24 Comments

1. David Thomson:

99% of Beirut untouched? This blows my mind. I thought that half the city had been turned into rubble! The Stockholm Syndrome seems to dominate the MSM’s reporting. When will these “professionals” show some courage?

Jul 26, 2006 - 3:16 pm 2. Roy Lofquist:

Dear Roger and friends,

I believe that what is happening in Lebanon is to a large extent strategic balance sheet warfare. The Israelis know who owns the buildings. In order to eliminate the effectiveness of Hezbollah they are targeting not only its military assest but its finacial assets. This view is reinforced by today’s bombing of real estate in Tyre.

Regards,
Roy

Jul 26, 2006 - 3:46 pm 3. Terrye:

Why does this not surprise me. After the Jenin massacre I am getting used to this kind of thing. The question is, when will the media catch on to the fact that they are being used, played, lied to etc.

Jul 26, 2006 - 4:26 pm 4. ras:

Terrye,

Catch on? Like they aren’t doing it on purpose?

Jul 26, 2006 - 4:29 pm 5. Ron:

With news coverage from CNN its news as you like it and in this case Hesballah likes it their way. CNN has had a lot of practice selling out from their days in Iraq when Saddam and his son’s wrote CNN’s bylines.

Its unbelievable that one of our news organizations is printing the propaganda of a bunch of killers. Can you imagine what would have happened if something like this occoured in World War 2? Just what does it take before people start demanding that these so called journalists, these so called news men and women, do some serious time for aiding and abetting the enemy.

Jul 26, 2006 - 4:30 pm 6. PeterUK:

In WWII there weren’t billions in oil money floating about,nor was there a “Loyal Opposition” so mesmerised by the pursuit of power that it could see nought else.

Jul 26, 2006 - 6:32 pm 7. flicka47:

I would like to recommend that everyone do what I am going to do -
Send a link and a copy of the map to everyone I know.

Jul 26, 2006 - 6:38 pm 8. Mark Razak:

Why is the MSM`s misleading reporting a surprise at all? MSM is a leftist propaganda machine, period. Its agenda is the defeat of America in Iraq. All other priorities have been rescinded. Israel`s attack on Hezbollah threatens that agenda. Therefore, the Israeli offensive must be made to fail. If Israel`s military action succeeds and Hezbollah is crushed, what follows could have profound political consequences in Lebanon, Syria and Iran which in turn could provide the death blow to the terrorist organizations in Iraq. That is the MSM`s nightmare scenario. The MSM will do everything in its power to prevent it.

Jul 26, 2006 - 9:33 pm 9. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

The map is in error. There is no airport (based on Google Earth imagery) where they claim it. What else is missing?

CNN’s report was the most honest I have seen from them in ages. They made it completely clear that they had been tricked into a media circus by Hezbollah for propaganda purposes. They commented on the behavior of their “handler” and the censorship throughout the piece. They ended it when there was one too many propaganda events, and they said they just left. For once, CNN did it right.

Jul 26, 2006 - 10:06 pm 10. Michael J. Totten:

My American friends in Beirut dispute this, including the Israel supporters. Achrafieh (in Christian East Beirut) has been hit at least four times. The targets were moving trucks that turned out not to be related to Hezbollah. Honest mistakes, sure, but that map doesn’t show all.

The landmark Manara lighthouse at the northwest tip was also destroyed, and that doesn’t appear on the map either.

Jul 26, 2006 - 10:10 pm 11. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

I fear that Israel is badly botching this war. Badly!

While busily creating events that feed the anti-war and anti-Israel crowds (bombing urban centers, killing UN inspectors, injuring and killing lots of Lebanese “civilians”), they are doing little to achieve their objective.

They started by relying way too much on air power (probably because their military chief is IAF). That was idiotic – nobody would expect to take out a guerilla force which is deeply embedded in a friendly civilian populace to be vulnerable to air power! The guy should be sacked. Today.

On the ground, they sent in the famed Golani brigade to capture only two villages. And they got clobbered. This in itself is a major psychological victory for Hezbollah and Iran. Hezbollah bloodied the brigade, and held them off for a couple of days and hurt them. That hundreds of Hezbollah may have been killed in the fighting doesn’t subtract in the slightest from this victory for the terrorists.

