We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

So what should Israel do?

I take a more equivocal view of the current military actions in Lebanon than Dale. I strongly question the wisdom of dislocating communications and infrastructure in the non-Hezbollah controlled parts of the country, i.e. punishing people who are, if not natural allies of Israel (though some are), at least not currently Israel’s enemies.

And yet…

We cannot pretend that Lebanon is a normal nation-state. The Lebanese government does not in reality control Lebanon, or more correctly, it controls Lebanon’s various regions at the sufferance of the local factional leaders. Clearly just as the Lebanese government is not responsible for the actions of Hezbollah within Lebanon, they cannot then claim their sovereignty has been violated when Israel attacks Hezbollah within Lebanon: they cannot have it both ways. If they are responsible, then the Lebanese state must stop Hezbollah. As they clearly cannot do that, they cannot reasonably object to Israel doing so. But similarly Israel should be very discriminating upon whom they drop their munitions.

I cannot really complain about Israel hammering Hezbollah anywhere they can be found (and I do mean anywhere). Hezbollah must be destroyed in the most literal sense of the word. Moreover the people in Syria and Iran who make Hezbollah possible must also be destroyed, again quite literally… and political posturing, UN resolutions and negotiations will not achieve those objectives. To this end right now Israel should be striking targets in Iran and Syria in retaliation for Hezbollah activities. In short, whilst I am very unhappy to see Israel attacking the airport in Beirut, I would have little problem with them doing exactly that to Tehran or Damascus. I think they are ‘sharing the pain’ with the wrong people.

It is easy to point the finger at Israel (I am certainly not reflexively pro-Israeli myself and Lord knows they can be pretty arrogant and unsympathetic), but in truth I have yet to hear any workable alternatives to what they are doing being offered up by the critics. Hezbollah’s actions are intolerable and so why should Israel tolerate them? If not this then what should Israel do? Methinks this is not an easy question to answer.

49 comments to So what should Israel do?

  • Perhaps the question is what should they not be doing?

    http://www.pickledpolitics.com/archives/644

  • Yes, perhaps that is the question.

  • Pete

    Doing nothing could be interpreted as appeasement, and that policy didn’t do the Jews much good in recent history.

  • lucklucky

    Well like i said it’s a legitimate question. They blasted the runways (not total since 4 civilian planes moved to Aman today over the watchfull eye of Israeli airforce) yesterday.

    Now what moves the Lebanese? What makes them act?
    For example Hizballah has been pretty succefull with their thuggery mafia tactics inside Lebanon.
    I doubt Lebanese reckon that Hizballah is a liability without causing damage. Neverthgless Beirut still haved electricity only in South it was a target for example.

    Now the Hizballah isnt something that felt from the skies. They arent only an Iranian and Syrian gang group
    They have the shiite vote +20% in the bag and are members of the Governement. So they represent a big part of the Lebanese society. Unless they cut the country in 2 pieces theya re responsible.

    The idea of atacking Iran and Syria is very nice in theory but what would be the UE/State Department reaction? That is what counts not the Samizdata reaction.

    Now the tone and the hysterical stance of Dale Amon?!For some that dont know him i am not in a bit surprised of some accusation that flyed.

  • I really do not think Israel is in any danger of being seen as an ‘easy touch’, Pete. Clearly the Israeli default position is “you mess with the bull, you get the horn”, which as far as it goes is not an unreasonable position. It is kind of a rough neighbourhood.

  • permanent expat

    pickledpolitics. Yes, I read the very good article. So everyone’s right….is that it? As for the remark about the ‘moral high ground’ I’m pretty sure the KZ inmates had that……and much good it did them.
    I said what I had to say in the previous thread. It elicited, unsurprizingly, no comment, not even “Expat is a dickhead.”
    I don’t give a monkey’s if you’re Jewish, Brit, Inuit, Seminole, Hindu or Seventh Day Adventist…..Islam wants your submission or death.
    So what should Israel do?
    Answer: What it’s doing. Fighting for it’s life &, by proxy, the lives of us all. For all you armchair Clausewitzes pointing out what you see as tactical or, heavens, moral errors…….better move your useless arses & fight for your survival…..I kid you not.

  • Chris

    Lebanon hasn’t moved against Hezbollah itself for years, because doing so has the chance of igniting another round of civil war. There’s the prospect of Syrian intervention if Hezbollah fights back against a Lebanese attempt to disarm them, and the ultimate nightmare of fragmentation. But while Lebanon tolerates Hezbollah taking over the south as a nearly independent fiefdom, Hezbollah is using that territory to wage a war against Israel. What the Israelis are trying to do, I believe, is make it clear to Lebanon that the price of not dealing with Hezbollah will be higher than the price of moving against them.

