Cheney,Rummy and the necons psy-ops...their back door policy(bush doctrine) for an middle east war. clve

"They were under the influence"!
Stupid is as stupid does.

1. the capture of the Israeli soldiers constituted an act of war by Lebanon (though for obvious reasons its best to downplay that). why? because the capture took place on sovereign Israeli territory. in other words, a quasi-official unit of the Lebanese military (Hezbollah has the only legal militia in Lebanon) invaded Israeli territory. that's an act of war.

2. this appears to be a power play by Hezbollah to take down the Lebanese government and take over. see Michael Young writing from Beirut for more on this.

3. is Iran behind this? well, Iran certainly exerts a great deal of influence behind both Hamas and Hezbollah...Iran wants to be the regional power, an Iranian proxy (Hezbollah) in control of Lebanon would certainly fit into that aspiration. does that mean that Iran has specific foreknowledge of this particular raid? nah, why would they?

conclusion: although a "warning shot" to us may be an intended indirect effect...it appears more likely that this is aimed at gaining Iranian control of Lebanon by proxy.

The missiles that have hit Haifa also appear to be of Iranian manufacture, and there are unconfirmed reports that Iranian officers launched them. It's an unreliable data point but worth bearing in mind. Certainly Iran should be happy to fuel a conflict that pulls attention away from its nuclear program just now.

is aimed at gaining Iranian control of Lebanon by proxy

If this is true than, you cannot say "the capture of the Israeli soldiers constituted an act of war by Lebanon"

The govt of Lebanon's control over Hezbollah is tenuous at best.

The missiles that have hit Haifa also appear to be of Iranian manufacture, and there are unconfirmed reports that Iranian officers launched them. It's an unreliable data point but worth bearing in mind. Certainly Iran should be happy to fuel a conflict that pulls attention away from its nuclear program just now.

Unreliable?!?! Talk about understatement. It's got about as much credibility as reports of Polish forces preparing to invade Germany in 1939.

Did any of the resident strategic geniuses reflexively defending Israel's heavyhandedness ever consider that that reaction is precisely what the more bloody-minded guerillas desired?

there are unconfirmed reports that Iranian officers launched them

That's quite an assertion. Do you have a source for that?

Pierre: as a matter of international law Lebanon committed an act of war against Israel...of course in actuality, the Lebanese government can't control Hezbollah, Hezbollah would defeat the Lebanese army....Hezbollah is now flexing its muscles to demonstrate that it is the state.

sglover:
that at least some of the missiles are provided by Iran (and the others almost certainly use Iranian technology) is not in dispute.
I highly doubt Iranians are firing them. they don't have to.

Israel has widened its offensive on Lebanon, with fighter bombers blasting the airport for a second day, residential buildings in the southern suburbs of the capital, igniting fuel storage tanks and cutting the main highway to Syria.

Furthermore, Nathan, as the capture of two Israeli soldiers was not an act of war, Israel’s response is totally inappropriate.

It is Israel, in fact, who has committed the act of war.

"I don't have evidence that there were direct instructions," said one Israeli official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. "But they were under the influence of the Iranian government."

That logic, of course, justifies blaming the US and Israel for civilian deaths caused by the other. Which, of course, the Arab street has often done -- it's just that, until now, the policy was to dismiss such suggestions.

For evidence of Nathan's analytical abilities and veracity, see here and here.

Pierre:

insofar as Hezbollah's action constituted an act of war, legally speaking (once again, Hezbollah's militia is a quasi-official part of Lebanon's military)...Israel is justified (although it certainly would not be wise) in invading and occupying Lebanon and demanding its unconditional surrender.

of course, if you just want to treat it as a "police action" to recover its soldiers, then blocking all transit links out of Lebanon (and internally cutting off the south from Beirut) is logical and justified.

Here's an excellent post on the futility of Israel's actions, regardless of who is behind the attacks, and how this could affect the U.S.

Ray Close

Gregory, to continue your vendetta on new threads is pretty fricking childish don't you think?

Isn't the most likely scenario here that Israel got spooked by the fact that they had soldiers captured on two different parts of their border? Now because they can't tell the difference betweens civilians and militants, they are punishing the governments of the PA and Lebanon in an effort to pressure the governments to get their militias in line.

Why people need to look for grand strategies involving Iran and Syria is beyond me. Just subscribe to Al-Jazeerah if you don't get enough dead brown people on the TV.

Gregory, to continue your vendetta on new threads is pretty fricking (sic) childish don't you think? Posted by: Nathan

Actually, Gregory your error was responding to Nathan in the first place. As with most trolls, if they are not fed, they post less frequently, and many eventually go away.

Shelby, your comment can be rewritten:

"The missiles that have hit Beirut also appear to be of American manufacture It's an unreliable data point but worth bearing in mind. Certainly the US should be happy to fuel a conflict that pulls attention away from its war in Iraq just now."

In other words who cares who gave what to whom. What is a concern is what the intent of use of these weapons are.

By attacking airports and infrastructurre Israel is forcing the Lebanese government to act and crack down on Hezbollah. Now Hezbollah wants Israel to force the Lebanese government into an impossible position because if further strengthens its position in the Lebanese parliment by destroying the effectiveness of the opposition.

Its like a firefighter commiting arson to keep employed.

Gregory, to continue your vendetta on new threads is pretty fricking childish don't you think?

Actually, Nate, his links were quite helpful. Of course, your remarks here weren't exactly oozing with informed honesty to begin with, but it's nice to see that they just fall in line with your history.

Ain't it a bitch, when folks can access your earlier conduct with an effortless click? It's not fair!

Thanks, Gregory!

Does "under the influence of the Iranian government" just mean that their religious leaders are there? This seems to me to be the most plausible form of direction. Iranian clerics speak out against Israel and praise suicide bombers --> Palestinian youths are able to rationalize the formation of small to medium sized contingents of terrorism minded militants. Without Iran, they'd still become terrorists. They'd just have to choose differenct religious leaders.

I have a hard time believing that Iran could direct individual operations in Gaza without Israel intercepting and publicizing them. Unless of course they are using AH's carrier pigeons.

Unless of course they are using AH's carrier pigeons.

AH is a traitor and should be executed for leaking that we are on to their carrier pigeon shenanigans.

enozinho:

Occam's Razor to the rescue once again.

Israel overreacted (gee, when have we seen *that* before?).

End of story.

If the benefits accrue to the regimes who have taken the hardest line against Israel -- that's only to be expected.