Furthermore, what did Israel expect to gain from conquering Ras and Bint Jubayl? Sure, they killed some bad guys, took out some fortifications, found Iranian equipment, and destroyed some supplies. So what? Those are all easily replaced. So far, there is no significant gain. More rockets hit Israel yesterday, after these “victories,” than in any other day of the conflict.

Israel needs to win decisively, and they need to do so before the predictable pressures from the decadent and foolish “anti-war” folks in the western powers force them to stop, leaving Hezbollah as the winner.

But to do so, Israel needs a new strategy. Perhaps they should send in a very strong, deep land strike – to the river – which then would spread out behind the Hezbollah positions, cutting them off. Then the villages could be dealt with. They should have done this a week ago.

This would have had higher initial casualties, as the spearhead hit prepared defenses – especially IED’s, but in the long run would have been far more effective, and importantly, would have been viewed as an Israeli victory.

In the past, this is the sort of thing Israel would have done. I suspect Sharon would have done something this bold (and violent) were he still with us.

Israel is fighting in an asymmetric war. That means the weaker side (Hezbollah) will fight using guerilla and terror tactics, and will especially seek to win in the psychological arena. They do this through the inevitable civilian casualties (no matter that these “civilians” may be aiding and abetting the terrorists); they demoralize the attacker with hit and run ambushes, and booby traps – IED’s, etc; they demonstrate that they have not been injured by increasing their terror rocket fire into Israel; their leader avoids decapitation attacks and keeps appearing on TV.

It doesn’t take much of this to defeat a big, competent (is the IAF still competent?) army. They already did it once before.

Jul 26, 2006 - 10:22 pm 12. Godzilla:

Anyone else get the idea that this war is starting to play out like the Rocky movie? Israel better wake up. They are in a fight.

Jul 26, 2006 - 10:28 pm 13. Michael J. Totten:

If Israel did what John Moore suggested, and left the north of the country alone, most Lebanese would be cheerleading Israel today instead of screaming hatred at them.

Israel has no mental category for Israel-neutral and Israel-friendly Lebanese. They are treating Lebanon as though it were the West Bank, and treating Beirut as though it were Ramallah.

The international airport was hit, but roads into Syria from the Bekka Valley were not.

Lebanese Christian TV stations were destroyed, so now the Christians have to watch Hezbollah TV because that’s all they get.

They hit the port at Jounieh. Jounieh is (I should say “was”) as pro-Israel as New York.

Jul 27, 2006 - 12:19 am 14. Terrye:

I am no military analyst and I have to say I am growing weary of all the people who seem to think they are. I don’t know if Israel is botching this war, I am not qualified to say…but I know who started it.

I am sure that Israel is aware of more facts on the ground in the region than I have access to. I am also sure that if the people of the region did not support Hezbellah for whatever reason, the terrorists would not be there in such force.

It could just as easily be said that if Israel only hit targets in the south, Hezbellah would just take refuge in the north…and from what I have seen I would say that a great many Lebanese would let them do that.

The point is that this thing could end tomorrow if Hezbellah would pull itself back from the border and return the soldiers they kidnapped. So maybe it would be more useful to lay off lecturing Israel for awhile and put more energy into pressuring the people who started this thing… to end it. But then again that is not what happens is it? It is always up to Israel to back off, not fire, look the other way, accept the fact that if they did not exist none of this would be happening so the least they can do is not make things uncomfortable for their neighbors. And where does that lead to? More of the same.

As for how proIsrael they are, maybe so for some…but I know that yesterday in that press conference the PM was praising Hezbellah for the great job of kicking Israel’s ass they did back in the 80’s. If he can not stand up to them in a press conference what are the chances the rest of the Lebanese will say no to them on the ground? They have not been able to do so yet.

I hate this whole thing, I really do. I don’t imagine the Bush people like it either, it will hurt them to see more trouble over in the Middle East. But I have to say I am getting tired of the violent soap opera of the region. They are always is some crisis and often as not it is of their making and while I still support democracy in the region it must be remembered that democracy requires responsibility on the part of the electorate. Hanging out with terrorists has its price. Sheesh.

