43 Comments

1. Bruce Wechsler:

I started reading Debka shortly after 9-11 (indeed for a while I was hooked on it). Prior to the last year or so they gave a fair bit of attention to the enigmatic Imad Mughniyeh. They claimed, in essence, that he was the real “best terrorist”…responsible for countless (and some infamous) terrorist attacks and surgically changing his appearance from time to time, but I hardly if ever saw his name from any other sources, MSM or otehrwise.

A few weeks ago, I sent Debka an e-mail asking “what ever happened to Mugniyeh”? They haven’t responded yet, and now don’t need to: see story about “The Fox” at JPOST here: http://tinyurl.com/ll7fd

Here’s hoping he was at the Syrian border crossing when it was taken out earlier today.

By the way, my biggest fear about the current war is that Debka was right in its pre-Iraq war claim that Saddam sent much of his WMD to Syria/Lebanon/Bekaa valley, and that they arepart of the “surprises” that Nasrallah has promised.

Jul 29, 2006 - 6:49 pm 2. Otter:

A few points:

* There’s a general sense in Israel that the IDF hasn’t exactly been covering itself in glory for quite a few months now, and certainly since the Keren Shalom fiasco.

* That said, there’s a notion among Americans that every outgunned enemy is necessarily contemptible and incompetent. Any Israeli will tell you that Hezbollah is an incredibly tough, organized, well-prepared adversary.

* The blogger consensus that a war on Syria and Iran is warranted is completely detached from reality. There is simply no way that’s happening.

* What would it take for the US to get involved in a new major war in Vietnam? That’s the psychological hurdle you’re talking about for Israel to get involved in some long-term operation in Lebanon.

Jul 29, 2006 - 6:55 pm 3. Patrick S Lasswell:

Water, bottled water. I drank a lot of it last week when I was in the Middle East, and I mostly had air conditioning where I was at. I wonder how much bottle water Hezbollah had on hand when the balloon went up.

It’s possible that they had two and a half months worth of supplies laid in like the defenders of Iwo Jima. I’ve read amateurs elsewhere compare Hezbollah to the Imperial Japanese Army, but nobody who has done so seems clear on the logistics or the fate of that institution. I do not think that Hezbollah is tremendously clear on logistics or fate, either.

Jul 29, 2006 - 6:56 pm 4. daniel:

here’s an interesting (and related) analysis I just read, by Frank Martin:

http://varifrank.com/archives/2006/07/things_are_not.php

PS- I got it on Pajamas Media. Definitely one of the top 5 places to get your news on the confict. Good Work!!!

Jul 29, 2006 - 6:59 pm 5. Roger:

Thanks for the kind words, daniel. Ironically, I was posting the Varifrank link on here just at the very oment you were adding your comment.

Jul 29, 2006 - 7:02 pm 6. chuck:

* There’s a general sense in Israel that the IDF hasn’t exactly been covering itself in glory for quite a few months now, and certainly since the Keren Shalom fiasco.

I have been thinking that one of the first things that is going to happen in Israel after the current conflict is a serious review of the IDF, in particular of their training. The colliding helicopters, blown up tanks, and friendly fire incidents point to a decline in standards that I am sure they will want to remedy.

* What would it take for the US to get involved in a new major war in Vietnam?

It isn’t widely reported, but I believe we now have military advisors in Vietnam. Politics, bedfellows, and all that.

Jul 29, 2006 - 7:30 pm 7. Terrye:

I don’t know if Israel is any more likely to win the war in terms of public opinion than the US is. They are always at a disadvantage.

I am going out on a limb here and say I have no idea what the Israelis plan to do. I am going to wait and see. Can they destroy Hezbellah? As a fighting organization? Maybe, but there is more to this outfit than that.

Jul 29, 2006 - 7:32 pm 8. chuck:

I think Varifrank has been taken over by aliens flying black helicopters. He controls what is posted on his blog and he assures us that he is not a black helicopter sort. It follows as night the day that even now one of those spooky black beaters is landing in the back yard to take him home. Count on it.