You really don't need a covert Iranian or Syrian op to explain this.

Bob

IRAN'S ROLE

Every news show, from NPR to CBS to PBS to FOX, has this as their first talking point when discussing Hezbollah's entrance into the conflict. I guess watching their brothers and sisters being murderously brutalized in Gaza is not reason enough for Hezbollah to become involved. Not one 'expert' was able to make this connection. Mr. Drum allows this TNR Stalinist 'Iran is to blame' talking point to be spread further.

To fight forces that are indistinguishable from the civilian population the Israeli’s have long employed the chevauchée. A term reintroduced yesterday over at Blood & Treasure:

I was wondering idly what the actual military term was for Israel’s two front rampage in Gaza and Lebanon might be, when I saw this: “Israel's army chief of staff, General Dan Halutz, said his military would target infrastructure and "turn back the clock in Lebanon by 20 years" if the soldiers were not freed."

Ah, that’s it. It’s a chevauchee: “Rather than besieging a castle or conquering land, soldiers on a Chevauchée aimed to create as much destruction, carnage and chaos as possible to both break the morale of enemy peasants and deny their rulers income and resources...” in order to pressure the opposition into giving them what they want. Broadly speaking, it’s what Henry V was up to in France as depicted by Shakespeare. It’s a bit harder to romantcise these days, though.

This is the only weapon a national army can employ to defeat a weaker guerilla force (particularly one that has the support of the civilian population). But the Israelis have not been able to break the Palestinians after all these years and have chosen a wall instead.

No way the Iranians are dumb enough to leave a finger print on this. They didn't stand back, they tacitly encourged them, you would never get the amount of proof needed to prove it in a court. Don't bother looking. No matter who ordered it the result is the same, collective punishment, I am sure that Iran wanted to draw attention away form it's neclear program and they have.

to continue your vendetta on new threads is pretty fricking childish don't you think?

As an alleged lawyer, you should know that it's perfectly valid to present evidence regarding an individual's credibility -- or lack thereof.

What's childish -- not to mention dishonorable and dishonest -- is to ascribe opinions to people who do not hold them, engage in much dissembly when called on it, pretend the whole thing is a joke, and refuse to apologize and admit one's error.

Are you prepared, Nathan, to offer an unconditional apology to cmdicely, Cranky Observer and myself for your -- I'll be charitable and call it an error?

whether or not Iran and Syria ordered the recent attacks against Israel or merely stood back and allowed them to happen

or Option 3: that the Hezbollah and Hamas attackers acted on their own, independent of some state boogeyman.

Keeping the discussion of the West Bank and Lebanon separate issues, it's not clear to me, a committed anti-Zionist, what exactly Israel is supposed to do about Hizbollah. Regardless of the fact that it was Israel that engendered Hizbollah's creation, at this point, they are a state with someone shooting across their borders. Someone they can't exactly negotiate with and can't be relied on to keep treaties.

That doesn't justify destroying civilian infrastructure, which they seem to be doing in either a fit of rage, or based on a seriously misguided notion that they would be better off with a failed state than what they have now.

I really can't see any way out of this except through international intervention. The Lebanese army can't keep Hizbollah off the border and the Israelis failed after trying for twenty years. I say the solution is to give all the prisoners back on both sides, give back the Shebaa Farms to Syria or Lebanon, and put some UN troops in a buffer zone for the next twenty or thirty years. That would stop border incursions on both sides.

I'm sure for the amount of trouble this gives America, it would be a good investment to build a bunch of resort hotels and have some non-aligned country send their soldiers on extended vacations in sunny South Lebanon.

Why is it that when Israel kidnaps Palestinian civilians they suspect to be guilty of terrorism, it's a "capture", but when Palestinians capture a uniformed Israeli officer, it's a "kidnapping"?

Also, can someone rightfully be called a "terrorist" for capturing a uniformed enemy officer?

I'm just trying to get clear on our terminology.

Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA

Thanks sglover and others but I don't really need help from racist bigots. I can take care of myself.

It is clear that Israel's only legitimate choice is to bomb Lebanon back into the stone age. An act which I wholeheartedly endorse.

Patrick, it was a capture insofar as it was one legitimate armed force capturing soldiers from another. However, since the capture took place in Israel it was also an act of aggression by Lebanon against Israel.

...but I don't really need help from racist bigots

...bomb Lebanon back into the stone age. An act which I wholeheartedly endorse.

So I take it help from genocidal maniacs is still welcome?

Even salon.com is joining in with the Hezbollah bashing, with a headline today implying Hezbollah is hijacking Lebanon's government. Hezbollah represents the largest ethnic/religious group of Lebanon's people: the downtrodden Shi'a, who have been denied political power by the minority Christian and Sunni populations. The reason Hezbollah is not the government is because of the military strength and wealth of the other religious/political factions.

There is absolutely zero evidence that Iran has anything to do with the events in Lebanon. It is just conjecture and hearsay from the usual propaganda machine enabled by a dumb and lazy press corps. There are probably only 10 people in the United States who have a credible understanding of Hezbollah and who they are connected to. Asserting that they are minions of Tehran is a joke.

But impressions are more important than reality when you are manufacturing consent. Implicating
Iran gives the impression of a region-wide conflict instigated by an aggressive and expansionistic enemy (now that Saddam is gone). It also legitimizes actions against Iran which, of course, is the point.

bellumregio, Hezbollah admits to being funded by Iran (and Syria to some extent).

Patrick,

You are partially correct. When combatants attack soldiers and capture or kill them, that is an act of war. Indeed, you will notice that Israel has labelled Hezbollah's conduct an "act of war." Israel's response, to wage war against Hezbollah and the state harboring it, is how states usually react to acts of war committed against them.

I wish Israel had done the same on the Gaza front. IMHO, it was a far worse crime of terrorism when Hamas captured and executed an Israeli civilian than when they captured an Israeli soldier. If I were in their shoes, I would have said to Hamas in response to the capture of the Israeli solider, "Congratulations. For the first time you fought like men, not cowards, and attacked soldiers, not civilians. We honor you for that. However, that is an act of war and in response we are going to attack every Hamas member we can find with the biggest most powerful weapons we have, and if any civilians are nearby, their deaths are on your heads. In addition, we are going to destroy every piece of infrastructure, every government building, every factory, and will sow every field with salt, and will not stop until you unconditionally surrender."