    Granted, perhaps they could have cooperated with the US and played “good cop, bad cop” with Lebanon before launching their attacks. Though at least acting under threat of Israeli invasion would give a fig leaf for Lebanese politicians to act without incurring blame, and if Lebanon does accept the Israeli terms for a cease-fire, Syria won’t dare try to intervene. And for the strategy of disengagement to work, Israel has to be ready to deliver immediate and painful retaliation for attacks that continue after withdrawal.

  • felix

    What should Israel do?

    How about:

    1) Obey international law.
    2) Stop using assassination, kidnapping, and collective punishment as instruments of foreign policy.
    3) Stop developing weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons.
    4) Renounce ethnic cleansing and make reparations for the same, including allowing people forced from their land – and their descendants – to return to it.
    5) Do something about Israeli racism – 68% of Israeli Jews would refuse to live in the same building as an Arab, for example. Stop discriminating against Arabs in areas of immigration, land ownership, and public services.
    6) Stop pretending, as a nation with one of the world’s more advanced militaries that receives billions of dollars of aid annualy with which to purchase weapons, that its existence is under serious threat from attacks by basically third world countries.

    That would be a start.

  • International law? What a joke. Try that in China some day.

    Daftest of all, why should they stop assassinating enemies who are involved in terrorism against them? If ever there was a case of well directed force, the Israeli tendancy to try and deliver weapons to the perople directly responsible for the deaths of Israelis is it. It is perhaps their best military policy.

    Face it, what you want is for Israel to stop doing anything which is actually effective because you are not neutral, you are on the side of the terrorists. You want Israel to ‘be nice’ because you want Israel to lose and its jewish population to be driven into the sea.

    Gawd knows I often castigate Israel for what I think are some very counterproductive policies, but you have nothing to add to this debate because in truth your answer to “So what should Israel do” is that it should allow itself to be destroyed.

  • felix

    On the side of the terrorists? Who are they? The ones who ignore international law and use tactics like assassination?

    You’ve become an apologist for terror as a weapon. What is your fearmongering other than terrorism? If suicide bomb attacks on kindergarten classes were an effective tactic, by your logic they would be acceptable, even admirable.

    If you now consider it allowable to ignore law and use tactics long considered immoral by the civilized world, what exactly do you think Hizbollah has done wrong?

  • Dave

    Felix, which one of those (rather inflamatory) suggestions will address Israel’s security concerns? You know, the one that goes “Our soldiers should not be killed or kidnapped from within our own borders” and the one that goes “Our towns should not be bombarded from foreign territory”?

    Or is your contention that if Israel unilaterally stops using force, the other side will, too? Because if it is, you sound rather ignorant.

  • What is wrong with assassination?

    There are no credible moral objections to killing the leader of enemy forces, only questions of expedience.

    Or do you think that Khaled Mashaal and Hassan Nasrallah has less guilt than their lowliest foot soldiers? I submit that the leaders are far more guilty than their cannon fodder.

  • The ones who ignore international law and use tactics like assassination?

    ‘International Law’ is a joke and please answer my question of why assassinating the people involved in terrorism is a bad thing?

    You’ve become an apologist for terror as a weapon. What is your fearmongering other than terrorism?

    Huh?

    If suicide bomb attacks on kindergarten classes were an effective tactic, by your logic they would be acceptable, even admirable.

    I take it English is not your first language or perhaps you just neglected to actually read what I wrote. I favour assassination because it is very discriminating. Suicide bombing is what your guys do, killing civilians in pizza parlours.

    If you now consider it allowable to ignore law…

    And what law would that be? Who voted on it? Back in the real world…

    …and use tactics long considered immoral by the civilized world, what exactly do you think Hizbollah has done wrong?

    Oh nothing much, just suicide bombing civilian targets and firing rockets into towns rather than at military objectives in towns, you know, that sort of thing. In case you had not noticed, it was established pretty conclusively after the experience of World War II that sort of thing (blindly bombing cities) really has almost no military value even as a ‘morale attack’. I would care about Hezbollah a lot less if all they attacked were Israeli military targets and their civilian victims were collateral damage… but that is not usually what they do. The irony is that the non-rocket based attacks this time were indeed directed at the IDF, but that is clearly not their consistent M.O… and the increasingly long range and utterly inaccurate rockets are clearly an intolerable threat to Israeli civilians.