Jul 29, 2006 - 8:15 pm 9. kioman:

Do not give up on Israel.

Jul 29, 2006 - 8:23 pm 10. Mike Silverman:

The past several weeks have been terribly disheartening. The same military force which defeated four entire Arab armies in six days a generation ago now seems incapable of doing much more then fighting a war of attrition to a draw against a small (albeit very well-trained) guerilla army in a single Arab state.

Jul 29, 2006 - 8:32 pm 11. Terrye:

chuck:

I must be getting lazy. If the rant lasts more than 500 words anymore I just can’t bring myself to stick with it.

Jul 29, 2006 - 8:41 pm 12. Terrye:

Mike:

Oh come on. This is not fair. They are not facing an Arab army, that is the whole point.

What do people want from Israel? Do they want them to nuke the neighbor and end this thing before we all get bored with it or what?

I don’t think Israel has failed, but I do think a lot of pundits who are not out there fighting and living with this day in and out are showing a great willingness to judge other people who actually have to do the job.

I don’t know what is going on and neither do most people watching the news.

Jul 29, 2006 - 8:45 pm 13. Roger:

“If the rant lasts more than 500 words anymore I just can’t bring myself to stick with it.”

You have more patience than I do, Terrye. I check out after about 100 words. 200 max. Who has that much to say?

Jul 29, 2006 - 8:49 pm 14. John Moore ( Useful Fools ):

Roger,
Aren’t you being an armchair quarterback?

As you know, my glass has been half empty. I am glad yours is half full. I hope you are right.

See this for an interesting viewpoint. It backs up the idea that Hezbollah is a different kind of foe, with different command and communications infrastructure.

Assuming you are correct, there is the question of: why now? Why not a week ago? Did they know that they could avoid an imposed cease fire for two weeks?

I suspect that, if you are correct, they are finally adapting – something that they and we are famously good at.

Oh, and Varifrank has been smoking something. I’ll stick to Debka.

I think that if we had any other US administration, Israel would already be forced into a cease fire. It is a good thing that we have an administration that understands who our allies are in the War on Terror (or is that World War III or the War Against Islamists).

Patrick Lasswell

An insightful post. Did Hezbollah learn from Massada? Or did they miss this little detail.

Jul 29, 2006 - 9:00 pm 15. Bruce Wechsler:

Terrye’s right. It is impossible for us to know what exactly the IDF/Olmert intend to accomplish militarily or how well they are executing upon it. They, more than we, seem to understand the foolishness of telegraphing your punches in war time.

Chuck: My friend’s brother was the seasoned pilot who died in the helicopter collision near Haifa a week ago. They don’t get better than he was. That kind of mistake, and friendly fire, always happens in war, we just hear about it more now than ever before.

Add to that the heightened sophistication of weaponry that is now in the enemies’ hands and the fact that Hezbollah does not have the deceny or cahones to line up like men in a REAL army for battle.

Jul 29, 2006 - 9:10 pm 16. Terrye:

Roger:

I think I have been at this for too long. Maybe I need some blogger enhancement drugs because I just can’t get it up for a lot of this anymore.

Jul 29, 2006 - 9:16 pm 17. Terrye:

Bruce:

We have had more than a couple of those crashes ourselves in Iraq. It happens.

Jul 29, 2006 - 9:18 pm 18. Doug S.:

Quite frankly, I don’t see how Varifrank’s analysis is any more absurd than those who insist that the IDF and the Ohlmert government is tripping over its own shoelaces. This is war, and in war, not even the people who are paid to know what’s going on at any given moment know exactly what’s going on at any given moment.

I do think Varifrank has a good point in that the IDF wants the Hezzies to stand and fight. If they stand still for long enough, you know where to drop the bombs. If more of Saddam’s bad boys had stood and fought rather than melted away, Iraq wouldn’t have been quite so nettlesome in months after. Whether the IDF is accomplishing that goal right now, we won’t know until afterward. Heck, the IDF won’t know for sure until afterward.