That's true enough Hostile, but one simply can't operate a state unless there is a monopoly of violence. When the militia is more powerful than the state and has its own foreign policy, the situation is completely hopeless.

Unfortunately, there is nobody else besides Hizbollah to protect Lebanon from Israel, and Israel is pretty aggressive. (I don't know if you all remember a few years ago when Israel threatened to bomb Lebanon rather than negotiate over water rights.)

I think this again leads back to the solution of UN troops on the border. I know Israel apologists hate the UN, but I think we can all agree that if there is one thing the UN is good at, it's sending troops to act as sitting ducks in godforsaken places.

DBL, hear hear!

There is absolutely zero evidence that Iran has anything to do with the events in Lebanon.

If you argue that Iran is responsible for the actions of Hizbullah, then you are endorsing the opposite view, that America is responsible for the actions of Israel. What am I missing?

Hostile, I hate you and your terrorist-apologist kind. May you go the way of Rachel Corrie.

Unfortunately, there is nobody else besides Hizbollah to protect Lebanon from Israel, and Israel is pretty aggressive.

Um, if it wasn't for Hezbollah (and, in the past, other terrorist groups using Lebanon as a base), Lebanon wouldn't have nearly as much need for protection from Israel. While Israel's actions in Lebanon may have been disproportionate and counterproductive, they haven't been wholly gratuitous.

enozinho, insofar as Israel's actions are largely defensible, I have no problem with that.

cmdicely, I'd say that an invasion by Hezbollah of Israeli territory was destined to provoke a response.

PD - You may be too young to remember this, but UN troops were in 1967 stationed in the Sinai between Israel and Egypt; the Six Day War came about because, among other aggressive acts, Nasser ordered all the UN troops out, presumably to clear the way for his troops to attack Israel. The UN troops obediently got up and left. That episode, along with years of relentless biased Israel-bashing by the UN, makes it highly unlikely that Israel would ever accept UN troops as a guarantee of its security.

Consider this: Suppose there were UN troops stationed along the border in Southern Lebananon. If Hezbollah militias continued to fire rockets at Israel, do you think the UN troops would do anything about it? It's almost laughable to even imagine that.

I think this again leads back to the solution of UN troops on the border. I know Israel apologists hate the UN, but I think we can all agree that if there is one thing the UN is good at, it's sending troops to act as sitting ducks in godforsaken places.

Its certainly not that good at doing that with any effect on the Israel/Lebanon border.

Personally, I believe that all of this is being orchestrated by Bush as part of a secret deal with Iran (remember Reagan?). They're pretending to be enemies in order to drive up the price of oil so that both can reap the profits.

insofar as Israel's actions are largely defensible, I have no problem with that.

Their actions as of today? Or would that include bombing "Lebanon back into the stone age" as well?

Would a Hizbollah attack on our interest in Lebanon be justified too?

gregory, it doesn't happen very often, but I concur with your statements 100%.

How is it their is this level of violence following the concessions Israel has made by pulling out of southern Lebanon in 2000 and leaving Gaza in 2005? Weren't those actions designed to promote peace and offer the Palestinians a chance to build a homeland? Apparently whatever concessions Israel makes, it will not be enough to satisfy their enemies who won't stop until Israel does not exist.

Unless and until the civilized community realizes that, this is going to be a very long drawn out battle.

OK never mind gregory, the last post of yours was deranged. I spoke too soon.

cm,

That's a very shortsighted historical way to look at it. Lebanon ended up with a bunch of troublesome Palestinian refugees because of Israel's actions. That destabilized Lebanon. In an incredibly stupid act, Israel invaded Lebanon to deal with the Palestinians. At first the Shia welcomed Israel, because they thought it would quickly solve the problem of the Palestinians. When it became apparent Israel was planning to stick around and control southern Lebanon, a resistance movement arose and was supported by other countries. That's Hizbollah.

I'll agree that Israel has to do something to deal with Hizbollah, (see earlier posts) but to say that Hizbollah caused the problem has the whole thing backwards. They were and are a primarily defensive group. And so long as Israel is occupying land and holding prisoners extrajudicially, there is going to be resistance.

That doesn't make Hizbollah great guys, but I always say to Israel apologists that you can't justify an occupation by the resistance to it. And if you fly warplanes over the border everyday and bomb every few weeks, people are going to start shooting back.

Suppose there were UN troops stationed along the border in Southern Lebananon.

Uh, does the world Qana mean anything to you?

jay: the civilized community realizes that, this is going to be a very long drawn out battle.

what?

jews and arabs at each others throats...

thanks for the breaking wind...

Hostile, I hate you and your terrorist-apologist kind. May you go the way of Rachel Corrie.

Today is a good day. I must have scored a logical point.

Thank you CEO of Caterpillar,

H

enozinho, Hezbollah or related elements have attacked us in Lebanon before.
We have no choice but to bomb them mercilessly. Or impeach Bush and stop him from inciting them.

I do know that about the 1967 war. Nasser made a grave error and listened to the Soviets, thereby destroying the possibility of pan-Arab nationalism and leading inexorably to his own death. At the time, Egypt was still smarting from the Israeli collaboration with the French and English in the Suez colonial war, so they were not rational about their interests. And Nasser was probably too proud of hs enormous popularity and success as a leader of the Arabs and the non-aligned nations.

I don't really see though how that makes any difference to the story today in Lebanon. There is no army in Lebanon of any significance, that is, nobody that could invade Israel. There is no real military threat to Israel. The whole point would be just to keep everybody away from the border.

And nobody expects UN troops to stop a state bent on war. The UN has never done that, and is probably not capable of it.

since the capture took place in Israel

Has anyone seen a detailed explanation of how this happened? Tunnels, overwhelming force, something else?

Attacking the border on foot is usually suicide. Walking away with prisoners is decidedly unusual. This operatioin certainly had good military planning. I guess Israel has given them lots of practice.

Well once again thisspace, you missed it (what a shock)

What the world community doesn't fully grasp yet, is that, in the minds of extremist groups, there will NEVER be peace with Israel. These groups will not stop until Israel does not exist, irrespective of lives lost.

So PD, Iran reportedly funnels millions of dollars to Hezbullah on a monthly basis. Is this money used to build schools, roads, infrastructure? Or maybe entitlements for the pverty stricken Lebanese? Considering that Israel conceeded land to Hezbullah in May of 2000, and has had zero incursions into that land since then, so how is that when Hezbullah crosses borders to kidnap Israeli soldiers, that they did not create this recent conflict? That's not exactly being a "defensive" group.

