Informed Comment

Thoughts on the Middle East, History, and Religion

Juan Cole is President of the Global Americana Institute

Monday, July 24, 2006

Israelis Kill 8, wound 45 on Sunday
Strike Clinic, Ambulance, Factories, Minibus, Journalist
Hizbullah Rockets Hit Haifa, Kill 2


The Daily Star reports that


"Israeli warplanes continued their bombardment of Lebanon on Sunday, killing at least eight and wounding 45, as Hizbullah gave the Lebanese government the green light to negotiate on its behalf for a prisoner swap with Israel . . . "The Lebanese government will lead the exchange through the intermediary of a third party. This has been accepted by Hizbullah," Speaker Nabih Berri said Sunday. . .

Meanwhile the Israeli offensive continued for the 12th straight day, bringing the overall death toll to at least 380 with over 1,000 wounded, according to Lebanese authorities."


Jan Egeland, the United Nations undersecretary general for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, said Sunday after touring South Beirut that most of the victims of Israel's attacks on Lebanon have been civilians, and that children are dying.

Israelis fired a missile that killed a Lebanese photographer who worked for The Bell magazine and for Agence France Presse, Layal Najib, 23.

An Israeli air strike killed 3 and wounded 13 when it hit a minibus "carrying 16 people fleeing the village of Tairi as it worked its way through the mountains from the Southern port city of Tyre . . . The Israeli military had told residents of Tairi and 12 other nearby villages Saturday to evacuate by 7 p.m. The villages form a corridor about 6 kilometers wide and 18 kilometers deep, believed to be the "buffer zone" desired by Israel."

I have noted before that it isn't very nice to make people leave their homes and then bomb them as they leave.

For more on the gauntlet that Israel is making innocent Lebanese civilians run in the south, see this article.

Lebanese television reported another 4 persons killed by Israeli air strikes in the south. Air raids on towns and villages around Tyre on Sunday left 45 wounded.

The Israelis also bombed south Beirut again. It is a pro-Hizbullah area, but its inhabitants are civilians.

On Sunday, Israel hit the Southern port city of Sidon for the first time, destroying a complex of buildings that contained clinics and service offices and was linked to Hizbullah, wounding four people. More than 5,000 people have sought refuge in the city from other Southern villages.

The Daily Star reports,

Israel also targeted Hizbullah's power base in the Bekaa Valley, hitting three factories, a house and bridges and roads. The air strikes ignited large fires, killed at least one civilian and wounded two others.

Three rescuers from the Civil Defense personnel of the Islamic Scout Mission, an association affiliated with the Amal Movement, were wounded after Israeli air raids struck their ambulance as it transported wounded civilians to nearby hospitals, according to Hassan Hamdan, the association's official in the South."


If the latter report is correct, and if the ambulance was marked as such, this strike was an Israeli war crime. If the Biqa' factories were not producing war materiel, hitting them was a war crime, too.

Hizbullah confirmed that the Israeli military had occupied the Lebanese village of Maroun al-Ra's in the south near the Israeli border, but gloated over how difficult the conquest had been:

"The enemy is deceiving its own people and the world by presenting the occupation of Maroun al-Ras as a great military achievement," a Hizbullah statement said. "An army using its elite forces and tanks backed by its air force that can enter a frontier village only after days of fighting ... is a defeated and useless army."

"Our steadfast fighters have presented through the Maroun al-Ras confrontations and the losses of the enemy - in troops, tanks and helicopters - an example of what the confrontations will be in every town, village and position," it said.


The Israeli narrative of the battle agrees that too many Israeli soldiers were lost (7) or wounded in the taking of Maroun al-Ra's, in part because of too much haste and poor tactical decisions (operating in broad daylight, letting individual tanks get isolated). Between 2 and 4 times as many Hizbullah fighers died. JP says the next challenge is to take Bint Jbail, a major Hizbullah stronghold.

