My emotional take on the events in Lebanon

sorry kind of long, read 3rd section if you want quick.
only people with hearts and brains can read, no need for hyprocrites.
Appreciate your feedback.

My emotional take on the events in Lebanon

sorry kind of long, read 3rd section if you want quick.
only people with hearts and brains can read, no need for hyprocrites.
Appreciate your feedback.

My emotional take on the events in Lebanon

sorry kind of long, read 3rd section if you want quick.
only people with hearts and brains can read, no need for hyprocrites.
Appreciate your feedback.

Chester, given the fact that G8 was coming up and that the US surely would have been talking about disarming Iran, don/t you think it would be highly advantages of Iran and its proxy warriors to stir things up and take the spot light off of Iran.

This may not have been pre-planned by Iran but certainly the current situation could be very beneficial to Iran. For all we know Iran may be closing in on an important and/or final stage of it nuclear plans and needs to buy time for its completion. Thus, the need for a flair-up to by time for their nuclear ambitions.

I notice Tony Snow specifically emphasized Iran in his last press gaggle. Diplomacy being preplanned, one could assume Iran knew of said US plans for the G8 and decided to tip the chess board over.

MR. SNOW: I think that the United States and its allies are working in concert on the key building blocks of the freedom agenda. Number one is to avoid nuclear confrontations, especially involving Iran and North Korea, and doing it in a way that reflects multi-lateral consensus and cooperation... Obviously, there will be specific attention to North Korea and Iran...

See: Press Gaggle by Tony Snow

Given that Israel is already in action I would suggest they get this thing over with quickly and decisively.

Syria is such an obvious target. Mubarik says Syria is to blame.

Why not a jab north then a roundhouse to the east with Israeli air pounding anything that moves in Bekka?

If Iran joins in all the better. The desire of Iranians for an American strike is not uncommon.

It wouldn't hurt at all if a lot of things got settled in the next few months.

Only the Syrians and Iranians could believe Syria is not a target.

For the life of me its starting to look like Iran is intentionally provoking Israel. Between the nuclear weapons rhetoric and this (well planned) Hezbollah operation I have to wonder if Iran has something up their sleeve. It could be as simple as luring the IDF back into Lebanon where they feel they can benefit from a war of attrition.

I wouldn't be surprised if Israel focuses on destroying Hezabollah in the South as a Phase One and, as someone said, invite the Lebanese Army to finally patrol the Southern regions of Lebanon. When Hezabollah is destroyed, Phase Two would be an invasion of Syria, specifically Damacus. I wouldn't be surprised if the Kurds in the Northeast decide to revolt as the Syrian Army was smashed. Then the Israelis would covertly invite the United States to set up a similar democratic government as Iraq. As for Iran, it can either get sucked into the war, or stand by and cut their losses, because if Iran enters - so does the United States AND that's a whole different ball game.

I bet the U.S. troops in Iraq are wondering what turn this news will take.

What is the Israeli endgame? If they are invading Lebanon, as they are, and Hezbollah is striking Israel with mass rocket attacks, as it is, then this is already about much more than three captured soldiers, whether they like it or not.

I posted a but on this topic, which I'd refer you to if not for my co-lo host lost building power (grrr...).

Anyways - there is ZERO CHANCE that Israel uses any airbase in Iraq. Unless the plane is in distress, there is not a chance on God's green Earth an Israeli warplane lands in Iraq. Period. In fact, it is inarguable. So many factors weigh against such an action, from the move being a completely dreamy Al Qaeda recruiting tool, to bringing down the Government, from making Iraq a proxy combatant, to unquenchable civil unrest, to the IDF history against the Osirik reactor...

Just. Isn't. Going. To. Happen.

MEC2

MEC2,

I agree it seems farfetched. I can't remember where I read about it, and not knowing the source makes your argument hard to refute.

Turkey on the other hand . . . ? Turkey and Israel have a history of working together covertly.

Ahh. Who knows?

I'd think the desired end state for Israel is Hezbollah neutered, Syria chastened, and Iran embarrassed. If Israel has a good target list (they probably do) and good real time intel, they have the means to put a hurting on their enemies. Hezbollah's best hope is to inflict enough Israeli casualties that the IDF turns around and leaves. They did take out a tank, killing the crew so it might be possible for them.

The IAF can hit targets regionwide though Iranian nuclear facilities might be tough. My guess is that the hostilities don't end til Iran has taken some shots at and from Israel.

The only shots exchanged between Iran and Israel will be verbal shots. Are people thinking these two are going to just fly over American-occupied Iraq to exchange fire? Unh uh.

The current die was cast when the Palestinians elected a war party to lead them. Israel heard that bell pealing loud and clear. And took advantage of the first opportunity that presented itself to declare de facto war against Hamas. Right now, to my mind, the only ball juggling in the air is - will Israel and Syria finally settle their differences? And by settle, I don't mean with a well intentioned accord...

MEC2

I'd say the IDF and IAF are pleased at this stage. I think they have successfully exploited surprise, as I dont think Hizbollah expected an attack on Beirut. I would take the Hiz threat to attack Haifa if Beirut is attacked as a sign of panic.

If Israel control the momentum of this fight and take it directly to Hizbollah in southern Beirut, then victory is theirs. If they hesitate, give in to phony calls for ceasfire or Foggy Bottom/EU pressure, then Hiz will have an opportunity to regroup and rearm for next time. Because Israel controls the momentum, they can prepare and react to any move by Hiz with punishing force.

Let's say Hiz actually does fire a barrage at Haifa. It only makes them appear as Israel has descibed them for years - a terrorist group with no state and no regard for innocent life. As they have signalled their intent, Israel can prepare for such an attack. If the people there are underground, then there is less of a chance of mass casualties. Israel has a justification to strike with more depth at Beirut and Damascus.

Now is the time to sacrifice treasure and blood. By clearing our Hamas and Hizbollah, Israel can nullify Syrian influence and embarrass Iran, who cannot act without fear of massive assault from the USA.

Lotsa doings going on right now, but a few things leap to mind. At least my mind...

First, the meeting a couple of months ago between Assad and Ahmadinejad is telling. Hezbollah is and always has been a wholly owned subsidiary of the Syrian army, used against Israel to maintain plausible deniablity. This is an obvious gambit by Syria/Iran to escalate, but to what end?

My vibration is that it serves a dual purpose. Just like Nasser in 1967, a pan-Islamic move against Israel will unify several different agendas against a common enemy. I think that's the obvious one. But further, it forces the U.S. into the position of taking sides with Israel, thus building on the popular conspiracy theory that we're the muscle behind Jewish Zionism. Israel doesn't have to land any planes in Iraq; Muslims already have the storyline scripted in their heads. That, in turn, weakens our position in Iraq and ultimately our bargaining position with Iran. Timing is interesting with the recent referral of Iran back to the UNSC.

Second, with a drive up the Bekaa, Israel pits its weakness against the Axis of Evil's strength, i.e. manpower. So look for a Bekaa campaign to be conducted from the air. That brings up the interesting possibility that U.S. satellites will pick up movement of materiel, as bunkers and strongholds are reduced. All those suspicious transports out of Iraq in 2003, which went through Syria into the Bekaa might then become exposed. On a darker note, they might just get used.

Any Israeli offensive against Iran will be limited to cruise missile attacks from submarines, I think, and only after an overt move by the Iranians. Logistically, an overflight of Iraq would be easiest, but Israel is smart enought to see that this would broaden the war unnecessarily. Still, the best intel in the region on Iran comes from Israel. This could give them the political cover they need to bang up Iran's nuke program.

Finally, the Lebanese are going to be put into a spot where they will have to choose their future. The Cedar Revolution comes to a screching halt if the Syrians move back in, or Hezbollah sets up a de facto Islamist presence. Given the current Lebanese government, my guess is that they will be working overtime to keep Syria out and will not openly move on Israel. But that Hez presence will continue to make them a prime target for Israeli warplanes and possibly invasion. So, the Lebanese have a real opportunity here to continue the push toward democracy, but only through expelling Hezbollah.

As I said on my own blog today, and yesterday...this is looking, so far, like a rerun of Operation Litani in 1978.

How long does it take to change a plane's markings so that it can land in Iraq, Turkey
or any Arab Emirates. I'm sure they perceive
a nuclear Iran as a greater threat than Israel.
Remember, Israeli pilots speak Arabic.

I think this is going to be like one of those quantum effects where the physical laws of the universe can be violated but only for a very short time. The international community is starting to think that there isn't very much upside to jollying the Iranians and the North Koreans along. Whatever else the international community argues about, they're all pretty interested in safe sea lanes, relatively low oil prices, and no nuclear attacks on major countries that would spoil the world economy. And with the NKor missile launches last week and the terrorist attacks on trains in Bombay together with Iranian intransigence on the nuclear issue, we may be looking at a perfect storm of bad publicity for the terrorists.

The thing to look for is how much do the Europeans and the Egyptians squeal about what Israel does. I'm not hearing all that much from either group. As Israel pushes forward, there's going to be a strange sort of alliance of basically everybody on the planet who isn't a completely wasted, murderous, incompetent, brutal, thuggish troublemaker. The alliance will be distinguished mostly by what it doesn't do - give Israel (and possibly the U.S.) a hard time as they push into Damascus and fly to Iran.

In this strange quantum world, just for a short time, the ordinary rules of international politics may not hold. Anything is possible as the Euros go on vacation and hope that the Israelis have settled everything by the time they get back.

I'm confused, and in need of some education here: it seems that Israel is punishing the Lebanese government itself too harshly here. Isn't the Lebanese government beginning to free itself of the Syrians? Shouldn't Israel be focusing just on Hezbollah and not the humiliation of the Lebanese army and government itself?

The first question in my mind is how much of an active role Syria will play in this conflict. I suspect they wish to sit on the sidelines and claim some kind of plausible deniability in all of this. Unfortunately, that leads to my second question...

Does Iran want to provoke Israel into overt military action against Damascus? And if they do, why? Do they really want to get sucked into armed conflict with Israel, because of treaty obligations (IIRC, Iran has a mutual defense agreement with Damascus)? And if they want to get pulled into a regional conflict, do they think they have a nasty surprise up their sleeve for Tel Aviv? Does Iran really have a couple of nukes that they would love to "test" (some designs, while somewhat inefficient, are reliable enough that testing isn't all that necessary) on Tel Aviv?

Ultimately, the question is just who is gaming whom, and to what end? Or is it really just a few hotheads who think that the time is ripe for more provocations and counter-counter-counter .... (etc.) retaliations.

Yes, this is going to be an all-too-interesting summer.

Just my $.02
DaveK

Lets make this real simple, if Isreal attacks Iran, kiss Iraq goodbye.

I posted here earlier but rather than speculate at what might happen, let's look at what is actually happening - Israel is totally kicking Hizbollah ass here. This is due to Hiz being totally surprised by the attack on Beirut. Sure this may escalate but I think Israel have the upper hand and probably have Hiz on the rack. The worst thing that could happen is a sudden loss of momentum because of phony 'international pressure'. UN/ EU etc : FOAD. You are irrelevant. I hope that this is Israel's attitude.

It concerns but does not surprise me that the terrorists in charge of Iran want the 2 kids who have been kidnapped. If that is the case, nuke Teheran immediately with promises of more ot follow. No more games - total war.

The object of war is to totally humiliate the enemy and war has been forced on Israel. Foot on the accelerator, lads and lets hope that the casualties of innocents are kept low.

I posted here earlier but rather than speculate at what might happen, let's look at what is actually happening - Israel is totally kicking Hizbollah ass here. This is due to Hiz being totally surprised by the attack on Beirut. Sure this may escalate but I think Israel have the upper hand and probably have Hiz on the rack. The worst thing that could happen is a sudden loss of momentum because of phony 'international pressure'. UN/ EU etc : FOAD. You are irrelevant. I hope that this is Israel's attitude.

It concerns but does not surprise me that the terrorists in charge of Iran want the 2 kids who have been kidnapped. If that is the case, nuke Teheran immediately with promises of more ot follow. No more games - total war.

The object of war is to totally humiliate the enemy and war has been forced on Israel. Foot on the accelerator, lads and lets hope that the casualties of innocents are kept low.

I posted here earlier but rather than speculate at what might happen, let's look at what is actually happening - Israel is totally kicking Hizbollah ass here. This is due to Hiz being totally surprised by the attack on Beirut. Sure this may escalate but I think Israel have the upper hand and probably have Hiz on the rack. The worst thing that could happen is a sudden loss of momentum because of phony 'international pressure'. UN/ EU etc : FOAD. You are irrelevant. I hope that this is Israel's attitude.

It concerns but does not surprise me that the terrorists in charge of Iran want the 2 kids who have been kidnapped. If that is the case, nuke Teheran immediately with promises of more ot follow. No more games - total war.

The object of war is to totally humiliate the enemy and war has been forced on Israel. Foot on the accelerator, lads and lets hope that the casualties of innocents are kept low.

Husker,

I expect any action in Bekaa will be strictly holding and blocking. If it becomes a matter of prestiege Syria will do the attacking.

I think the main action will probably be north from the Golan. I have to look at a map. LOL.

Michael,

If it is only a military strike - yes. If it is political the goverrnment falls. Nuke weapon plants may only be a cover for the real targets.

Dave K.,

Meschaal has already said from Damascus that he is the key to solving the crisis, Lebanon and Gaza. In effect he has announced that Assad is a sock puppet. He has also announced that Iran is calling the shots.

===================

Political aside. I would hate to be a D running in November. India and now this.

I suspect that Iran and North Korea have ginned this game up pretty good. "Make noise in the East and attack in the West," if I remember my Sun Zu, and the NorKs study him well.

AQ's theory was that the Western world did not have the moral resolve or the financial resources to wage a sustained, expensive war in the Middle East. Frankly, I don't see how Israel can afford to wage war on two or three fronts for more than several weeks.

I remember hearing several months ago that NorK Kim had travelled to China (by train) and then on into Russia/Siberia for reasons unknown. Let's assume it was for a 'conference' of Nuclear Third-World Powers (NTWPs?) with participation by Hamas, Hezbollah, AQ in Iraq, etc. Maybe the decison was to agree to let the Twelvers have their way, with the understanding that if the world didn't end, the spoils would be divided among the survivors? If I'm North Korea, I got nothing to lose with that theory.

Buying time/disrupting the G8 conference? Sure, but sooner or later, we're going to have to use these nukes. Why wait?

Carl of J says that a "Katyusha" hit Haifa.

That's not a Katyusha...seems like the range on that is 12.7 miles. I bet this is the Iranian Fajr-5.

If Hezbollah (in the Iranian Revo Guard's pocket), has got missiles to drop on Haifa -- deep in Israel, then things just got exponentially more dangerous. When the mad mullahs get their warhead, Lebanon becomes Tehran's "Cuba."

Israel is not intending to invade middle or northern Lebanon. If it was it would not be dropping so many bridges.

What Israel is doing is preventing the movement of the kidnapped soldiers to the Iranian plane in Damascus.

Bridges, ports and airports are all targets related to that end.

The other task that Israel will undertake, if this is not resolved quickly, is the reduction of the two Hezballah defense lines in southern Lebanon.

Israel will continue to track, capture and kill Hamas and Hezballah at their own pace and on their own timetable.

All this because of the gambler in Iran and appeasers in Europe.

One more thing. Remember how short the distances are in this area.

Damascus is less than 60 miles from the front in southern Lebanon.

Everyone in that area is sitting in each others lap.

They have to put boots on the ground. They can't let the Hezbollah pukes keep putting Fajr's into Haifa.

Besides...the Israelis are calling a bunch of reserves. That's not done for posturing...the civilian economy takes too much of a hit.

The Israelis have bridge trains...the Hezbollah people don't. They just don't want them getting away, or getting their prisoners away.

My two cents; Israel is dropping bridges not stop the movement of the two kidnapped soldiers but to prevent the reinforcement of Hezbullah trops, and even more likely, the retreat of Hezbukkah. Trap them and them destroy them. Or at least immoblize them so that Israeli forces have free passage to Syria.

Also, Israel warned Syria a year ago that if war breaks out, this time Israel will not stop until they are in Damascus. I'll bet there will be Israeli tanks in Damscus within 45 days.

How will Iran respond? They have no airforce that can reach Israel. They cannot send troops or eguipment. All they have are missiles of questionable accuracy. Iran will look very weak in response.