We have no choice but to bomb them mercilessly.

Who is "we"? You said Israel. Now we're supposed to bomb Lebanon too? You understand that if you were Lebanese making the opposite argument, that you'd be in Guantanamo right now with a glow stick up your butt?

That's a very shortsighted historical way to look at it. Lebanon ended up with a bunch of troublesome Palestinian refugees because of Israel's actions. That destabilized Lebanon. In an incredibly stupid act, Israel invaded Lebanon to deal with the Palestinians.

Stupid or not, it was in response to terrorists using Lebanon as a base, hence my statement if it wasn't for Hezbollah (and, in the past, other terrorist groups using Lebanon as a base), Lebanon wouldn't have nearly as much need for protection from Israel.

I'll agree that Israel has to do something to deal with Hizbollah, (see earlier posts) but to say that Hizbollah caused the problem has the whole thing backwards.

I didn't say Hezbollah caused the problem. (Though, certainly, with regard to the immediate present conflict, they did.)

I said the presence of Hezbollah and other terrorist groups in Lebanon is and has been historically the reason that there is a threat to Lebanon from Israel.

I won't argue against the idea that the presence of Hezbollah and other terrorist groups in Lebanon has also been a predictable consequence of Israeli policy.

If you are looking for one organization alone to blame for things in this conflict, you aren't going to find it without willful blindness.

I can't recall where I saw the direct statement that an Iranian officer may have launched missiled. I've been reading a lot of sites. I do offer the following from Time Magazine:

Israeli officials reportedly allege that the long-range rockets are under the direct command of officers of Iran's Revolutionary Guards
link: http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1208916,00.html

I can't imagine UN troops are going to do any good. They can (sometimes) help to keep the peace when both sides don't want to fight anyway, but it's clear that Hizbullah, at least, is spoiling for a fight.

Hizb. also certainly intended to provoke A reaction from Israel -- it's just not clear they intended THIS reaction. It appears to me that nobody has a clear handle on anyone else's motivations or goals at the moment, or even their capabilities. That suggests to me this could rapidly escalate, potentially drawing in Syria and even (less likely) Iran. I don't expect WWIII, but I won't be surprised if it becomes a multi-country affair before things settle down again.

You know, a decapitation strike by Israel against Iran and Syria would probably do a world of good right now.

Israel goes into Lebanon every day with airplanes and bombs regularly. And Hizbullah has been the most effective builder of schools, roads, hospitals, etc. in Lebanon, probably in the entire Middle East.

Whole populations don't support Islamists because they are full of irrational hatred. They do it because the Islamists provide the social infrastructure and protection from violence. This is just as true of Hamas in Gaza as it is of Hizbollah in south Lebanon.

I don't want to get in the game of defending Hizbollah as I'm not a big supporter of theocrats. But again, Israel is still occupying land and illegally holding prisoners. And I did use the word "primarily" precisely because Hizbollah has also engaged in offense, but their main function is to protect the Lebanese Shia from Israel, from the Phalangists, from the Palestinians, and so on.

I don't ever buy into conspiracy theories but this might merit discussion.

Reports are that Iran is behind all of this in their attempt to distract the G-8 discussions from there nuclear amibitions.

I don't know.

Yes, of course, there is funding and there is funding by the Saudi’s and any number of parties. But to what degree and what sort of influence do they have? We have gone from the assertion of a connection to the insistence that the abduction of Israeli soldiers was directed from Tehran. This is coming mostly from the Israelis who just state it as fact. Others in Europe see the Syrians trying to regain influence.

It is likely, however, that there was just an opening to grab some Israeli troops and they did it without any real strategic considerations. Sy Hersh thinks that Israel may just be making a buffer zone in southern Lebanon.

Fasicnating. The same dishonest individual who hijacked my identity on the other thread has been up to the same tricks here. Gee, I wonder who it could be? Anyway, posts under my identity from 2:07 PM to this one are not by me.

I'm delighted to see that someone is despairing enough of making a convincing and honest argument that they rseort to such dishonest.y It's clear that someone is uncomfortable with the issues raised.

gregory I have to admit, I am liking your hawkish ways today.

I hesitantly agree that a devastating strike on Demascus and Tehran by Israel may be a good thing. Israel has bent over backwards in appeasement which has obviously resolved nothing.

If Israel did that, this conflict then rises to unprecedented levels and the the US should be prepared to take a win-at-all-costs attitude. There would be no running away from that.

Here's what As'ad AbuKhalil, aka the Angry Arab blogger, had to say about Young this week:

And then there comes Michael Young. I was expecting it. The US press was able to find a half-Arab who has a Western name, and whose link to the Arabic language is akin to that of American students of Arabic on college campuses in the US. And Young is a neo-conservative pro-Zionist writer, who is a huge fan of Bush's wars. So that gives him great qualifications as far as the US media are concerned. It is a matter of time before he becomes a bureau chief of one of the American newspapers or TV stations. He has the credentials: the biases against Arabs and all. Notice that this ostensible Lebanese is giving advise not to Lebanon and what is in the best interest of Lebanon, but to the enemies of Lebanon: he is basically giving advise to Israel on how best to take advantage of its aggression on Lebanon. Look how this man is writing when "his country" is under attack by Israel from land, air, and sea and with the full support of the US: "If America and its Security Council partners [he wants to say Israel here] are smart, however, they may be able to use this crisis to further their security goals in the Middle East." And notice that faults Hizbullah for taking the fight outside of the Shib`a farms but would not dare say that Israel has repeatedly taken its fight against Lebanon well outside the Shib`a Farms. He would not dare say that. Young is a mimic of the New York Times dogmas and language on the Middle East, and is a better mimic of colonial writings on Arabs and Muslims. I always read him, after Sep. 11, as somebody applying for jobs in US newspapers. So if I read him correctly, he fully supports Israeli aggression on Lebanon, but recommends that Israel extends its aggression to Syria to make it more perfect. Young writes for Western readers only, and Arabic readers don't know him, and don't know what he is saying to the White Man. It is thus hilarious for Young to write about "the public mood" in Lebanon. He certainly knows of the public mood in Ashrafiyyah, but do you think that he ever stepped foot in a refugee camp, or in the South or in the Southern Suburbs? Also, Young wants to disarm Hizbullah. Oh, ya. Have Hassan Fattah and Michael Young disarm Hizbullah. That would work.