The Chicago Tribune reports that Israeli troops found the Hizbullah fighters tenacious, and expect difficult battles ahead as they forge deeper into Lebanon. Joel Greenberg reports,

'Sitting on the Merkava tank he commands, Assaf, 22, who gave only his first name, said his force had destroyed two abandoned Hezbollah positions across the border and was facing a "serious" adversary, which has used mines and anti-tank rockets to battle the Israeli armor. Dudi Mizrahi, 21, the tank driver, said Hezbollah had been pushed back from the border but was capable of putting up a determined fight. "They're very small, but very, very stubborn," he said. "If there is a deeper incursion, there will definitely be resistance. They're hiding in bunkers, and they come out, fire a Katyusha rocket and go back in. They're holding up." '


Billmon quotes sources that do not believe the war is going at all well for Israel. Despite bombing Lebanon back to the stone age, they had not stopped the rocket attacks of Hizbullah, and taking a single village was costly for them. Billmon does not mention another element in the losing of the war, which is that aside from the US congress and the usual pundits in the US, most people in the world don't seem to approve of the Israeli wholesale destruction of a whole country. I don't think they were counting on those thousands of evacuees getting this kind of television coverage. They are used to controlling communications in Gaza and the West Bank and did not count on how intertwined Lebanon is with the world information system. (Hence their recent attacks on internet servers.)

Greenberg also reports on continued Hizbullah rocket strikes on northern Israel on Sunday:

'More than 90 rockets were fired at cities and towns across northern Israel on Sunday, killing two people and wounding several others in the port city of Haifa and a neighboring suburb. One of the dead was a motorist, killed in his car by shrapnel; another was a worker in a carpentry shop wrecked by the rocket blast. A couple in another suburb were saved when they took shelter in a bombproof room before a rocket slammed into their home. '


Some readers have asked why I characterize Hizbullah's rocket launches as war crimes. It is because the Geneva Convention requires that in war you have to aim at enemy combatants. You can't deliberately target civilians, and you can't endanger civilians unnecessarily. The Hizbullah rockets have poor targeting, and so just firing them endangers civilians. The rockets themselves have apparently killed almost no Israeli troops, and almost all their victims have been innocent civilians, like that poor man who was just driving along in or near Haifa. That is, the Hizbullah rockets have been fired indiscriminately (the only way they can be fired) and mainly hit civilian targets, which a prudent person could foresee. Bingo. War crime.

See the statement of the International Commission of Jurists.

See also The Fourth Geneva Convention:

There is actually an argument to be made that both Hizbullah and Israel have taken the civilian population of their enemy hostage. Since hostage-taking is forbidden, both are war criminals. I heard former National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski make a similar argument at a salon dinner in Washington, DC, last week, though the wording above is my own.

19 Comments:

At 2:27 AM, Blogger johnMccutchen said...

A quibble. The use of Katyusha rockets or the infinitely more lethal US MLRS launchers is not per se a war crime simply because each can only be fired "indiscriminately". The gravamen of the war crime charge is that Hezbollah is firing at civilian targets indiscriminately.

Why not fire at those Merkavas queued on the border? No war crime, possibly fewer enemy warriors and civilian casualties? Collateral damage to a lawful use of force.

Legalisms aside, Hezbollah's rocket tactics are a strategic folly. Perhaps its the new toy but Hezbollah has lost sight of what they're about as a military force and significantly diminished their substantial asymmetric advantage over their enemy.

In a word, more than just a War Crime, a really dumb war crime.

 
At 4:48 AM, Blogger johnMccutchen said...

Bravo Billmon!

It took Israel 6 days to beat Syria Jordan and Egypt. In twice the time not even a dent in Hezbollah...Israel has made a serious strategic error. The Butchers of Beruit 2006 will rue the day they took on HezbollahHezbollah is playing cat and mouse with the increasingly harrassed and frustrated Israelites.

Hamas and Hezbollah, already the popular heroes of the Middle East, will prevail, strengthened.

Welcome to the brave new world of 4GW Mr. Olmert. You and your mangy little dog Duhbya too!
.