I can remember when 87 people died in Waco, Texas because of the company they kept and they were American citizens. But somehow if it is the Middle East it is different, there are no real rules.

Jul 27, 2006 - 3:40 am 15. Terrye:

BTW, I don’t think Israel is betting clobbered.

Jul 27, 2006 - 3:43 am 16. JK Ribera:

I would define someone who claims to know exactly what is going on during war as a pompous ass.

Jul 27, 2006 - 6:52 am 17. JK Ribera:

I would add that anyone who says Beirut was as pro-Israel as New York (see above) is a blowhard.

Jul 27, 2006 - 6:55 am 18. Always right:

Firstly, I am not military or even strategic genius. But I disagree with some of the comments above.

If Israel started bombing all over Lebanon first day into the conflict, Totten might have a point. It is now day 14 (?), hard to believe Hezbollah would just stay put and hunker down in southern Lebanon and be blown up by the IDF. Of course they are moving north and away from the initial area of engagement.

What did the Israel-neutral and Israel-friendly Lebanese do when the bad guys move into their area?

Jul 27, 2006 - 8:44 am 19. Michael J. Totten:

I would add that anyone who says Beirut was as pro-Israel as New York (see above) is a blowhard.

I didn’t say Beirut, I said Jounieh. It’s a (large) Christian port city.

Jul 27, 2006 - 8:56 am 20. submandave:

JK, if I were only allowed one person’s opinion concerning Beirut, Michael Totten would certainly be on my short list. That said, and while I won’t question his read on Lebanese attitudes, I will quietly side with Terrye in believing there are other less public but none-the-less valid military reasons for the Israeli strikes into the city. For example, I’ll accept Mr. Totten’s report of strikes in Achrafieh but recognize that they were most likely predicated on intel of Hezbollah logistics/resupply. I’d also point out, however, that while airstrikes against these targets does demonstrate that the map does not show all IDF action, it does not disprove the claim that the vast majority of Beirut remains untouched.

JM, the target identified along the Northen coast that is mislabeled “airport” is in fact the seaport. I assumed the person making the graphic either misread or that it was identified simply as “port” and they assumed it meant airport. In either case, you are correct that the airport to the south of the city was also struck, but that, too, does not disprove the claim that 99% of Beirut remains intact.

Jul 27, 2006 - 2:42 pm 21. Gazzer:

So about 99.9% of New York was left intact after 9/11. In other words, silly numbers games like 99% of Beirut remains intact are meaningless.

Jul 27, 2006 - 7:59 pm 22. Always right:

Gazzer,

True, 99.9% of NYC was not destoyed.

However, we don’t have a MSM as Hezbollah mouthpiece saying Israel indiscriminately targeting whole Lebanon or Beirut.

Wise up, you lefty.

Jul 28, 2006 - 6:52 am 23. Gazzer:

Precisely,
Taking a number out of context is totally meaningless. So the title of this article should be renamed:

“99% of Beirut untouched which is significant because we don’t have a MSM as Hezbollah mouthpiece saying Israel indiscriminately targeting whole Lebanon or Beirut.”

Hardly, meaningful any more is it.

“Wise up, you lefty.” Ha, no doubt you were one of those ‘wise’ people who thought Iraq was a good idea, and cheered as Bush swaggered about saying ‘mission accomplished’. Moronic shallow pot-shots like ‘Wise up, you lefty’ are hardly a convincing argument that there is any intellectual acumen there on the ‘always right’.

Jul 28, 2006 - 11:10 am 24. Bostonian:

Gazz,

Speaking of moronic, shallow potshots, the “mission accomplished” myth originates in GWB’s visit to a Navy ship whose crewmembers had hung up a banner saying “mission accomplished” to congratulate *themselves* on completing a tour of duty.

Bush did not say “mission accomplished.”

But I’m sure that won’t dissuade you from repeating your tiresome lie another five hundred times.

***
As for the war in Iraq, why yes, I think that it is a good idea to have another 25 million people on the side of democracy rather than under the bootheel of a vicious dictator. You see, I actually believe in freedom.

Jul 28, 2006 - 3:58 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: