So, is Israel winning?

[Bernie Gunther]

Juan Cole has written a useful 'What is Hezbollah?'

The Sunni Arabs of central, west and north Iraq are now also creating a subnationalism and organizing extensive paramilitary cells with highly significant asymmetrical warfare capabilities. The entire might of the formidable US military machine has made no headway against these 5 million persons.

Where subnationalisms are organized by party-militias willing to use carbombings and other asymmetrical forms of warfare, they are extremely difficult, if not impossible to defeat militarily. It would take a World War II style crushing military defeat of these populations, with the willingness of the conqueror to suffer tens of thousands dead in troop casualties. Israel is not even in a position to risk such a thing, given its small population.

Hizbullah is not like al-Qaeda in any way, sociologically speaking, and making such an analogy is a sure way for a general or politician to trick himself into entering the fires of hell.

What the Israelis set out to do, if they intended to "destroy" or even substantially attrite Hizbullah, was completely impractical. What they have done is to convince even Lebanese formerly on the fence about the issue that Hizbullah's leaders were correct in predicting that Lebanon would again be attacked in the most brutal and horrible way by the Israelis and that an even more powerful deterrent is needed. I.e more silkworms, not fewer. . The days when the Israelis could lord it over disconnected unmobilized Arab peasant villagers with their high tech army are coming to a close. The Arabs are still very weak, but are throwing up powerful asymmetrical challenges (e.g. party-militias with silkworm missiles!). Israeli alarm about the new connectedness of their foe explains the orgy of destruction aimed at bridges, roads, television and radio facilities and internet servers. But it is too late to disconnect the south Lebanese, who can easily and quickly rebuild all those connectors.

One hope the Israeli hawks appear to entertain is that they can permanently depopulate strips Lebanon south of the Litani river. Since most Shiites vote Hizbullah and offer political support and cover to it, fewer people means fewer assets for the party-militia. This project would require the total destruction of large numbers of villages and the permanent displacement of their inhabitants north to Beirut.

source

 

[slaar]

Walid Jumblatt hates Hezbollah. I mean really hates them. So if if he's saying these things they're probably true.

Good tactic guys. Not that I think a Hezbollah, nor indeed a Hamas victory is necessarily that bad if they moderate and settle for establishing strong nation states looking after their own people's interests. Problem is a lot of countries have something to say about that.

 

[nino_savatte]

Walid Jumblatt hates Hezbollah. I mean really hates them. So if if he's saying these things they're probably true.

Good tactic guys. Not that I think a Hezbollah, nor indeed a Hamas victory is necessarily that bad if they moderate and settle for establishing strong nation states looking after their own people's interests. Problem is a lot of countries have something to say about that.

Aye but Jumblatt is also something of a weathercock who accepts the US dollar for services rendered.

 

[david dissadent]

From a strategic point of view Israel now has no option but to try to take Lebanon up to the Litini river. But the forces in play however are no longer merely gauging what is in a countries best interest (or at least a ruling elites) it is the passion of the peoples.

For domestic political survival Olmert has to have a victory.
Given there 2000 withdrawal and the impression of 'a day in infamy' on the Israeli national physique it is probable that it take huge casualties for the Israelis to withdraw. They will not want to be beaten twice and the irony is the more casualties they take the more they will feel physiologically: this is not a raid it is an invasion. They need to win.
The problem is that the passion on what is patronizingly referred to as 'the Arab street', i.e. any other countries public opinion, are being aroused amongst a tinder box of domestic situations. This is not 1967 or 1973 or even 1982. The rise of militant Islamist groups and fundamentalist political parties joined with the lack of moral authority of the governments and the incendiary hourly on TV mean that the peoples of countries such as Syria, Saudi and Egypt are being stirred with passion and now with options (change of government). This leads to the dangerous situation where governments may feel they need to act, not for national interest, but for domestic self preservation.

These two factors of domestic pressure will about the most dangerous of all international situations. Where misunderstanding between bluster for the home front and genuine moves for war on the fronts. The situation is far more like 1914 than say 1939 and that is scary. 1939 was an inevitable war all were readying for. 1914 was a war long planned but that none wanted.