Martin Van Creveld :


In private life, an adult who keeps beating down on a five year old – even such a one as originally attacked him with a knife – will be perceived as committing a crime; therefore he will lose the support of bystanders and end up by being arrested, tried and convicted. In international life, an armed force that keeps beating down on a weaker opponent will be seen as committing a series of crimes; therefore it will end up by losing the support of its allies, its own people, and its own troops. Depending on the quality of the forces – whether they are draftees or professionals, the effectiveness of the propaganda machine, the nature of the political process, and so on – things may happen quickly or take a long time to mature. However, the outcome is always the same. He (or she) who does not understand this does not understand anything about war; or, indeed, human nature.

In other words, he who fights against the weak – ...militias are very weak indeed – and loses, loses. He who fights against the weak and wins also loses. To kill an opponent who is much weaker than yourself is unnecessary and therefore cruel; to let that opponent kill you is unnecessary and therefore foolish. November 18, 2004





Mao Tse Tung:
the enemy attacks, we retreat; the enemy withdraws, we pursue; theenemy encamps, we harass; the enemy comes in large numbers, we disperse; use a superior force to crush an inferior enemy force; create a noise in the east and attack in the west.

 
At 6:18 AM, Blogger shmooth said...

Wow - analysis from Zbig, the guy who unleashed the terrorist war in Afghanistan (under Carter), and then refused to work with the Russians to make sure that a Taliban-like force didn't take over (it did).

Zbig is entitled to all the analysis he wants, as long as he spares us the moral righteousness.

 
At 7:36 AM, Blogger Mytwords said...

I appreciate your consistency in pointing out war crimes by whoever is committing them. I think this increases your credibility and it really makes me able to recommend your blog to anyone and everyone that wants to get a grip on what's happening. Thanks.

 
At 9:01 AM, Blogger the path less traveled said...

Dr. Cole,

First I would like to say I have always loved this blog. It is nice to have voice somewhere that is just, and not just about rhetoric.

It is important that we recognize each of these as such. But, there is a huge difference between a democratic government back by its people perpetrating such crimes versus an uncontrolled militia. There are different levels of culpability for both the peoples of the nations and the bodies themselves. Militias are militias because they do not represent the people of the nation, and they do not agree to follow rules of war. (Was that not the great complaint Britain had over our militias hiding in trees during the Revolutionary War.) On the other hand, you do have an armed forced that has done both. So while both have perpetrated war crimes, there is a difference. And, when you add the record in the Occupied territories, it seems such humanitarian abuses are systematic and endemic.

I wanted to add that I saw an interview of Zbigniew Brzezinski yesterday. We need more statesmen like him right now. He pointed out two important US policy errors that led us to this crisis. One, in destroying Iraq, we destroyed the power balance keeping the Iranians in check. This has allowed them to expand influence without fearing war at their border. Which is exceptionally frightening given this man's insane comments.

Second, I believe I read somewhere in your previous work, that if Syria was not forced out of Lebanon, this would not have happened. They had enough "security" infrastructures, ie their insane numbers of secret police, to keep them informed of Hezbollah actions. They would have stopped this so as not to be held accountable.

 
At 9:10 AM, Blogger Professor Asshole said...

CNN.com today has the following headline (at the bottom of the page): "Iraq: The Forgotten War."

Mission accomplished!

 
At 10:08 AM, Blogger cmdr_chex said...

This "war crime" idea is a problem. Isn't a "war" inherently a "crime?" We can get into legalistic and semantic arguments, but this is philosophical.

They're both war criminals! How morally convenient!

To put it bluntly, it's a war crime when "white" people kill other "white" people, or when the rest of us kill each other...but when "whitie" comes and drops a quarter of a million tons of explosives on our heads, it's colonialism, or imperialism, or police action, or war on terror or regime change.

There are two parties here, the party on behalf of self-determination and the party on behalf of colonial domination. Moral equivalency, whether calling everyone war criminals or anything else is ahistorical.

We've always been called names when we defend ourselves. Was Jown Brown, the abolitionist insurrectionist, a war criminal? (he wasn't exactly defending himself, but you get the idea) WWII was won bombing civilians, pure and simple. You really have to pick your side and call the other criminals. Hence why it's always a crime.

What are we to do when faced by the modern industrial war machinery but fire inaccurate (yet available) rockets at the civilians who with their tax dollars directly support this barbarity? I'm sure Nasrallah would love nothing more than to possess several US made and highly accurate cruise missiles.