As for accidents and friendly fire incidents, they are, as others have pointed out, inevitable in war. IIRC, we suffered as many casualties from friendly fire in Desert Storm as from enemy fire. And I don’t buy for a moment the notion that that sort of thing never happened in earlier IDF wars; either we never heard about them or they were forgotten in the rush of victory.

In any event, there is one thing that the doom-and-gloomists never seem to mention: That a strong majority in Israel wants to take off the gloves and have it out with the Hezzies. The peaceniks are in full retreat. Ohlmert is a successful politician who has to answer to his electorate, and war is his path of least resistance now. He has to know that if he executes this war in a half-assed way, he’s going down, the Kadena party is going down, and Israeli politics will devolve into sheer chaos.

Jul 29, 2006 - 9:43 pm 19. chuck:

We have had more than a couple of those crashes ourselves in Iraq. It happens.

This is true, but considering the numbers involved, the distances flown, the stress on the machinery, and a period of three years, there have been remarkably few. And it seems to me even fewer recently, truck and hummer rollovers seem more common (knock, knock). I think this shows that no training is a substitute for an actual combat situation and that there is always a lethal learning curve. However, proper training helps and the US has made adjustments. I expect Israel will do the same.

Jul 29, 2006 - 9:54 pm 20. Terrye:

Doug:

I don’t think Israel is losing. She is not doing just what some people think she should the way they think she should, but that does not mean she is losing.

Maybe Israel is not looking at this as the end of it all, maybe to Israel it is just one more campaign in a long war and so they are fighting not just to obliterate and or occupy Lebanon today..even though some folks seem to think they know better.

Jul 29, 2006 - 9:57 pm 21. Terrye:

chuck:

Yes, the Americans are well trained, but it does happen and not just in battle. There was an accident like this in the states not long ago.

Gale has two words for helicopters: death traps.

Jul 29, 2006 - 10:11 pm 22. Bruce Wechsler:

I hope Varifrank’s on the money;

I also hope none of the enemy read it in time.

Jul 29, 2006 - 10:29 pm 23. Yehudit:

What I hear isn’t that “the IDF and the Ohlmert government is tripping over its own shoelaces.” It’s not a question of incompetency so much as clarity and resolve (as the blog says). People who know Israeli politicians say that Olmert, Perez and Halutz are susceptible to political correctness and are reluctant to play the “bullying Israeli” by going all out. Also Halutz is IAF and therefore out of touch with ground war strategy. The other generals have been pushing to go all out with a ground campaign.

Lots of links in my post, including Caroline Glick who’s an uberhawk and usually spot-on, and also isn’t happy with how things are going. Also read the comment by Ben-David near the end of that post.

I think Varifranke is wrong, he is letting tall tales of the Mossad go to his head. The truth is that Israel is an open frank society which easily airs its dirty laundry.

However the latest is that they are going to start a ground campaign so maybe the other generals won.

Jul 29, 2006 - 10:59 pm 24. Yehudit:

PS I don’t know anyone who says Israel is losing, just that they need to get on the stick and win this thing because Bush can’t hold the window of opportunity open forever. If the world forces a ceasefire before Hezbollah is destroyed, then Israel will be subjected to increasingly severe rocket attacks and will have to go in again and that time the rest of the ME will be dragged in.

Jul 29, 2006 - 11:02 pm 25. Yehudit:

also Ze’ev Schiff and Michael Oren and Carl In Jerusalem are not happy.

The Bush admin is more hawkish about this war than the Olmert admin. Condi has to go to Israel to light a fire under Olmert’s butt.

Jul 29, 2006 - 11:15 pm 26. Naiman:

Every criticism of the Israeli government’s actions in Lebanon should acknowledge the role of the Bush Administration, which has given the green light, blocked efforts for a cease-fire, and provided the weapons. And the British government, which has supported the U.S. and is allowing U.S. shipments of weapons to Israel to pass through Scotland.