Domestic pressure will at some point begin to force Syria, Egypt and perhaps Saudi to make moves to support the Lebanese and perhaps Hezbollah. These moves will infuriate Israeli public. The Israelis and Washington will seize on any Israeli setbacks as being caused by national level interference and there will be very strong calls for punitive raids. For Syria’s part it is possible domestic pressure may force them to defend some of Lebanons airspace. Or at least make moves towards it.
With tempers so raised incidents have a habit of happening. Syrian troops on the ground may not be too shy of allowing Hezbollah and other Lebanese fighters (perhaps some from Amal or the Lebanese army) to shelter from Israel in there borders irrespective of what Damascus does, or Israeli commanders may feel they are entitled to the same latitude of operations Sharon was famous for in uniform.

Incidents happen.

Like 1914 domesticaly week governments under the threat of home revolution are have an international crisis that requires everyone to loose a bit of face and walk away from the abyss. Like 1914 I don’t see anyone having the moral will to walk away take the domestic wrap and save the middle east a bloody unnecessary war.

The blame is complex: But Olmerts call to destroy Hezbollah early on is the point where catastrophe stopped being a possibility and became likely (not gaurenteed).

God help me for saying it, but at least Sharon would have had the clout and reputation to walk away. And for all his brutality, perhaps the realism not too make this trap for himself. Mind maybe not. A lot of this was planned with him in charge.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Prof Rogers of Oxford Research Group thinks that the war is quite likely to spread, and very likely to remain smouldering for a long time.

In such circumstances, it is not at all likely that the Hizbollah leadership would accept a ceasefire followed by the insertion of a multinational force that is committed to its disarmament. Without Hizbollah's compliance, a multinational force is simply a non-starter. Too many countries would recognise the dangers of participating in an operation that would be seen across the region as operating on Israel's behalf.

Beyond this, there are two other factors involved. First, the missile strikes on Israel have had a marked effect on the Israeli perception of vulnerability. The country's much-vaunted secure borders have turned out to be anything but secure, and the effect on Israelis is certainly approaching that of the Iraqi Scud attacks back in January 1991, if not yet the shock of the Yom Kippur/Ramadan war of 1973. This does mean that it is absolutely essential for the Israeli leadership to bring this threat to an end, and this will require an even more intensive use of force.

Second, there remains the possibility that Hizbollah may decide in the very near future to use longer-range missiles in order to attack Tel Aviv-Jaffa. If that were to happen in concert with a failure of the IDF to fully secure the proposed buffer-zone, then the Olmert government might be in severe difficulties in a matter of days. It is in such circumstances that the war might expand, perhaps with Israeli action against Syrian and Iranian facilities considered to be supporting Hizbollah.

It must be remembered that the overwhelming view within the Israeli leadership is that Hizbollah is an operating arm of Iran; even more significantly, this is a view shared strongly within the George W Bush administration. Since Israel's war in Lebanon is part of the American war on terror, and since that war is going so badly in Iraq and Afghanistan, this part of it cannot be allowed to fail. For this reason alone, it is wise to assume that the Lebanon war has not just taken root but may branch suddenly to affect the wider region.

source

 

[moono]

I note that the Zionist '48 hour ceasefire' was matched with a cessation of Hizb'allah rockets and that the continuation of the Zionist attack was matched with the largest barrage of rockets so far. That's a pretty obvious message to all.
I guess that the Zionists are prepared to risk their own people for 'the greater good' until Hizb'allah runs out of rockets and/or enthusiasm. That's a misjudgement. Even if they run out of rockets the enthusiasm wont flag.

The wall has proven useless, Israel's 'peace-loving' reputation is shagged and America is exposed, along with its puppets, as a Zionist arse-kissing regime.
Under such circumstances I expect, as does Prof. Rogers it seems, that the Zionists will attack anyone and anything. That's been their policy to date and they don't seem to have any political alternatives to their bloodstained ex-generals and assassins.

Fuck them. Now. Then there will be peace.