PD, Israel is holding three Lebanese prisoners. All of them terrorists.

I'm pretty hawkish, just not as hawkish as my troll.

"Israel goes into Lebanon everyday with airplanes and bombs regularly"

That is a dishonest statement.

enozinho et al, you've been arguing with someone, but it wasn't me.

That someone, of course, is dishonest enough to hijack someone's handle, evidently upset enough at me to choose my own, displays certain verbal tics and, in general, seeks to support a certain point of view either by espoising cerain points of view under my name or by making ludicrious arguments on the other side.

It might be fun to speculate who those statements might describe. But I'm satisfied with knowing that that someone is angry, desperate and dishonorable enough to do so. I take that as a victory.

gregory, conservative handles are hijacked all the time for the same reason. Welcome to the club.

Ah, evidently my doppleganger is continuing to monitor these threads, and has adapted! We can narrow down the suspects to those known to spend much of the day posting, can't we? The following post was not by me.

PD, Israel is holding three Lebanese prisoners. All of them terrorists.

I'm pretty hawkish, just not as hawkish as my troll.

Posted by: Gregory (the real one) on July 14, 2006 at 3:08 PM | PERMALINK

By the way, I'm vastly amused that Jay fell for it.

Unfortunately, someone has being going around pretending that I'm not me. And here he is on this thread.

I think I know who it is -- I wouldn't use the words "et al" -- we all know who pretends to be an attorney around here.

So yes, the previous posts, except for 3:11 PM and 3:05 PM, were me. Those two, however, were not mine.

There is an old Dick Gregory joke about when he ordered a roast chicken at a White's Only diner in the South. Some Git-R-Done boys told Gregory that they were going to do to him whatever he did to that chicken.

Punchline: Gregory picked up the chicken and kissed it.

The reason I bring it up, is that if the Israeli/Palestinian conflict was turned upside down and it was Palestine doing to Israel what Isael is doing to Palestine, most people would correctly identify the outcome as genocide. Imagine the outcry if Israel was still within its 1948 borders and the 'Arabs' built a security wall around it. However, when it is Israel bringing similar violence against its antagonists, it is rationalized as a reasonable security response to prevent their extermination. It is not reasonable and they are the exterminators.

Urge your AIPAC/JENSA compromised/bribed Congressional representatives to end all military and economic aid to Israel until Israel returns to its pre-1967 War borders and recognizes a Palestinian state in the left over territory. If the 'Arabs' should then attempt to drive Israelis into the sea, the US should guarantee Israel's security, but not expansion.

Neither was 3:14 PM above me.

Jay you were talking to me. Sorry that my troll is confusing matters.

I know gregory, I should have known better. For a minute there I thought you had gained clarity.

Consider your handle ignored completely.

gregory, conservative handles are hijacked all the time for the same reason.

I'm on record as dsiapproving of this practice, even as applies to commentors with whom I regularly disagree, such as tbrosz.

Unfortunately, the individual who hijacked my handle appears to be posting random nonsense. Unlike the fake tbroszes -- some of which, I must admit, were spot-on parodies -- he or she is not.

He or she does admit, though, that as far as this debate goes, he or she has got nothin'.

So Hostile, you want to bring back the Jewish ghetto?

Ok, I'm done with this thread. It's getting too confusing. Jay, we actually did have some agreement earlier. I'm sorry that my troll came along and emulated me (spot-on in places I must admit) by disowning mine own arguments.

I'm going to another thread.

Well, this is amusing. My doppleganger is trying new ways to muddy the conversation. These aren't mine:

Unfortunately, someone has being going around pretending that I'm not me. And here he is on this thread.

I think I know who it is -- I wouldn't use the words "et al" -- we all know who pretends to be an attorney around here.

So yes, the previous posts, except for 3:11 PM and 3:05 PM, were me. Those two, however, were not mine.

Posted by: Gregory (the real real one) on July 14, 2006 at 3:15 PM | PERMALINK

Neither was 3:14 PM above me.

Jay you were talking to me. Sorry that my troll is confusing matters.

Posted by: Gregory (the real real one) on July 14, 2006 at 3:17 PM | PERMALINK

Aren't you ashamed of yourself, my doppleganger? Why go to such lengths to dishonor yourself? I take it as an extreme compliment that you work so hard to try to shut me down.

I'll go play on other threads for a while. I trust the regulars will know which posts are mine (well, except for Jay, but I won't mind that at all).

Gregory:

Thanks for clearing that up. I was about the call Homeland Security! Now I want an hour of my life back.

Jay, I think you know that Israel sends jets over Lebanon every day. I also think that a quick google search will help you, Israel bombed targets in Lebanon in May, and several times every year starting just a couple months after the withdrawal.

Well, I must have ruffled some feathers at the Scaife Counter Blogging (or Perpetually Idle Lawyers' Office) project today! Nor, obviously, are these mine:

So Hostile, you want to bring back the Jewish ghetto?

Posted by: Gregory (the real real one) on July 14, 2006 at 3:19 PM | PERMALINK

Ok, I'm done with this thread. It's getting too confusing. Jay, we actually did have some agreement earlier. I'm sorry that my troll came along and emulated me (spot-on in places I must admit) by disowning mine own arguments.

I'm going to another thread.

Posted by: Gregory (the real real one and done here) on July 14, 2006 at 3:21 PM | PERMALINK

I hope my doppleganger has indeed departed in disgrace, knowing that he or she has accomplished nothing at all.

enozinho:

Although there is indeed a troll impersonating me today and muddying the waters, a practice which I abhor, that was indeed me attacking you. I chose exaggerated language because I felt that's the only verbiage that antisemetic bigot like you would respond to. My troll is now attempting to disown my remarks and confuse the matter.

It appears
Goof On Parade
forgot his medication today

Give your Mom a call Goof
She'll fix you up.

Gregory, I liked the way you called out both your troll and that dumbass Ron Byers on the Blogging the Bible thread.

Those May strikes followed incursions by Hizbullah.

This recent conflict is an attempt to undermine the new democracy in Lebanon and to distract the G-8 attendees from Iran nuclear ambitions.

To understand this, and every battle, between Israel and the Arab community, one simply has to ask themselves on question:

Will, Hamas, Hezbullah and the broader extreme Muslim community ever acknowledge Israel's right to exist?

Gregory, I liked the way you called out both your troll and that dumbass Ron Byers on the Blogging the Bible thread.