Robert Naiman
Just Foreign Policy
http://www.justforeignpolicy.org

Jul 29, 2006 - 11:21 pm 27. Charlie (Colorado):

Every criticism of the Israeli government’s actions in Lebanon should acknowledge the role of the Bush Administration, which has given the green light, blocked efforts for a cease-fire, and provided the weapons. And the British government, which has supported the U.S. and is allowing U.S. shipments of weapons to Israel to pass through Scotland.

Does that include all the people criticizing Israel for not moving fast enough or being brutal enough?

(And, as for a “Just Foreign Policy”, anyone who thinks Israel not responding to multiple provocations is “just” has a very peculiar, even aberrant, idea of justice.)

Jul 29, 2006 - 11:29 pm 28. rayber:

For the U.S., the Middle East is a “strategic playing field”, where the game is establishing full U.S. domination. The U.S. already controls Iraq and Afghanistan, and considers Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Jordan and a few other states as friendly cooperating regimes.

But even with this massive foothold, full U.S. domination is still far from established. Iran has only been strengthened by the Iraq war and refuses to accept the decrees of the master. Throughout the Arab world, including in the “friendly regimes”, there is boiling anger at the U.S., at the heart of which is not only the occupation of Iraq, but the brutal oppression of the Palestinians, and the U.S. backing of Israel’s policies. The new axis of the four enemies of the Bush administration (Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria and Iran) are bodies viewed by the Arab world as resisting U.S. or Israel’s rule, and standing for Arab liberation.

From Bush’s perspective, he only has two years to consolidate his vision of complete U.S. control of the Middle East, and to do that, all seeds of resistance should be crushed in a devastating blow that will make it clear to every single Arab that obeying the master is the only way to stay alive. If Israel is willing to do the job, and crush not only the Palestinians, but also Lebanon and Hezbollah, then the U.S., torn from the inside by growing resentment over Bush’s wars, and perhaps unable to send new soldiers to be killed for this cause right now, will give Israel all the backing it can. As Rice announced in her visit in Jerusalem on July 25, what is at stakes is “a new Middle East”. “We will prevail” – she promised Olmert.

But Israel is not sacrificing its soldiers and citizens only to please the Bush administration. The “new Middle East” has been a dream of the Israeli ruling military circles since at least 1982, when Sharon led the country to the first Lebanon war with precisely this declared goal. Hezbollah’s leaders have argued for years that its real long-term role is to protect Lebanon, whose army is too weak to do this. They have said that Israel has never given up its aspirations for Lebanon and that the only reason it pulled out of Southern Lebanon in 2000 is because Hezbollah’s resistance has made maintaining the occupation too costly. Lebanon’s people know what every Israeli old enough to remember knows – that in the vision of Ben Gurion, Israel’s founding leader, Israel’s border should be “natural”, that is – the Jordan river in the East, and the Litani river of Lebanon in the north. In 1967, Israel gained control over the Jordan river, in the occupied Palestinian land, but all its attempts to establish the Litani border have failed so far.

As I argued in Israel/Palestine, already when the Israeli army left Southern Lebanon in 2000, the plans to return were ready.[12] But in Israel’s military vision, in the next round, the land should be first “cleaned” of its residents, as Israel did when it occupied the Syrian Golan Heights in 1967, and as it is doing now in southern Lebanon. To enable Israel’s eventual realization of Ben Gurion’s vision, it is necessary to establish a “friendly regime” in Lebanon, one that will collaborate in crushing any resistance. To do this, it is necessary first to destroy the country, as in the U.S. model of Iraq. These were precisely Sharon’s declared aims in the first Lebanon war. Israel and the U.S. believe that now conditions have ripened enough that these aims can finally be realized.

Tanya Reinhart, Professor Emeritus of linguistics and media studies at Tel Aviv University

Jul 30, 2006 - 2:51 am 29. rayber:

The air campaign against Lebanon is inextricably related to US-Israeli strategic objectives in the broader Middle East including Syria and Iran. In recent developments, Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice stated that the main purpose of her mission to the Middle East was not to push for a ceasefire in Lebanon, but rather to isolate Syria and Iran. (Daily Telegraph, 22 July 2006)

At this particular juncture, the replenishing of Israeli stockpiles of US produced WMDs points to an escalation of the war both within and beyond the borders of Lebanon.

This broader military agenda is intimately related to strategic oil and oil pipelines. It is supported by the Western oil giants which control the pipeline corridors. In the context of the war on Lebanon, it seeks Israeli territorial control over the East Mediterranean coastline.

Is there a relationship between the bombing of Lebanon and the inauguration of the World’s largest strategic pipeline, which will channel more a million barrels of oil a day to Western markets?

Virtually unnoticed, the inauguration of the Ceyhan-Tblisi-Baku (BTC) oil pipeline, which links the Caspian sea to the Eastern Mediterranean, took place on the 13th of July, at the very outset of the Israeli sponsored bombings of Lebanon.

One day before the Israeli air strikes, the main partners and shareholders of the BTC pipeline project, including several heads of State and oil company executives were in attendance at the port of Ceyhan. They were then rushed off for an inauguration reception in Istanbul, hosted by Turkey’s President Ahmet Necdet Sezer in the plush surroundings of the «Ωra°Æ†Palace.

Also in attendance was British Petroleum’s (BP) CEO, Lord Browne together with senior government officials from Britain, the US and Israel. BP leads the BTC pipeline consortium. Other major Western shareholders include Chevron, Conoco-Phillips, France’s Total and Italy’s ENI. (see Annex)

Israel’s Minister of Energy and Infrastructure Binyamin Ben-Eliezer was present at the venue together with a delegation of top Israeli oil officials.

The BTC pipeline totally bypasses the territory of the Russian Federation. It transits through the former Soviet republics of Azerbaijan and Georgia, both of which have become US “protectorates”, firmly integrated into a military alliance with the US and NATO. Moreover, both Azerbaijan and Georgia have longstanding military cooperation agreements with Israel. In 2005, Georgian companies received some $24 million in military contracts funded out of U.S. military assistance to Israel under the so-called “Foreign Military Financing (FMF) program”.

Israel has a stake in the Azeri oil fields, from which it imports some twenty percent of its oil. The opening of the pipeline will substantially enhance Israeli oil imports from the Caspian sea basin.

But there is another dimension which directly relates to the war on Lebanon. Whereas Russia has been weakened, Israel is slated to play a major strategic role in “protecting” the Eastern Mediterranean transport and pipeline corridors out of Ceyhan.

The bombing of Lebanon is part of a carefully planned and coordinated military road map. The extension of the war into Syria and Iran has already been contemplated by US and Israeli military planners. This broader military agenda is intimately related to strategic oil and oil pipelines. It is supported by the Western oil giants which control the pipeline corridors. In the context of the war on Lebanon, it seeks Israeli territorial control over the East Mediterranean coastline.

Israel is now part of the Anglo-American military axis, which serves the interests of the Western oil giants in the Middle East and Central Asia.

While the official reports state that the BTC pipeline will “channel oil to Western markets”, what is rarely acknowledged is that part of the oil from the Caspian sea would be directly channeled towards Israel. In this regard, an underwater Israeli-Turkish pipeline project has been envisaged which would link Ceyhan to the Israeli port of Ashkelon and from there through Israel’s main pipeline system, to the Red Sea.

The objective of Israel is not only to acquire Caspian sea oil for its own consumption needs but also to play a key role in re-exporting Caspian sea oil back to the Asian markets through the Red Sea port of Eilat. The strategic implications of this re-routing of Caspian sea oil are farreaching. In April 2006, Israel and Turkey announced plans for four underwater pipelines, which would bypass Syrian and Lebanese territory.

“Turkey and Israel are negotiating the construction of a multi-million-dollar energy and water project that will transport water, electricity, natural gas and oil by pipelines to Israel, with the oil to be sent onward from Israel to the Far East.

The new Turkish-Israeli proposal under discussion would see the transfer of water, electricity, natural gas and oil to Israel via four underwater pipelines.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145961328841&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

Prior to the bombing of Lebanon, Israel and Turkey had announced the underwater pipeline routes, which bypassed Syria and Lebanon. These underwater pipeline routes did not overtly encroach on the territorial sovereignty of Lebanon and Syria.

On the other hand, the development of alternative land based corridors (for oil and water) through Lebanon and Syria would require Israeli-Turkish territorial control over the Eastern Mediterranean coastline through Lebanon and Syria.

The implementation of this project requires the militarisation of the East Mediterranean coastline, sea ways and land routes, extending from the port of Ceyhan across Syria and Lebanon to the Lebanese-Israeli border.

Is this not one of the hidden objectives of the war on Lebanon? Open up a space which enables Israel to control a vast territory extending from the Lebanese border through Syria to Turkey.

Michel Chossudovsky, GlobalResearch.ca

Jul 30, 2006 - 3:07 am 30. Bruce Wechsler:

Rayber, you are violating the “max 500 word” rule of thumb. Rant your lunacy elsewhere, if you want it read past the first paragraph.

One other note: you wrote that Bush intends to “…make it clear to every single Arab that obeying the master is the only way to stay alive”?? Hello…that’s not a lesson they need to learn…that’s their reality for the last who knows how many decades/centuries.

Lower your dosage soon.

Jul 30, 2006 - 5:41 am 31. Always right:

I don’t have any more insight to the current warfare. However, my biggest worry is that Americans tuning out ALL war conflicts.

General public just don’t care about them (Iraq, Afghan, ME, etc) anymore. Afghan and Iraq had been given a chance to start over, Americans have done their jobs, however it turns out over there, it is no longer Americans’ business. The current ME conflict will be viewed as strictly regional. Americans will expect the Bush admin to “control” (”restrict”) it in that region only. And most Americans saw and heard arab (mooslem) terrorists and Israelis going at each other for the past four decades, the current conflict is just another “ME war,version 4.0.1″. What the difference is this time, how it ties to us, Americans just won’t care to know.

The government, the local authorities all play their parts to “ensure” the public not pay attention (esp. for crimes committed by mooslems in the name of their religion).

Jul 30, 2006 - 5:49 am 32. Patrick S Lasswell:

John Moore,

I’m not sure that they missed the lesson so much as avoided it. There is a battle from the crusades that they might learn from, but it’s hard to say how willing they are to study actual history instead of the heavily redacted crap. Lack of serious scholarship is a serious impediment to development of military professionalism. Lack of military professionalism is a serious impediment to victory.

Tanya,

Boy do you have a lot of faith that there is a coherent idea driving US foriegn policy. Who exactly is supposed to be behind the wheel on this and can you give me an example of a person or group that has that kind of power? Attributing coherence to US foriegn policy is dumber than playing the lottery; with the lottery you can lose small amounts.

Jul 30, 2006 - 6:56 am 33. Leiif:

In case you don’t all know about this. The Isreali’s have created a tool that they are using to alert all their supporters to articles, polls, surveys and other sites of interest that they feel need to have the opinion adjusted more to their favor . Go to http://giyus.org/ and download their tool “megaphone” so you will be alerted to the same sites in order to counter their countering efforts . 2 days ago they had a page on the link where it says “make a “difference”" that showed a snapshot of a yahoo survey before and after they sent out their alert . It showed a totally skewed survey, of course . They pulled that page . The following link shows what they are working on this morning http://giyus.org/alerts/ . Sometimes you must use the oppositions tools . They are clever and organized, that I will give them . Many of the pro-israeli remarks are by their minions.

Jul 30, 2006 - 8:36 am 34. dougf:

I don’t think Israel has failed…–Terrye

Unhappily I do.

Israel has made the one mistake it really should have been intelligent enough to avoid.

It has used air-power to save Israeli soldiers from having to fight but in doing so it has both failed to deal devastating blows to the enemy and has provided invaluable propaganda against itself.

Don’t get me wrong. I am all in favour of BRUTAL. I don’t believe in ‘moral war’. It is an oxymoron. What I am not in favour of is incompetent and inefficient BRUTALITY.

Examples that come to mind at once:

A. The Qana story just today. Sheer Stupidity on just about every level. Not even the ghost of an ‘upside’ here.

B. The missile strike on a UN post that killed 4 UN soldiers. No matter what the ‘tactical’ justification, it was also Sheer Stupidity. Not enough ‘bang for the buck’.

I am not saying that it was ‘immoral’ to kill all those children at Qana or the 4 UN troopers. I am saying that it was Stupid, Careless, and Counter-Productive. These are quite different concepts.

All of these ‘mistakes’ result from one cause. The ‘casualty adverse’ IDF reliance on technology instead of troops. Better for Israel to have lost 200 more soldiers in fighting Hezbollah on the ground, than to have conducted this pathetic little campaign.

No pain — No Gain. Israel is about to prove the wisdom of that adage all over again.

There’s a general sense in Israel that the IDF hasn’t exactly been covering itself in glory for quite a few months now, and certainly since the Keren Shalom fiasco.

Yeah what he said.

Soon now this will all stop as International Pressure becomes irresistible. Then where will Israel be?

My guess is up that infamous creek with all the spare paddles having been previously targeted in error by the IAF.

Jul 30, 2006 - 8:49 am 35. Terrye:

dougf:

You are demanding the impossible.

Besides, do you think that if the Israelis sent tens of thousands of ground troops into these densely populatated areas to kick in doors and root out fighters that civilians would not be killed?

If this were WW2 the US would have “lost” because it bombed Tokyo and killed thousands of civilians after the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and killed 2300 American servicemen.

The problem is the Hezbellah hides and fights from behind civilians. Whether the Israelis depend on men on the ground or technology will not change the way the enemy fights.

Jul 30, 2006 - 1:06 pm 36. dougf:

Terrye,

When the conflict is over and Israel has ‘lost’, I will still be demanding the ‘impossible’. As will the Israeli Public who will be enraged at their ‘leaders’.

Israel is not conducting a bombing campaign like WW2. It is conducting a supposedly ‘targetted’ campaign. How you can do this when it takes 5 minutes or so to set up and launch the missiles and just a further 2 minutes to disappear from view BEFORE the air assault arrives, is quite beyond me. All Israel is hitting in many cases is the place where the target USED TO BE. That is worse than useless.

The ‘proof of the pudding is in the eating’ as they say and Israel is baking a concoction that will prove to be inedible. Soon.

And I think you misrepresent my comments.

I don’t care at all about ‘civilian casualties’. I would prefer the Cartago delenda est style of warfare if that is what will WIN. What annoys me is a style of warfare that does NOT do the job, leaves the ‘enemy’ still largely intact, and still manages to lose the propaganda war at the very same time. It takes a degree of perverse genius to accomplish those very diverse goals at one and the same time.

At this rate the IDF will be giving lessons to the Russians in Ineffective Brutality.

Be as ruthless as you need to be to WIN. The important part however is the WINNING. I and if I might suggest, many others, are not at all convinced that the current Israeli leadership knows what ‘winning’ should look like.

A hint — It don’t look anything like this.

Jul 30, 2006 - 1:39 pm 37. Terrye:

dougf:

The point is we only know what we hear on TV. For all we know Hezbellah brought down that building.

So is winning even possible with Kofi Annan and the world press up Israel’s butt? I mean really, can it even be done?