Under the Uniting for Peace resolution of 1951, the General Assembly could convene to discharge the Council's responsibility when unanimity among the veto-wielding members of the Council could not be obtained.
http://www.palestinechronicle.com/story-08030654339.htm

 

[TAE]

I note that the Zionist '48 hour ceasefire' was matched with a cessation of Hizb'allah rockets and that the continuation of the Zionist attack was matched with the largest barrage of rockets so far. That's a pretty obvious message to all.

I noticed that too.

I guess that the Zionists are prepared to risk their own people for 'the greater good' until Hizb'allah runs out of rockets and/or enthusiasm. That's a misjudgement. Even if they run out of rockets the enthusiasm wont flag.

Unless the IDF attack the suppliers of those weapons, they cannot destroy 'all' rockets because they cannot destroy the rockets which have not been built yet.

America is exposed, along with its puppets, as a Zionist arse-kissing regime.

I'm not certain who is kissing who's arse here. Maybe the US encouraged Israel to take this action, in order to draw Syria and Iran into a war? It's not american towns which are being hit by rockets as a result.

 

[nino_savatte]

I'm not certain who is kissing who's arse here. Maybe the US encouraged Israel to take this action, in order to draw Syria and Iran into a war? It's not american towns which are being hit by rockets as a result.

Aye, I keep thinking "Suez" too.

 

[dylanredefined]

Never send a soldier where a missile can go. The military crede of the coward. Weakness for all to see.

Seems pretty good idea to me if you ve got a target .If not you have to send
a drone or a soldier to confirm what you want to blow up is a target and not collateral damage

 

[detective-boy]

If not you have to send a drone or a soldier to confirm what you want to blow up is a target and not collateral damage

Or simply shrug and go "Fuck it! Let's blast it to fuck anyway" ...

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Fuck me. Even arch neo-con Charles Krauthammer thinks Olmert has blown it.

Hence Israel's rare opportunity to demonstrate what it can do for its great American patron. The defeat of Hezbollah would be a huge loss for Iran, both psychologically and strategically. Iran would lose its foothold in Lebanon. It would lose its major means to destabilize and inject itself into the heart of the Middle East. It would be shown to have vastly overreached in trying to establish itself as the regional superpower.

The United States has gone far out on a limb to allow Israel to win and for all this to happen. It has counted on Israel's ability to do the job. It has been disappointed. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has provided unsteady and uncertain leadership. Foolishly relying on air power alone, he denied his generals the ground offensive they wanted, only to reverse himself later. He has allowed his war cabinet meetings to become fully public through the kind of leaks no serious wartime leadership would ever countenance. Divisive cabinet debates are broadcast to the world, as was Olmert's own complaint that "I'm tired. I didn't sleep at all last night" (Haaretz, July 28). Hardly the stuff to instill Churchillian confidence.

His search for victory on the cheap has jeopardized not just the Lebanon operation but America's confidence in Israel as well. That confidence -- and the relationship it reinforces -- is as important to Israel's survival as its own army. The tremulous Olmert seems not to have a clue.

source

 

[david dissadent]

Does Israel have a plan? It very rapidly look like it does not. On the one hand reports of a rift between Olmert and Peretz over how far into Lebanon they should push, and with the Israeli seeming to swing from refusing to countenance an international peace keeping force to actively promoting one, it seems they are totaly rudderless.

However if the Israelis are seeking to annex S Lebanon, then claiming to wish for a peace keeping force is not a bad ploy, they sound interested in an international solution.

But who will send there troops into the hornets nest of Hezbollahs home turf, given what happened there in 1982/3 with the peace keeping force. Only the UK US and France have the kind of troops needed. None of them are remotely interested. Either Israel is clueless or too clever by half.

 

[david dissadent]

Israel seems to be doing a total rethink on there feet. An article on the 4th in the Jerusalem Post trail ballooned the idea of no substansive push to the Litani river only a token sweep, and holding a few miles worth of Lebanon.

The butchers bill to clear all the way up to the Litani seems to be a bit steep for a democratic government. Clearing fox hole by fox hole is a mean way to fight any war. The Golani Brigade have taken substansive casualties and if a nations elite are taking a pasting you cant send reserves in without following up with body bags.