  • permanent expat

    felix………from ‘Arabia felix’ no doubt………posts his strange comments, you may be sure, from a western country whose lifestyle pleases him better than that of the land of his fathers where such reversed dissidence would find him ‘disappeared’ in small pieces. Ah, the sheer decadence….
    felix is probably a citizen of the country which, in its blindness, gives him shelter & a rule of law which doesn’t include amputations or the stoning of women who have been raped. If only those Jews could be wiped from the face of the earth……….oh, and all those other swine who don’t follow the word of whomever (PBUH). Never mind, felix, so far we haven’t been able to get our act together…but we will, we will.

  • Keith

    Felix, time for your medication. Until then, just try to keep away from the keyboard, eh?
    Terrorists sympathisers aren’t cute any more.

  • I am all for Israel bombing both Syria and Iran, my only conern would be the negative effect that would have on the Shias in Iraq and the lives of the US troops in Iraq.

    As it stands now, the US is doing most of the heavy lifting, i.e. DYING.

    I pity the US right now, they are surely in a bad spot. If Israel decides to attack Iran, then the US is basically going to war with Iran….I see few ways that such a scenario WOULDNT lead to Iranian aggression against the US in Iraq.

    That being said, the US would be better off in the long term by dealing with Iran (with Israel and the coalition troops backing us up) now, but our plate is already full.

    And who in the coalition will follow the US to Iraq?

    Painfully few, I suspect….

  • Samsung

    If the Israelis had observed “International Law” thirty years ago, they wouldn’t have pulled off the Entebbe Raid and successfully rescued their fellow citizens from the clutches of the Palestinian hostage takers and the Baader-Meinhof Gang. Sometimes it pays for Israel to flout so called “International Law”.

    The Belmont Club (Link)

  • Dale Amon

    I’d say just take out Syria. No one would particular miss them. I cannot see Israel going after Iran any way. It’s too big, it is too far away, and I really do not think the US DOD wants to get pulled into that big a war right now. As far as I can see from a map, there is really no way they could go after Iran without the US looking the other way. There are an awful lot of US front line fighters in Iraq Kuwait and the Gulf and I am sure there would be a strong discouragement from getting us dragged into something at this time. The “Please turn around and go home now or we might have to shoot you down” type of discouragement.

    Of course if the target happened to be certain nuclear facilities, the US radar systems might just accidentally be down for maintenance at the time…

    I retain hopes that internal events could change the sort of government in Iran. But it might take a few smart bombs to delay their nuke program.

  • The Best thing of all woulds be well-timed targetted assassinations of both the Syrian and Iranian leadership, as well as a thorough no-holds-barred land assault against the terrorists in Palestine and Lebanon…perhaps with a tip to the US to pay special attention to Iraq’s borders…

  • Keith

    QuickRob, I’ve long thought that well-targeted assassinations are the answer to the terrorist problem. For all their talk of martyrdom, very few of the leaders seem anxious to make that trip.
    Take out the leaders of Syria and Iran as well as the muftis preaching hate from their Western mosques.
    After the first ten or twenty die in mysterious circumstances (or just get plain knocked off in full view) I suspect that things would quieten down a lot.

  • XWL

    To this end right now Israel should be striking targets in Iran and Syria in retaliation for Hezbollah activities

    I agree with your take on this issue, Israel has the right and responsibility to hunt down, kill, destroy, maim, mutilate, and generally erase from existence the people, organizations, and state leaders (the next time an Assad summer home is bombed, he’ll be in it) who back them (and any civillians bloodied because the terrorists cynically stockpile weapons, facilities and their own personnel amongst civillians, the blood was spilt by the terrorist, not by Israel).

    The reason I quote above though is to use it to pose a question, one which I’m not sure the answer to myself.

    Does the USA allow Israel fly-over rights through Iraqi airspace should they choose to raid Iran, and Israel’s version of cruise missles weren’t able to do the job alone?

    (the current Iraqi leadership even if they agree with the goal, could never officially allow that, and would have to condemn both Israel for acting, and the USA for allowing Israel to act)

    And to the Felix’s of the world, just admit that you would love to join in the ‘Death to Israel, Death to the United States’ chants, and be done with it.

    International Law is mostly a European fiction used by Europeans to feel superior and the courts are manipulated by despots to condemn the United States and Israel at every opportunity (yet truly criminal actions commited by the Taliban government before they were destroyed, or North Korea, or the People’s Republic of China, are ignored)

  • htjyang

    I really do not think Israel is in any danger of being seen as an ‘easy touch’

    – Perry

    Let us review recent events:

    1. Israel was forced to withdraw from southern Lebanon as a result of incessant Hezbollah attacks.

    2. Israel withdrew from Gaza recently. The Hamas claimed credit. The Palestinian people awarded Hamas control of the Palestinian Authority.

    The sad truth is, Perry, Israel is being perceived as lacking the stomach for a long fight or harsh measures. No one doubts that Israel can launch a brief but furious strike. I would be impressed if Israel does what the Arabs accuse them of doing: carpet bomb Beirut. The question is whether Israel has the stomach for a long and vicious fight. On this question, see #1 and #2 above.

    That is why it is very important for Israel not to quit until its soldiers are retrieved. Personally, I would prefer the IDF march to Damascus and wipe out Assad. Failing that, I’d settle for another invasion of Lebanon. Knock down every house there if necessary. Israel has been on the retreat for more than 20 years since the Lebanon invasion. It is time for that to change. The best the US can do is to stay out of the way and prevent anybody else from getting in the way.

    Power is a two-part equation of will + capability. Israel is more than capable of handling the Hezbollah, Hamas, and Syria. Now we have to see whether they have the will to win.

  • lucklucky

    “QuickRob, I’ve long thought that well-targeted assassinations are the answer to the terrorist problem. For all their talk of martyrdom, very few of the leaders seem anxious to make that trip.
    Take out the leaders of Syria and Iran as well as the muftis preaching hate from their Western mosques.
    After the first ten or twenty die in mysterious circumstances (or just get plain knocked off in full view) I suspect that things would quieten down a lot.”

    I fully agree with that. Democracies are much better replacing leadership than Theocracy and Dicatatorships.

    Targeting leadership and the elite families is one of the best solutions against Syria, Iran & Co. reducing the damage to the civil population.

    When NATO started to put some anti-bunker nuke missiles in Europe the Soviets started to make heavy noises.

  • Gordon

    htyang’s analysis is correct but it is unlikely that Israel would have the stomach to kill say 10 000 Hizbollah when the price for that in terms of civilian deaths would be five or ten times higher. Perhaps Kofi could persuade Iran’s pawns to group themselves into UN certified civilian free zones?
    So I don’t think we are at the end game point yet.
    The Jews must be thinking though that as bad as it is now, what will it be like when Iran gets the bomb.
    There is only one conclusion to be drawn from that.
    What’s that poem of Milton’s? You know the one that contains the phrase “Eyeless in Gaza”.

  • permanent expat

    In all this amateur stategic & moral proselitizing, an important point has been (curiously) overlooked:
    Certainly since WW2, there is no other country in the world with more experience in fighting for its survival and it would be facile to think that the Israelis do not think things through. (Osirak, Entebbe & much more) Mistakes do happen……duh!
    Whether we like it or not, Israel (like us) has its own national interests & to neglect them would mean certain ‘Vernichtung’.
    Munich (Chamberlain) we have forgotten.
    Munich (Dachau et al.) the Israelis have not forgotten.

  • Johnathan Pearce

    It is an interesting question as to whether nation states should employ assassination as a weapon. If the rather logic-challenged Felix objects to Irsrael bumping off islamofascist nutters committed to killing Jews, perhaps he might like to answer the now-rhetorical question as to whether the Allied powers should have killed Hitler and his thug allies prior to WW2 and therby saved the world from a massive war.

    The use of assassination has been traditionally abjured by states on the rather practial, not moral, grounds that it would encourage tit-for-tat killings. So instead young men got conscripted to the army and got killed in vast numbers instead.

  • Israel has a right to defend itself, period. It’s sad that Bush isn’t vocally, unequivocally standing for Israel, but at least he isn’t calling their actions illetigimate. (Perhaps he doesn’t because he can’t pledge our military resources committed elsewhere.) Blair should be ashamed. Pope Benedict should be slapped.

    Anyone insisting on Israel’s passivity is a Jew hater.

  • Kentuckyliz:

    Israel has a right to defend itself, period.

    But that is not really in question so “so what?” It also does not follow that as Israel has a right to defend itself, it therefore has a right to do anything to anyone it pleases.

    htjyang:

    1. Israel was forced to withdraw from southern Lebanon as a result of incessant Hezbollah attacks.

    Israel withdrew from militarily vulnerable positions. The value of remaining just to prove how macho they were was outweighed by the fact they were taking unacceptable losses for no real gain. I would call that a rational military judgement, not being an ‘easy touch’.

    2. Israel withdrew from Gaza recently. The Hamas claimed credit. The Palestinian people awarded Hamas control of the Palestinian Authority.

    I suspect Hamas’ success has as much to do with:

    1. the harsh economic condition that result from the fact Gaza is both under a virtual state of siege (for which Israel is responsible and even though it does this for very good security reasons, economic destitution is a consequence, which also has security & political implications) and..

    2. Gaza was presided over by a kleptocratic & corrupt PLO government and Hamas, who may be all manner of vile things, they do seem to be a bit less corrupt.