Jul 30, 2006 - 2:59 pm 38. Godzilla:

dougf, maybe Olmert read your last comment and decided to take action:

Cessation Of Bombing Raids Pending Investigation

Jul 30, 2006 - 3:01 pm 39. Terrye:

BTW doug I forgot to ask, what does winning look like?

Jul 30, 2006 - 3:03 pm 40. dougf:

BTW doug I forgot to ask, what does winning look like?–Terrye

Large scale ground assault backed by close air-support against likely targets in South Lebanon. Much like the attacks against the two towns actually levelled. If it is run by Hezbollah it is a target. Surely Israel at least knows which towns are on the list.

The object should only be to kill as many Hezbollah personnel as humanely possible, and to demonstrate that they cannot protect anyone when push comes to shove. Surround the town and give everyone 12 hours to leave through Israeli checkpoints(on foot). Then assault the town with everything you have. Everything inside is targettable.

This should have been done a week or more ago. The air only campaign has failed. Now that might be just my opinion, but I am quite content to stand behind it.

The downside to this — serious Israeli casualties, and lots of ‘collateral damage’. Well we are getting the ‘collateral damage’ anyway. What we are not evidently getting is the results.
And yes , it is ‘only’ media reports that we have to review so the truth might be different. But at this point I doubt it. Just last week the Mossad indicated that Hezbollah had not been significantly weakened, and that it could fight at this level for a very long period. How can that be good news?

Israel could still have responded to missiles by air strikes, but it could also have forced Hezbollah to fight in place or lose its local assets completely.

Israel failed to follow through. Now it’s trapped in a true quagmire of indecision, with its window of opportunity closing inexorably.

Maybe Israel had good reasons not to go ‘full-bore’ but if so they would have been better to have done NOTHING, and found another way to handle the problem.

What they have done to date is IMHO worse than nothing. A brutal campaign which paradoxically has been rendered ineffective and inefficient by a concern for ‘appearances’, an unwillingness to fight in Lebanon, and STUPID mistakes.

My reservations are all on the ‘tactical’ level, not on the ‘ethical’. Israel had the right to respond, but it also had the duty to respond effectively.

Jul 30, 2006 - 3:46 pm 41. Terrye:

Maybe the reason they did not do it is because it is almost impossible to know who Hezbellah is unless they are shooting at you.

I don’t feel comfortable with second guessing Israel’s strategy because I do not consider myself as expert on this. However, if it was really likely that a ground invasion with close air support could wipe out Hezbellah in a couple of weeks I think it would have been done a few decades ago.

Jul 30, 2006 - 4:09 pm 42. dougf:

Hi Terrye,

Nice to babble at you. I am still crossing my fingers and hoping against better judgment but if you think I am negative, you should read some of the comments from Israelis at the Haaretz site.

Wow, looks like a sizeable portion of the population is gearing up to do Olmert,Peretz, and company some serious damage.

Send In The Clowns.

Jul 30, 2006 - 9:47 pm 43. Henry Bowman:

Israel is losing this war, primarily because of the infatuation of the world media with civilian deaths. The United States and other western countries, including Israel, has to seriously re-examine some aspects of international war, if it has any real hope of defeating the terrorists.

Our rules of engagement practices are not designed for asymmetric war, but are designed for wars in which one nation’s army fights another nation’s army. It seems obvious that terrorists quite deliberately do not adhere to such practices. As long as we choose to refrain from involving civilians in the wars, we are almost guaranteed to lose.

The current Israeli-Hiz’ballah conflict is a good example. The only way for Israel to destroy Hiz’ballah is to also destroy those who protect and provide aid to Hiz’ballah. We should have acted similarly in Iraq: when terrorists first took over large portions of Fallujah, we should have killed them all by simply leveling the place. Israel must, as a minimum, do the same with southern Lebanon, or it will surely lose.

The western countries have to annouce that this sort of war will be the norm. The Muslims will quickly get the message, and will turn on the terrorists who are ultimately responsible for the mess.

Jul 31, 2006 - 10:24 am

Write a Comment

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