It is closing on descion time. Whether to strike at Syria and Iran and go for this long predicted war or to hold back. If the US neocons want a fall war for the polls they will need to get there skates on before Israel gets bogged down.

Mind Iran is playing its part as well. Behind the headlines its busy thumbing it nose at the UN over the nuclear issue. With oil looking set to rise on the closure of this BP pipeline, just stirring with words must be worth hundreds of millions to them in additional revenues on the back of increased oil prices.

 

[david dissadent]

Haaratz reporting 15 killed in fighting. This confirms a statement yesterday from Hezbollah in a Pakistani news paper.

This is clearly no cake walk. It seems as if the Israelis are now steeling themselves for a land war of up to 6 weeks and casualties just below 4 figures.

Commentators are suggesting the Israelis are 'hilltop hoping'. Moving to occupy high ground while only raiding into low lying areas. Also the kills of Hezbollah are no where near as high as being reported. Hezbollah auxilaries and even local voulenteers are being counted as Hezbollah and subtracted from the numbers of there core millitiamen. Israel are killing alot of fighters but not biting deep into the core strengths of Hezbollah. Also a SAM team was killed recently which suggested they are holding back there SAMs. If they are doing that they may have alot of ATMs left including perhaps some modern ones.

Its all just speculation.

In some ways Hezbollah has already won. They have become iconic heros to many arabs.

The question now is where do we go from here?


If Hezbollah launches its alleged large long range rockets, then this will be the excuse to widen the war the US neocons have been seeking. However small rockets are easy to conceal the larger ones are not. That has long been my creeping fear with all of this, is the neocons unleashing into a bloody drawn out war.

 

[moono]

The neocons don't need an excuse for war. All that holds them back is fear.

The Russian support for Lebanon at the UN might have been enough to keep Team Bush at home.

 

[david dissadent]

ROFLMAO. Moono mate your a gem. Our very own comical Ali.

 

[moono]

Thank you. I give it almost my best shot.

 

[LumpenProle]

Long-term, I can't see a way Israel can 'win' this. They've lost their much-vaunted deterrent power (and indeed their own self-image of invincibility), they're having a tough time of it against Hezballah, and the vast majority of the world depises their clearly pre-planned agression against Lebanon. You gotta love the arrogantly racist boast of 'searing it into the Arabs' consciousness' beloved of senior Israeli military and political figures.

Anyway, the above said, it seems clear that they would love to entice Syria and Iran into making a wrong move (bombing very close to the Syrian border for example), so that may be the wider strategy. Can't help thinking that with the IDF having been given a bit of a spanking by the Iranian-trained Hezballah, it might not be that wise to antagonise Iran too much.

 

[bouncer_the_dog]

I have become so upset by the situation i have made some anti war art:

 

[Bernie Gunther]

William Lind used to write tactics manuals for the US marines, is very far to the right, but is highly critical from a military viewpoint of the Bush regime.

He thinks the wheels are about to fall off:

In Iraq and Afghanistan, the “coalition” defeats continue slowly to unroll. In Lebanon, it appears Hezbollah may win not only at the moral and mental, strategic and operational levels, but, astonishingly, at the physical and tactical levels as well. That outcome remains uncertain, but the fact that it is possible portends a revolutionary reassessment of what Fourth Generation forces can accomplish. If it actually happens, the walls of the temple that is the state system will be shaken world-wide.

One pointer to a shift in the tactical balance is the comparative casualty counts. According to the Associated Press, as of this writing Lebanese dead total at least 642, of whom 558 are civilians, 29 Lebanese soldiers (who, at least officially, are not in the fight) and only 55 Hezbollah fighters. So Israel, with its American-style hi-tech “precision weaponry,” has killed ten times as many innocents as enemies. In contrast, of 97 Israeli dead, 61 are soldiers and only 36 civilians, despite the fact that Hezbollah’s rockets are anything but precise (think Congreves). Israel can hit anything it can target, but against a Fourth Generation enemy, it can target very little. The result not only points to a battlefield change of some significance, it also raises the question of who is the real “terrorist.” Terror bombing by aircraft is still terror.

and

Washington, which in its hubris ignores both its friends and its enemies, refusing to talk to the latter or listen to the former, does not grasp that if the flanks collapse, it is the end of our adventures in both Iraq and Afghanistan. It is also, in a slightly longer time frame, the end of Israel. No Crusader state survives forever, and in the long term Israel’s existence depends on arriving at some sort of modus vivendi with the region. The replacement of Mubarak, King Abdullah and the House of Saud with the Moslem Brotherhood would make that possibility fade.