The wild card is nukes. Iran may have designed one or two. They may have aquired one from NK or maybe a Ruskie loose nuke. But Israel has at least 75, probably double that.

This may well help the cause in Iraq. Jihaddies would rather fight Israel than any other country. It will take the heat away from Iraq. Any prolonged war will also drain away finances and weapons from Iraq.

It is also interesting the reaction from mideast blogs. Most Lebanese seem very angry with Hezbullah. Other Arab blogs also see Hezbullah as the perp rather than the victim. Could be seachange in the mideast mindset.

M.Simon:

I expect any action in Bekaa will be strictly holding and blocking. If it becomes a matter of prestiege Syria will do the attacking.

I think the main action will probably be north from the Golan. I have to look at a map. LOL.

You could be right. As others have posted, the overall strategy seems to be cutting Hezbollah off from the rest of Lebanon,preventing flight, and destroying in place. I'm curious if areas near Jazzin have been hit to form a bottleneck for all points south to the border. No news to that effect yet that I've found.

If so, a right hook northeast, cutting the Golan, not only would put the Israelis at the gates of Damascus (to the east), but would give direct access to high ground over the Bekaa in the Anti-Lebanon range from the Syrian side (to the west). That serves two fairly obvious useful purposes.

Supported by a push straight north, and air cover protecting the eastern flank, you could cut the southern half of the valley off. Actually, you could effectively cut off everything south of Beirut and west of Damascus.

The real question to me is not whether it could be done, but whether it would be a prudent political move.

Thewiz is correct that the Lebanese are furious with Hez. This action does nothing to support Palestinian causes, and puts the new and popular democratic government of Lebanon at risk. Direct Israeli action against Syria stengthens the political hand of Iran, Syria and their proxies and weakens the position of Lebanon.

So the correct Israeli dialogue with Beirut should take the form of telling them explicitly that Israel will not endure attacks from the north (sponsored by the hated Syrians) and that the Lebanese government faces an Afghanistan moment if they don't work from their end to stop it.

M.Simon:

I expect any action in Bekaa will be strictly holding and blocking. If it becomes a matter of prestiege Syria will do the attacking.

I think the main action will probably be north from the Golan. I have to look at a map. LOL.

You could be right. As others have posted, the overall strategy seems to be cutting Hezbollah off from the rest of Lebanon,preventing flight, and destroying in place. I'm curious if areas near Jazzin have been hit to form a bottleneck for all points south to the border. No news to that effect yet that I've found.

If so, a right hook northeast, cutting the Golan, not only would put the Israelis at the gates of Damascus (to the east), but would give direct access to high ground over the Bekaa in the Anti-Lebanon range from the Syrian side (to the west). That serves two fairly obvious useful purposes.

Supported by a push straight north, and air cover protecting the eastern flank, you could cut the southern half of the valley off. Actually, you could effectively cut off everything south of Beirut and west of Damascus.

The real question to me is not whether it could be done, but whether it would be a prudent political move.

Thewiz is correct that the Lebanese are furious with Hez. This action does nothing to support Palestinian causes, and puts the new and popular democratic government of Lebanon at risk. Direct Israeli action against Syria stengthens the political hand of Iran, Syria and their proxies and weakens the position of Lebanon.

So the correct Israeli dialogue with Beirut should take the form of telling them explicitly that Israel will not endure attacks from the north (sponsored by the hated Syrians) and that the Lebanese government faces an Afghanistan moment if they don't work from their end to stop it.

Whoop. Sorry for the double post there.

So far the Israelis look like they are giving Hizbollah a serious beating. Let's hope that they finish the job and do not bow to UN/G8 pressure for a ceasefire.

HIzbollah look defeated - they are defiant but let's face it, so was Hitler in his bunker. Nasrallah is like a rat in a sewer with a cellphone. The mullahs are starting to look weak - their proxy is being wiped out in situ and their hands are tied. I would expect unofficial communication from the Americans have warned them not to move an inch or they will get wacked, too.

Israel have the momentum and really should take this to Damascus, but I doubt they will.

Chester,
I am going to throw this out on digg. Let's see if the hits come in!
Nice posts and glad to see you back in full swing again!!