Um, Pierre, I haven't commented on the Blogging the Bible thread yet.

nor did I make this one, obvisuly:

enozinho:

Although there is indeed a troll impersonating me today and muddying the waters, a practice which I abhor, that was indeed me attacking you. I chose exaggerated language because I felt that's the only verbiage that antisemetic bigot like you would respond to. My troll is now attempting to disown my remarks and confuse the matter.

Posted by: Gregory (the real one) on July 14, 2006 at 3:27 PM | PERMALINK

For the record, it is not I.

gregory, conservative handles are hijacked all the time for the same reason. - Jay

I'm on record as dsiapproving of this practice, even as applies to commentors with whom I regularly disagree, such as tbrosz.

Unfortunately, the individual who hijacked my handle appears to be posting random nonsense. Unlike the fake tbroszes -- some of which, I must admit, were spot-on parodies -- he or she is not.

He or she does admit, though, that as far as this debate goes, he or she has got nothin'. - Gregory (not sure which one any more)

The big difference between what used to happen to Tbrosz and what happened to Gregory just now, beyond the content of the posts, is the email address. Almost all the hijacking of conservative handles is done in jest, and uses a different email, often a fake amusing one.

You can't properly have a discussion if you can not discern who's saying what.

To be fair, I have seen fake conservative posters who also copied the e-mail addresses of those posters. I've seen DonP, tsbroz and Nathan mistreated in this way. I always thought that Pale Rider may have been the one responsible.

You can't properly have a discussion if you can not discern who's saying what.

A fact not lost on this creep, I am sure, D.L.

"I hesitantly agree that a devastating strike on Demascus and Tehran by Israel may be a good thing. Israel has bent over backwards in appeasement which has obviously resolved nothing."

If occupying a foreign territory in violation of international law, bulldozing homes there to build illegal colonies, establishing illegal checkpoints all throughout said territory, and initiating extrajudicial kidnappings and assasinations on those living there is "appeasement," then I don't wanna see what the get-tough Israel looks like.

Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA

"Occupying foreign territory....." patrick

Well apparently patrick doesn't acknowledge Israels right to exist either. I suppose your vision is just the opposite, instead of Israel ceding land to Lebanon in 2000 and leaving Gaza in 2005, is actually Israel still illegally occupying the land they do have.

I suppose then all of the suicide bombings in Israel are justified.

"Well apparently patrick doesn't acknowledge Israels right to exist either. I suppose your vision is just the opposite, instead of Israel ceding land to Lebanon in 2000 and leaving Gaza in 2005, is actually Israel still illegally occupying the land they do have. I suppose then all of the suicide bombings in Israel are justified."

Jay, you should try arguing against what I *do* say instead of *inventing* things you think I might say and arguing against them.

Since you're asking:

I do recognize Israel's right to exist.

I do not believe that any of the suicide bombings in Israel are/were justified.

Now then, please note that, even when Israel pulled back from Gaza (in '05), Israel continued to illegally occupy land in the West Bank, and Israel bulldozed homes there to build illegal colonies, and Israel continued with illegal checkpoints all throughout the occupied territories, and Israel continued with its policy of extrajudicial kidnappings and assasinations of Palestinian citizens.

Do you dispute any of the above?

And now that I've very clearly disavowed all Palestinian bombings of Israeli civilians, will you, Jay, disavow the Israeli policy of collective punishment upon the Palestinian citizenry?

And will you also acknowledge Palestine's right to exist?

And will you also stop putting words in my mouth, please?

Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA

If occupying a foreign territory in violation of international law, bulldozing homes there to build illegal colonies, establishing illegal checkpoints all throughout said territory, and initiating extrajudicial kidnappings and assasinations on those living there is "appeasement," then I don't wanna see what the get-tough Israel looks like.

Amen.

I really have doubts about Israel's future. Countries like that just don't make it in the long term.

I wrote: if the Israeli/Palestinian conflict was turned upside down and it was Palestine doing to Israel what Israel is doing to Palestine, most people would correctly identify the outcome as genocide.

Gregory's troll wrote: Hostile, you want to bring back the Jewish ghetto?

I am now kissing that roast chicken.

I do not acknowledge Palestine's right to exist. The Un does not officially recognize a stae of Palestine, because there never has been a state of Palestine and there means to justify their ends in this case are illegal and criminal.

Israel does not have a policy of extrajudicial kidnappings and assisinations of Palestinian citizens.

If the Arab community had any real concern of helping their brtheren, they would carve out a small slice of land from the over whelmingly majority of ME land they occupy to see to it that a state of Palestine existed.

The west bank belongs to Israel unless and until they decide to cede the land to the Palestinians which they have already done in Gaza.

Therefore, there is no "illegal" occupation.

But apparently Israel has no right to defend themselves right?

The west bank belongs to Israel unless and until they decide to cede the land to the Palestinians which they have already done in Gaza. - Jay

I don't believe that is the opinion of any government in the world...even Israel's.

I guess it all depends on your world view.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Bank

"The west bank belongs to Israel unless and until they decide to cede the land to the Palestinians which they have already done in Gaza. Therefore, there is no "illegal" occupation."

You pulled that straight out of your butt, Jay.

The UN considers the West Bank to be under Israeli occupation. Even the United States agrees with this assertion.

Israel's occupation of this territory, and the bulldozering of homes there, and the construction of colonies thereon, is considered illegal by the United Nations and by practically the entire international community, with the sole exception if Israel itself, and sometimes by the United States, and by some guy named Jay.

"But apparently Israel has no right to defend themselves right?"

Dude, what did I just say about not putting words in my mouth? You can't help yourself, can you?

Yes, of course, Israel has a right to defend themselves, but they have no right to occupy land which does not belong to them, nor do they have a right to bulldozer homes on said land, and build colonies upon said land.

Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA

It all depends on your world view "Dude"

Israeli captured the land previously under Jordanian rule in the six-day war in 1967. Never once did it belong to the faux state of Palestine.

Every bit of Israeli's military actions have been defensive.

Jay,

Could you please point to something in that Wikipedia entry on West Bank that supports your view? Because the opening paragraph seemed to explicitly contradict it.

Whom does the land of the West Bank belong to?

Jay, read your own damn link:

"The West Bank is a landlocked territory on the west bank of the Jordan River in the Middle East. It is considered by the United Nations and most countries to be under Israeli occupation. Some Israelis and various other groups prefer to refer to it as "disputed" rather than "occupied" territory. It is not currently considered under international law to be a de jure part of any state.... The United Nations calls the West Bank and Gaza Strip Israeli-occupied (see Israeli-occupied territories). The United States generally agrees with this definition."

Compare and contrast that to what you yourself wrote just a few minutes ago:

"The west bank belongs to Israel... there is no "illegal" occupation."

Notice any discrepancies?

"I guess it all depends on your world view."

Yes. If your world view is that might makes right, you agree with Jay. If your world view acknowledges international law, you don't.

"Israel does not have a policy of extrajudicial kidnappings and assisinations of Palestinian citizens."

Do you seriously believe this?!

"I do not acknowledge Palestine's right to exist."

And yet those who do not acknowledge Israel's right to exist (a group to which I do not belong) are, in your eyes, genocidal anti-semites.

P.S.: I have yet to hear you comment, one way or another, on Israel's policy of collective punishment. Do you disavow it or not? Reminder: I have already specifically disavowed Palestinian attacks on Israeli civilians.

Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA

My view is that Israel won the right to the West Bank in the six-day war and has chosen not to legally annex it due to the large population of illegal occupants, the Palestinians. Israel actually was deferring to them to allow them a livable area rather then kick them all out. Which they should have done.

"Every bit of Israeli's military actions have been defensive."

I'm curious who Rachel Corrie was attacking.

I'm also wondering what that beach on the Gaza Strip was up to on June 9th to justify the deaths of seven Palestinian civilians.

Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA

I do not disavow it. Israels actions are strictly defensive and not near enough severe in my opinion.

They are freedom fighters.

Do you need glasses?

The word illegal is nowhere to be found in that paragraph.

Just answer the question, who do you think rightfully owns the West Bank?

"I do not disavow it. Israels actions are strictly defensive and not near enough severe in my opinion."

The fact that so many Israelis feel like you, and that so many Palestinians feel exactly like you, only in reverse (right down to the "strictly defensive" bullshit), is why the war continues, and why so many innocent people have died.

I mean, look at you, you don't even acknowledge the right of the indiginous population to exist, and you justify it by citing their lack of acknowlegement of the Israelis to exist. How can you not see your own part in this cycle of violence?

I think it's a real shame that the deaths of civilians makes you happy, and that you wish only for more of it. It makes me sad for us all, it makes me sad for Israel, it makes me sad for Palestine, and most of all, it makes me sad for you.

Patrick Meighan
Venice, CA

My view is that Israel won the right to the West Bank....blah, blah, blah.

Uh, educated people subscribe to a known view. Yours ain't. Get an education, kid. You aren't doing Israel any favours with your rants.

Right, but no where in that paragraph is the suggestion that it is Israeli land...which was your claim. You went straight past disputed, and resolved that dispute in favour of Israel.

How else do you expect people to take this statement?: "The west bank belongs to Israel unless and until they decide to cede the land to the Palestinians which they have already done in Gaza."

There is no point talking to someone like Jay if you are a person interested in the fate of the Palestinians. He should be ignored. We all come on here for fun, but also to add a bit to the conversation, make something happen. So, you talk to the people that disagree with you, and hopefully both you and they learn more. Later maybe you've refined your ideas enough to write something cohesive and you put it up on your blog or you write a magazine article or whatever.

If someone is just a bigot, there's nothing there to reason with. So forget it. Some people disagree with you about methods and who's right, but still fundamentally want everyone better off. Talk to them. Some people believe that Arabs, by definition, have fewer rights and less valuable lives. They are not worth talking to.

They are already lost in their sad, hateful, twisted little minds.

There is NO Palestine. Never has been. This whole conflict is based on something that has never existed and people like you perpetuate the lie, therefore the death is on your hands.

Israel is, or has been in full concession to mode to carve out a state of Palestine. Yassar Arafat walked away from a great peace deal because he wanted more. There will never be peace unless and until palestians, people like you and the broader extreme muslim community acknoeldges Israel and reaches accords with Israel on specific Palestinian borders.

This is the same type of "no fingerprints" attack as the assassination that sparked the Cedar Revolution/Protest Babes last year. I wish you guys would go back and review why GWB, Cheney, Wolfowitz and others said leaving Saddam in power with WMD capablity was intolerable. For all our problems in Iraq, we aren't as worried as we otherwise would be that Sarin or VX or who-knows-what might be spewed around one of our cities if we tick that fruitcake off.

Israel won the right to occupy the West Bank in the six-day war and has, for over forty years maintained overall control of the area, at the same time allowing their enemy to maintain residences.

And yet, they are the bad guys. They should have kicked them out then and let the compassionate states of Jordan, Syria or Lebanon welcome their fellow Arab bretheren.

Question:
who do you think rightfully owns the West Bank?

Answer:
previously under Jordanian rule

You ask 'em and you answer them

"......If you are interested in the fate of Palestinians" PD

And I am not interested......anymore.

They have had their chances and were too greedy, selfish and blood thirsty to accept the peace agreements that have been on the table.

And yet Jordan has very little conflict with Israel.

Interesting, no?

"Yours ain't. Get an education..."

oh, ok Bob.

They are freedom fighters
The Palestinians, yes they are

Every bit of Israeli's military actions have been defensive.
Well, just about every bit, this week they're busy blowing up Lebanon, just to show how tough they are.

("I don't have evidence that there were direct instructions," said one Israeli official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. "But they were under the influence of the Iranian government.")

Based on this EVIDENTIARY reasoning couldn't it also be said:

I don't have have evidence that there were direct instructions said one Iranian official, who spoke on condition of anonymity "but Israel is under the influence of the American government"

Sounds just as plausible to me..given the billions and billions of dollars America spends suporting Israel ..based on finances alone it could be conceded to be sufficient evidence of influence with Israel ...not to mention the fact that George Bush has already inferred that he intends to go to war with Iran, several times, in his quest to 'democratize' the Middle East.

um.....Pierre, Hezbullah crossed the border killed three Israeli soldiers and kidnapped two. Did you miss that?

And are you related to Pepe LePew?

Israel does not have a policy of extrajudicial kidnappings and assisinations of Palestinian citizens. Jay 4:31 PM

The west bank belongs to Israel unless and until they decide to cede the land to the Palestinians which they have already done in Gaza. Jay 4:38 PM

Every bit of Israeli's military actions have been defensive. Jay 5:05 PM

Here's a brief history of Palestine and here is some history from an Israeli point of view with clear maps.

Well let's see here, considering that Hezbullah illegally crossed Israels border to kill three soldiers and kidnap two, having America state that Israel has the right to defend their border seems logical, no? If that is what you call influence.

Secondly, please cite the specific dialogue in which GW "infered" going to war with Tehran.

I am waiting.

Well, excuse me for being a cynic, but Israel is setting us up to be in a war with Iran.

Now, you can talk all you want about who's right and who's wrong, but if things get much worse over there we'll be in some pretty deep doo-doo.

Kinda funny though- just a few weeks ago Kevin was saying "Well, they're not going to fool me again" and now he's all like "Well, David Ignatius blah blah blah".

Guess what, Kevin- they're fooling you again.

Thanks for the laugh Mike, I needed it today.

Citing Israels killing of one of the worlds most notorious terrorist, Yassin, as extrajudicial assasination is dishonest at best. Furthermore, linking to Common Dreams Newscenter is hysterical.

The West bank was under Jordanian control until 1948. THERE HAS NEVER BEEN A STATE OF PALESTINE.
Even the liberal bastion of the UN acknowldges that.

Israel has given the Palestinian people more than enough chances to reach a peaceful settlement of borders, which is far more than any other Arab nation has even offered to do for them.

You are dishonest and continue to perpetuate the lie. You are a muslim pawn.

I think Jay meant to say "You are a Muslim prawn"- you're acting as a lobster-claw of the vast hoodie consiracy- riding the sandworms through the library of history- etc etc etc.

Because, in the end, what really matters is who was right and who was wrong.

Off thread:

this lawsuit publicity tour by Americas most covert spy and her husband is just too funny for words. Were they getting bored on the cocktail circuit?

Jay wrote: ... this lawsuit publicity tour by Americas most covert spy and her husband is just too funny for words. Were they getting bored on the cocktail circuit?

You are an asshole. An ignorant, stupid, tiresome little jerk.

Thank you so much secular. I thought you might like that.

I want to thank all of the little (minded) people who voted for me.

the majority of americans are already predisposed to thinking poorly of cheney ... a lawsuit demonstrating his disregard for america and his pure pettiness would fit in with his characterization perfectly.

not even the retarded 30% still approving of bush pull for cheney ... I guess even neocons have limits to the quality of dick they're willing to suck.

我向大家推荐:您想要了解 办公用品 吗？请到中国办公用品网来寻找办公用品。上海 窃听器 公司专业生产窃听器产品，欢迎选择窃听器。窃听器 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的窃听器,丰富窃听器行业资讯助您成交。PANTONE色卡 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的PANTONE色卡,丰富PANTONE色卡行业资讯助您成交。您想要了解 监听器 吗？请到中国监听器网来寻找监听器。要想寻找窃听器信息请访问 窃听器 网，各种窃听器应有尽有。餐饮管理系统 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的餐饮管理系统,丰富餐饮管理系统行业资讯助您成交。要想寻找无线点菜信息请访问 无线点菜 网，各种无线点菜应有尽有。北京 餐饮软件 厂向广大客户提供餐饮软件产品及餐饮软件服务。北京 传奇私服网 厂向广大客户提供传奇私服网产品及传奇私服网服务。中国 投影机灯泡 网，打造投影机灯泡领域专业搜索平台，提供全球投影机灯泡品牌公司及产品展示。要想寻找投影机维修信息请访问 投影机维修 网，各种投影机维修应有尽有。北京 窃听器 厂向广大客户提供窃听器产品及窃听器服务。上海 上海笔记本维修 公司专业生产上海笔记本维修产品，欢迎选择上海笔记本维修。北京 餐饮管理系统 厂向广大客户提供餐饮管理系统产品及餐饮管理系统服务。餐饮软件 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的餐饮软件,丰富餐饮软件行业资讯助您成交。办公用品 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的办公用品,丰富办公用品行业资讯助您成交。北京 二手笔记本电脑 厂向广大客户提供二手笔记本电脑产品及二手笔记本电脑服务。要想寻找笔记本租赁信息请访问 笔记本租赁 网，各种笔记本租赁应有尽有。北京 条形码打印机 厂向广大客户提供条形码打印机产品及条形码打印机服务。移动硬盘 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的移动硬盘,丰富移动硬盘行业资讯助您成交。上海 上海交换机 公司专业生产上海交换机产品，欢迎选择上海交换机。要想寻找窃听器信息请访问 窃听器 网，各种窃听器应有尽有。中国 大头贴 网，打造大头贴领域专业搜索平台，提供全球大头贴品牌公司及产品展示。对讲机 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的对讲机,丰富对讲机行业资讯助您成交。对讲机 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的对讲机,丰富对讲机行业资讯助您成交。北京 机柜 厂向广大客户提供机柜产品及机柜服务。复印机租赁 网上批发市场，为您提供优质低价的复印机租赁,丰富复印机租赁行业资讯助您成交。上海 窃听器 公司专业生产窃听器产品，欢迎选择窃听器。要想寻找手机信号屏蔽器信息请访问 手机信号屏蔽器 网，各种手机信号屏蔽器应有尽有。北京 上海笔记本维修 厂向广大客户提供上海笔记本维修产品及上海笔记本维修服务。

I do know that about the 1967 war. Nasser made a grave error and listened to the Soviets, thereby destroying the possibility of pan-Arab nationalism and leading inexorably to his own death. At the time, Egypt was still smarting from the Israeli collaboration with the French and English in the Suez colonial war, so they were not rational about their interests. And Nasser was probably too proud of hs enormous popularity and success as a leader of the Arabs and the non-aligned nations.

I don't really see though how that makes any difference to the story today in Lebanon. There is no army in Lebanon of any significance, that is, nobody that could invade Israel. There is no real military threat to Israel. The whole point would be just to keep everybody away from the border.

And nobody expects UN troops to stop a state bent on war. The UN has never done that, and is probably not capable of it.

It really is depressing that even now, as the whole place erupts into mayhem, the armchair theorists and the backyard warriors calmly blame Iran and talk in terms of how Lebanon started all this. Meanwhile, the elephant sits placidly in their midst, unnoticed.
Israel is trampling all over international law while bombing the crap out of civilians, and is paving the way towards a repeat of the same dreary cycle of monstrous inhumanity wreaked upon defenceless people followed by long term ill-will and retaliation.
good work guys. you keep talking amongst yourselves.