Are any of us truly innocent? Why can they (Cheney, Israel, et al) selectively interpret the old conventions at will, while we sit passively and not define our own language? Every Katsuya rocket is people's resistance, whether accurate or not. Every Israeli attack is colonialism, whether surgical or not. Let's call a spade a spade, dude. This viewpoint is sorely missing here.

 
At 10:23 AM, Blogger ennui anomie said...

ISRAEL IS THE MOST DIVISIVE FORCE ON THE PLANET.

Ya that's right... you heard me. I can't think of any issue that breeds so much opinion, so much conjecture, and so much sentiment.. so much self-assured BS on all sides... and yes so much violence. Everyone from the zombie media to the guy next door in the trailer-park, to your local Rabbi, to the nutcase Iman over 'there' ...has something to say about Israel. I can't think of another issue that awakens opinion like Israeli affairs in North America does. It causes insanity?

Iraq? Palestine? Lebanon? Chechnya? Afghanistan? etc. Does anyone care in the West about the 'other' place? Think for a minute... does anyone really care?

Um, *reality check* no they don't. Casualties could post in the millions in terms of 'Arab' lives and the soccer moms, the voters as they were, wouldn't blink an eye as long as the dead aren't North Americans, um... I mean *white* North Americans... um... I mean 'white North Americans' that happen to be children of said soccer moms/dads and/or his/her spouse... I mean... um... Where's my bubble? No one cares.

Israel however... that's an issue we can all get emotional about. They had the Holocaust after all. Everyone cares about Israeli security suddenly; and I mean *suddenly*. The quiet slaughter of Palestinians for the past 10+ years is, apparently, not news-worthy.I live in Toronto, and one of my daily rags is the abomination called the 'National Post'. Ya that's right... I do read it; the same paper that tried to propagate the 'Iran wants Jewish people to wear armbands in a quasi-Nazi way' story. Turns out the story was utter bull s***. Figures. Page after page this 'newspaper' goes on and on about how Israel has the right to mass-murder in the name of self-defense. From 'news' to editorial content it's back-to-back justification for Israel's violence without critique. And lo and behold... who's the star of this drama? Mr. hair-helmet himself... born-again in Christ in all his majesty... PM Harper.

Hallejluiah.

But I digress

As of January 1, 2006 more than 400 'foreigners' (i.e non-Iraqi nationals) have been kidnapped since the the occupation of Iraq by the United States military began. The number of Iraqi nationals kidnapped is impossible to calculate and is probably ten times higher. You know where I'm going with this... it almost pains me to spell it out. I can't spell very well. If Israel's thinking came into play in Iraq, that would mean for the 400 kidnappings of non-nationals thus far... Israel would have to overtly kill 4000 civilians - at least - in revenge. Now that's a foreign policy you can set your watch to... Watch as John Bolton strokes himself. Ewww...


So let's spell it out together....


