says the two soldiers were kidnapped inside Lebanon, and then you built a whole story about how a commando (made out of Technion engineering students, of all people in the world) infiltrated Lebanon to start a war. Now it seems that the orders came straight from the top, something like "Hey, elite unit. You're PM is in political trouble, we need to start a war. Go get kidnapped, over". In short, I think your whole opinion is deeply based in fiction, making it a nice venture into the hypothetical and the counter-factual, no more.

You also mistake me for some Olmert admirer or something. I know exactly who he is, for every scandal you can bring up I can show you two more. The problem is I truely get the shivers when I think what's on the other side of the bench, so I stick with the lesser of two evils.

And you continue refusing to understand the Israeli political landscape. For example, that no government would have not responded to a coordinated attack on and kidnapping of soldiers on the border, complete with "distraction" fire of Katyushas at towns and villages in the north (before a single Israeli round was fired) with a complaint to UNIFILth. That there was 97% agreement inside Israel that the war was a no-choice situation for us. That the complaints against Olmert are that he restrained the army. That he agreed to a cease-fire just when we were about to launch a real offensive against Hezbullah and break them on the outskirts of Tyre. That he did not order a full-scale offensive from the beginning.

Those are the kind of complaints you hear in Israel. Not that that story you sucked out of your thumb there.

Your opinion and my opinion differ Genie. I do read a great deal from as many sources as possible, and I do follow the situation. I agree that Hizbollah is a threat to Israel, but at the same time Israel is a threat to Lebanon. This is why I am so happy that 15,000 better armed peacekeepers are going in, and I hope they fully intend to fire upon any side that attempts to break the peace. I suggest that they should stay a minimum 99 years, to be joint paid for by Lebanon and Israel. I would also now like an equivalent 15,000 multi-national peacekeepers in Gaza, and a further 60,000 in The West Bank for the same reasons.

And I still say that heads must roll in the Israeli cabinet and at the head of the armed forces, purely because I am quite sure that the outcome is not that which was sought from the Israeli side. They did not do their homework, and they paid for it. With any luck we can now get back to the diplomatic approach.

Sin really is unbelievable. Slagging off the armed forces, implying they are stupid, calling them "cannon fodder" & therefore implying their lives are worthless, YET, now he wants tens of thousands of them deployed to keep the peace. Amazing. Hypocrisy or plain stupidity?

Hi all, even though I haven't read the whole thread,I am quite familiar with that subject. It is a pity that media is biased and shows one side of the reality. I can also assure you that Hezbollah also has some popularity among Christians. There is no Lebanese from the south of Lebanon, whose city was occupied by Israel for more than 20 years, who does not support Hezbollah to a certain extent. The problem is broader than just the Lebanese-Israeli conflict. There is the issue of palestinians, as well as the Israeli occupation of Lebanese territory, and more. This war was predicted by many, but no one thought it would be now... I do understand the decision of Israel to go for this war, but I also do understand the resistance Hezbollah was leading in the south of Lebanon, which is explained by the ever lasting occupation of the Shebaa farms. Some justify this war by the Katyusha rockets sent by Hezbollah on Israel. But many do not know the facts about the lebanese detainees held in Israeli prisons (not different than the ones held in Syrian prisons too, and that is another topic). As long as Lebanon is occupied, there is resistance, and this is natural to some, less obvious to others. Finally, my personal opinion about the situation, this is a long planned war, and it was not totally unexpected to many. I honestly never expected so many civilian casualties and infrastructure damage. There was no reason for targetting all those bridges, ports and buildings, specially not to stop the smuggling of arms inside Lebanon, which did not happen at all during the war. Hezbollah resistance was located in the South of Lebanon, and all those civilians who were killed on their way fleeing their towns were innocent, and most of the people who remained in their towns and died in the rubbles did not have the means to leave their cities. These are facts I know about, which you will not find in most media, and I am sure there are similar facts on the other side of the border... As a lebanese, I can tell you that the situation wont get better, the way things are heading, with the current Isreali administration, and Hezbollah resistance, and there is no way to remove one or the other, as most people think is possible. The proof is the past 25 years in the history of Lebanon.

This is simply not true. There was a fairly large section of the population, mostly Druze but some Christians as well that actually supported the Israeli military presence there. Some also were members of the SLA, a militia allied with Israel that took part what they saw as protecting SL from takeover by Hezbullah's religious extremism (remember, their plan is to make Lebanon into a state modeled on Iran). Hasbaiya comes to mind, as well as El-Meri, Kaukabeh and I think parts of El-Khiam as well. That's what I know, I'm sure there are more.


The UN ruled that there is no more Israeli occupation of Lebanese territory. There's only use of this alleged occupation as an excuse to further the military conflict with Israel.

Please elaborate.


Resistance to what? I mean seriously, you use these mantras like occupation and resistance but they are just empty justifications for the continuation of violence. What occupation? What resistance?

This is part of Syria, as ruled by the UN. It consists of about 25 square km and is hardly a reason to continue holding a militia of 10K people in SL and continuously heating up the border. Syria has never gave its consent to giving this land to the state of Lebanon, in which case I would guess things would look different. But actually, this will never happen in the current state of affairs because Syria does not recognize the existence of a free state of Lebanon.

Besides, Syria occupied much larger parts of Lebanon much longer than Israel did, including imposing a government and ruling it from Damascus. Did you see any Katyushas flying on border towns in Syria? No. Why? Because this is not about occupation, not about resistance. This is about hatred of another nation/religion/race (depends on who is doing the hating).


Please share this with us. You want Samir Quntar free? He's serving a sentence for murder. Would you send your resistance fighters to Berlin to free convicted Lebanese murderers that are sitting in German jails as well?

Again, let me say this: resolution 1559 states that there is no Israeli occupation in Lebanon.


I'm not going to start debating numbers and why certain things were target and why not. We both do not have access to the unbiased information (not coming from the likes of Adnan Hajj) to actualy make a meaningful statement on this.

But it makes me truely sad that you think this situation is not amenable. Especially that you think that the state of Lebanon cannot decide who has the right to hold weapons in their own country. Because as far as I know, in political science one of the preconditions of being a state is holding the right to power. If as a state, anyone can just decide he wants to use your land as a basis to fight a war with a neighboring state you're not in conflict with, and Lebanon itself has no real reason for conflict with Israel, then what kind of state is this? Seriously. These guys are sitting in parliament in Lebanon, but at the same time giving fuck all about the laws of their own country. Can't the rest of Lebnon do anything to bend their arms to dissolve themselves into the Lebanese army?

There's a really good piece about the War on Terror, Israel and the US by George Soros in Ha'aretz today.

A news article I promised to a sweet little Israeli last night (...and it just took forever to find the bloody thing again, Treacle): European Nations Bar Heavy El Al Cargo Planes - No idea if it is 100% true. Gonna be a bit too busy this morning to check it out.