To the region, America’s apparently unconditional and unbounded support for Israel and its occupation of Iraq are part of the same picture. For a military historian, the question arises: will history see Iraq as America’s Stalingrad? If we kick the analogy up a couple of levels, to the strategic and grand strategic, there are parallels. Both the German and the American armies were able largely to take, but not hold, the objective. Both had too few troops. Both Berlin and Washington underestimated their enemy’s ability to counter-attack. Both committed resources they needed elsewhere and could not replace to a strategically unimportant objective. Finally, both entrusted their flanks to weak allies—and to luck.

source

 

[moono]

He thinks the wheels are about to fall off:

Good. It might be the end of theocracies fighting each other.

 

[denniseagle]

,

Thousands of years of slavery, eh? Don't mean to question the accuracy of your historical understanding, but when was this, please, and where?

Original quote was "millenia of slavery,pogroms, attempted genocides, always first scapegoating"

Your precis skills lack somewhat methinks.

 

[laptop]

William Lind

William S. Lind, expressing his own personal opinion, is Director for the Center for Cultural Conservatism for the Free Congress Foundation

'Strewth. With that kind of rhetoric and analysis coming from that far out to the right...

George W, you're in trouble. Your own nutters think you're mad.

 

[MonkeyMagic]

Congratulations to Israel and Hezbollah for achieving precisely fuck all in a month of fighting. Rest assured that there will be a discreet prisoner swap in the coming weeks which will finally confirm that people on both sides have died for nothing.

 

[audiotech]

Ehud Olmert has just been decribed on the news as beginning this conflict as Winston Churchill and ending up as Neville Chamberlain.

 

[MonkeyMagic]

Just another world leader who doesn't know what the fuck he's doing. Israelis worried about his lack of war experience before and they're moaning about his inability even more now.

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Post moved to WW3 thread.

 

[Jonti]

,


Original quote was "millenia of slavery,pogroms, attempted genocides, always first scapegoating"

Your precis skills lack somewhat methinks.

I didn't precis.

Are you saying millenia does not mean thousands of years?

 

[Bernie Gunther]

Meanwhile, as both sides declare victory, here's Larry Johnson's view:

Israel lost at least 108 soldiers and 39 civilians during the last month. More than 1140 Lebanese civilians died from Israeli bombings. Over 300 of these are dead children. Way to go Israel, that helps your image. I'm sure you've earned the affection and good will of the Arab masses for that bit of professional soldiering. Oh, and Hizbullah is still in place.

What is truly remarkable is that Hizbullah displayed far more discipline on the battlefield than Israel. Most of the people killed by Hizbullah were soldiers, not civilians. Israel cannot say the same. Moreover, Hizbullah turned off the rocket attacks when the ceasefire arrived while Israel continued bombing Beirut. Bombing Beirut may help Israel feel good at a visceral level but it accomplishes nothing in terms of tactical or strategic objectives. In fact, it achieves the opposite result. It unites the people of Lebanon--Shias, Sunnis, and Christians--against Israel. On this count, at least, George Bush's promise to be a uniter not a divider has turned out to be true. As an enabler of a foolish Israeli policy Bush has helped unite the Arab world against Israel and around Hizbullah. Hopefully he does not have the same "success" in Iraq.

source

 

[moono]

MonkeyMagic;

Congratulations to Israel and Hezbollah for achieving precisely fuck all in a month of fighting.

I can see your viewpoint very clearly.

Putting myself in the places of Olmert and Nasrallah ( according to information received, naturally) Olmert has achieved far less than 'fuck all' and Nasrallah appears to have bent and blunted the physical and political point of Zionism itself.

Was that worth fifteen hundred Lebanese dead ? Far, far more have already died in achieving far less. Somebody ought to consult the ranks of the armies of ghosts.