1.Two Israeli soldiers are kidnapped by ? (we don't even really know and stopped caring at some point) the MSM says it's Hamas.
2.Israel's response is to bomb Palestinian electrical, water and sanitation infrastructure in revenge. This makes no sense and is completely disproportional. Israel's response is nonsensical -- I don't think they even get what crime and punishment is about. Israel's response is violent, brutal, and wholly unjustified. Pardon me, but how does Israel have the right to find guilt in an unnamed person without trial, due process, without humanity – and then bomb the s*** out of the 'guilty' innocents as punishment, to punish a nation, as if 'they' – all the Palestinians were guilty of ...???... what's the charge? Truth is Israelis hate Arabs and don't see them as human beings. There I said it. If Ann Coulter can talk s*** so can I. It's true. Otherwise, how could their government drop a bomb on an apartment building full of families and feel justified as they walk away smirking and un-guilty in their mind - as people are screaming in anguish... ? To Israel nothing happened in that hypothetical bombing because the people in that building were not people – they were Arabs. Israel thinks it has license to indiscriminately kill anybody and anyone that gets in the way of their policy Israeli lives are more precious than Arab lives. The world backs them on this. Israel believes it is justified in murdering 'so-and-so' if they see fit; without trial, without due process, without democracy. State murder is apparently extra-judicial and permissible and the whole world should rally behind it. Israel's murderous rampage has a cost-benefit analysis of 100 innocents to 1 terrorist killed; and we are supposed to swallow this... we are supposed to adopt a 'shut-up' mentality because it's 'Israel' after all... and it has a right to defend itself'. Kill people for defense. This line of thinking is a farce. Israel has become the problem – our sacred cow is the problem. I thought Israel was a Western-style democracy and that's why the United States keeps feeding them BILLIONS of it's tax-payer dollars in weapons every year. Am I missing something? Oh ya.. it's terrorism. The terrorism moniker means anything is permissible. Murder at the hands of the state is permissible if it's done in the name of the so-called war on terror.. Silly me.
3.Hezbollah launches rockets into Israel. Who makes these weapons? Seriously.. who is the manufacturer? Can anyone tell me who is the criminal giving these morons these missels? Where is the media on this? WHO MAKES THE MISSILES? This is a story which no one will follow up on. The only reason this is happening is because someone is getting rich. Who? Hezbollah is the face of Shia outrage. I want to say they are an Iranian pawn, but that would be over-simplifying it. It's not like that. I get really pissed off when the map of the Middle East is painted with the broad stroke of the 'Arab' brush and is supposed to be understood in terms of either 'Shiite' or 'Sunni”. The Mid-East is a fragile crossroads of MANY people and cultures that managed to maintain a delicate understanding and hesitant tolerance of each other until... until... until...um... I can't spell. I think it's I-R-A-K. Because of the USA's actions, Iran... or more aptly, Persia.... finally has ascended to it's rightful position as the key player in that part of the world. Persia is exercising it's right to exert influence in their backyard. How can we argue otherwise? It's their world. It's their yard. And to accuse them of crimes because they are trying to stabilize their world is - insane. It's their world. IT'S THEIR WORLD. Persia is the major power in that part of the globe. I can't believe we are wasting time arguing whether or not they have a right to speak or flex muscle or decide policy or anything... they are not a cartoon. They are a country. They own the mid-east now - largely due to US policy. I think the 55 million people in Iran should be heard. Iran IS a democracy if you care to look... The losers are the Saudis. hmmmm
4.The Saudis.
Take a wild guess -- who is the biggest supporter of Israel's incursion into Lebanon other than the USA?:. 'Nuff said. You're smart enough. See how they are? They have no shame. They feel like they're entitled to everything at any cost.
5.Lebanon
This is plain and simple – it's a proxy war by the Saudis against Persian / Shia expansion. The Israelis are the suckers in this which makes me laugh and cry at the same time. It's soooooo ironic that Israel has become the Saudi military. I think it's going to take a year or two before the Israeli troops get this particular fact as they die. The world, however will never know, the 'media' will insure that we don't care. Let me make this clear --- This whole cluster-f*** is SAUDI ARABIA v. IRAN. This is a war waged by proxy in Lebanon. Wait a minute... the Saudi's have no army you say... I would point out that the Saudis just spent the past 20+ years putting billions of dollars into the US economy anf making sure 'their man' has been in the White House. If you doubt me see Craig Unger on this matter. Now, I'm thinking the Saudis want a return on their investment. The army they paid for is American and by proxy - Israeli. American taxpayers that work blue-collar jobs, sad to say, work half their day, every day - to pay for the Saudi army that is not supposed to exist. Get to work...
6.Hezbollah – patsies and blow-hards; except they have missiles. Without those arms they're a non-factor. Again, who is making theirarms? I can't believe anyone takes these morons seriously. I can't believe they take themselves seriously. I can't believe Israel takes them seriously.Connect the dots... Israel's actions just like Hezbollah's have NOTHING to do with what each party claims to be doing... Israel is reacting the way it is because it's reacting to something other than what we see in the papers. Disproportional? You bet....

 
At 11:24 AM, Blogger Vigilante said...

Can any one shed any light on my confusion about this passage from the International Commission of Jurists' statement of 21 July?

"As for the capturing of two Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah last week, under international law, enemy combatants held prisoners by the other party should be granted prisoner-of-war status in accordance with the III Geneva Convention. The taking of hostages is strictly forbidden by international law and thus constitutes a war crime."

The two IDF soldiers were not civilians; so, are they not Prisoners of War (POW's). I wish the Commission could have been more clear on this point.

 
At 2:17 PM, Blogger Cide Hamete Benengeli said...

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 4:05 PM, Blogger Boli-Nica said...

Seems to me that a big issue is getting rid of the Katyusha launchers, and the short and long range misiles. That is what bugs Israel the most, and will be a massive issue for ANY negotiation. Bottom line, that is a lot of rockets pointed at Israel and a formidable network of dug-in weapons.
It seems that both sides had their battle plans drawn up long before, and that it will be a bloody hill by hill fight in Southern Lebanon. At least that is what I gleaned from What I got from the media and reading Nassrullah's recent interview from .

 
At 4:26 PM, Blogger BadTux said...

I'm not sure what Israel hopes to accomplish in Lebanon. It certainly isn't an attempt to get the Lebanese government to take on Hezbollah. If the second-most-powerful military on the planet (Israel's) cannot defeat Hezbollah militarily, how on earth could they expect some 20,000 lightly-armed border police (the Lebanese "army") to do so? And fighting a guerilla war in an occupied land is a loser's game. The guerilla strikes, kills, then disappears into a sea of civilians, and the tools normally used by a government against guerillas (secret police, death squads, etc.) are precluded because you don't understand the language, don't understand the culture, don't know the people.

Of course, there is one way to win a guerilla war in an occupied land: Genocide. If the guerilla disappears into a sea of civilians, why, just kill all the civilians and the guerilla has nowhere to hide! Of course, all civilized nations frown at genocide, indeed, the state of Israel was formed as a reaction to Hitler's murderous ethnic and religious based genocides, so maybe Israel isn't planning genocide against the occupants of southern Lebanon. On the other hand, given their actions taken to isolate Lebanon and eliminate the ability of reporters to report on what's happening there, maybe they are. If so, then Israel has truly become that which they hate.

- Badtux the History Penguin

 
At 6:13 PM, Blogger The Buffalo In The Midst said...

Professor Cole:
There is actually an argument to be made that both Hizbullah and Israel have taken the civilian population of their enemy hostage. Since hostage-taking is forbidden, both are war criminals.

It is also possible that they have taken their OWN populations hostages, at least in the socio-psychological sense.

Hence, images like [ Not graphic] this:

I know that the terms 'Nazi' or 'Fascist' are thread-stoppers, but the resemblance, and the socio-psychological circumstances, that would lead to a photo-op like this, and it WAS a photo-op al la 'happy news'... can only be described as... Hitlerian, Hitler Youth mentality, Fascism.

Even if the children were only eager to please, they've been fanatic-ized, brainwashed as fanatically to the same psycho-emotional frenzy as the cabal that slaughtered 6 million of their kin.

The adults who raised these children... most likely 'settlers', should be held accountable for mass child abuse in the international arena.

I'm pretty sure that the government of Israel won't hold the adults accountable, unless they are reamed for causing bad worldwide publicity (which is likely to happen, but no one will hear about it).

 
At 6:28 PM, Blogger English European said...

Meanwhile in Iraq... I nearly cried when I read this story: Sectarian break-up of Iraq is now inevitable. Excerpt:

"Iraq as a political project is finished," a senior government official was quoted as saying, adding: "The parties have moved to plan B." He said that the Shia, Sunni and Kurdish parties were now looking at ways to divide Iraq between them and to decide the future of Baghdad, where there is a mixed population. "There is serious talk of Baghdad being divided into [Shia] east and [Sunni] west,"

So that's that then. It's all over. Bosnia-style ethnic cleansing and partition seems inevitable - except seven times the size, and with far greater geo-political consequences.

 
At 6:30 PM, Blogger Boli-Nica said...

So the bottom line question is: what kind of realistic solution can be imposed?

Facts are that Israel does not want hundreds of rocket launchers and missles, both mobile and in hardnened emplacements, aimed at its territory.

Hizbullah theoretically wants to maintain its legitimately won politicial control of the South of Lebanon.

How do you reconcile both objectives?

 
At 7:11 PM, Blogger sherm said...

Todays papers have pictures of Sec Rice shaking hands with Lebanon's prime minister. Here's my notion of the conversation:

Rice: Thank you for being so gracious and moderate in reaction to Israel's destuction of your country.

As you well know the US considers this violence on your country to be somewhat similar to the pain and anguish of a difficult birth. Ah, but how angelic the newborn child will be - peace, tranquility, loving neighbors from border to border - a secular Shangri La.

Leb PM: So you think I'm doing a good thing by accepting the destruction of Lebanon in a dispassionate and indeed appreciative way. But tell me, would President Bush feel and act the same way if the US were attacked?

Sec Price: My boy, if any country attacked the US the way Israel attacked you, Mr Bush would wipe that country off the face of the earth - to paraphrase Mr Ahmadinejad. But, of course, we're not expendable and you are - there is a difference.

Leb PM: For this clarity I thank you so much. As you Americans say "What, me worry?".

 
At 9:41 PM, Blogger johnMccutchen said...

An excellent discussion on NewsHour tonight...



"I run a state not a charity"

Bashar Assad



"Rice has two options. Either she's doing what she should be doingor she's sitting in front of a mirror, talking to herself."
Zbigniew Brzezinski







GWEN IFILL: Now, the American diplomatic push to end the violence between Hezbollah and Israel. It began today with Secretary of State Rice's visit to Lebanon, a country once again caught up in the fighting and the maneuvering of outside powers and once again a focus of American interests in the Middle East.

To assess the Rice visit to Beirut, we're joined by Hisham Melhem, Washington correspondent for the Lebanese newspaper An-Nahar and host of a weekly program on Al-Arabiya. He was born and raised in Lebanon, but is now an American citizen.

And Theodore Kattouf, a former State Department official who spent 31 years covering Middle Eastern affairs, his final posting was to Syria as U.S. ambassador from 2001 to 2003.


Welcome to you, both.

 
At 1:17 AM, Blogger Cide Hamete Benengeli said...


Jonathan Cook,
who is based in northern Israel, has some very intriguing observations about the rockets and where they are aimed.

 
At 2:24 PM, Blogger Malcolm said...

Col. Sam Gardiner/Brian Lehrer Show Tues 07/25/06 WNYC/New York, NY
1) Israel and the United States planned the Lebanon attack for several months and were simply allowing the oportunity to arise
2) they knew about the Hezbollah plan to kidnap: intel of the Syrian/Iran/Hez meeting in Damascus establishing the plot
3) noting the original Israeli annoucement of the Leb. campaign to last a week[now 11 days ago], with subsequent annoucements that it will be another 2 weeks indicates the unforseen dificult of achieving objectives
4) part of the cause of the time frame change is the level of entrenchment of the Hez, and the level of weapons being used, the level of stockpiles; there were appox. 12-14 occupied positions by the Hez, and Tyre was much more entrenched than had been estimated
5) the nature of the proxy war: Hez supplied by Syria and Iran, the weapons being supplied by the US, and the US political support for the incursion
6) the sychronization of attacks in Bagdad up 40% over the same time period
7) Moktadr al Sadr threatening any attack on Iran will end his militia support in Iraq
8) Saudi Arabia announcing any furtherance of Israeli aggression will get Saudi Arabian support against Israel
9) Israel has annouced they will occupy southern Leb until a peacekeeping force is ready to take over
10) the mission of Israels aggression was to change the military/political paradigm of the MiddleEast by effectively elimanating the Hez

The questions remain of the bigger picture, that is with the destruction of Leb and a $1b gift from Saudi Arabia for reconstruction, how will the cards fall; has the Hez been sactified by the global Islamic population(and others); has Israel lost the tacit support Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia first offered in condemnation of the Hez; has Israel gained the security it wanted with the elimanation of the Hez as a military threat? Has the United States gained any position in Iraq or any other country in the MiddleEast?

 

Post a Comment

<< Home