    The sad truth is, Perry, Israel is being perceived as lacking the stomach for a long fight or harsh measures.

    Given that Gaza is more or less an open air prison camp and that Israel invaded and occupied a part of Lebanon for many years, I find that conclusion a tad bizarre

    No one doubts that Israel can launch a brief but furious strike. I would be impressed if Israel does what the Arabs accuse them of doing: carpet bomb Beirut.

    Now THAT has to be one of the most puzzling things you have ever said. Beirut is made up of neighbourhoods filled with people who detest Hezbollah and who are trying to create a state that is anathema to the Islamists: i.e. secular and modern. And you think Israel should carpet bomb them? Were that to happen, Israel would be everything its enemies claim it is… just another rogue state that needs to be destroyed. Fortunately the people running Israel are considerably more discriminating than that, so it will not happen any time soon.

    The question is whether Israel has the stomach for a long and vicious fight.

    But that is not the question. It will do whatever it has to do. However Israel does not have the ability to sustain a long and vicious fight. In a lengthy attrition war, Israel loses. There are very good reasons Israel fights the way it does. It uses speed, intelligence, firepower and (above all) range.

    Israel stands off and fights from afar where its enormous technological, organisational and educational advantages mean it will win pretty much every fights. Its enemies try to get up close and personal… and you cannot get much more up close and personal than a suicide bomber. The ONLY advantage Israel’s enemies have is numbers and that means ‘long and vicious fights’ are exactly what Israel’s enemies want and why Israel is quite rightly very loath to oblige them.

  • jrdroll

    When is the Red Cross are going to demand to see the captured Israeli soldiers? Club Gitmo critics where are you?

  • htjyang

    Perry,

    I quite agree with your analysis as they are not incompatible with my views. You speak of Israeli positions in southern Lebanon as “militarily vulnerable.” Nothing is militarily vulnerable unless it comes under relentless attack, which characterizes what happened in southern Lebanon and only sustains my point about the tenacity of the terrorists.

    I also hope you noticed that the key word I used was “perceived.” In other words, it doesn’t matter what the truth is. What matters is what the Palestinians and Arabs “perceive.” Everything I’ve read suggests that they do see things my way. To defeat the enemy requires first understanding how they think and right now, they think that prolonged skirmishes drove Israel out of southern Lebanon and Gaza and they think that with the same kind of tenacity, they can win back the West Bank and eventually drive the Jews into the sea.

    The perception of the Palestinians and Arabs have been warped by decades of anti-US and anti-Israel propaganda as well as extreme Islamism. You should know that suicide bombers and a bunch of Third World thugs who decide to take on the US and Israel do not see reality the normal way.

    That’s why I made my (admittedly frightening) suggestion of pounding Beirut into the dust. I entirely agree with you that a repeat of the southern Lebanon situation is unsustainable. What is need is a quick and devastating clearing of the area, (hence my “knock every building down”) not a decades-long occupation.

    After a series of wars, Israel finally forced Egypt, Jordan, and Syria to realize that conventional war won’t work. What differentiates conventional warfare from terrorism is that people generally accept that warfare is merciless whereas when it comes to terrorism, you see a lot of people ranting on about “proportionate response.”

    What I’m offering is to deal with terrorism using the means of conventional warfare. The way to do that is the same way Israel forced Egypt, Jordan, and Syria to quit conventional warfare: To raise the cost of conflict to such astronomical levels that the other side has no choice but to make peace or some kind of detente.

    My point about carpet-bombing was to stress the importance of ruthlessness in war. I’m certainly not in favor of bombing those who are friendly to Israel. But for those who are unfriendly, I would say that there is a time and place to “win hearts and minds” and right now is not the time.

    Pinpoint strikes and targeted assassinations will not be enough to send the message. Israel does need to send its army into Lebanon and wipe out anyone who’s not standing by the road cheering them on. It would be to Israel’s benefit to drive millions of refugees into Syria and create a disaster for Damascus to deal with. Since a direct invasion of Syria is unlikely, the only way to pressure the sponsors of terrorism is to create crises for them.

    You spoke favorably of targeted assassinations before, thus ignoring how long Israel has tried that. Terrorists easily replace their leaders. I long lost count on how many al Qaeda leaders US disposed of.

    Terrorist groups need an entire network to sustain them. They need people to contribute money and provide bodies for suicide bombers. This unfortunate modern focus on pinpoint strikes only allows the supporters of terrorists to go on forever, furnishing money and children for the terrorists, safe in the knowledge that as they never picked up a gun themselves, they can go on with their daily lives. The only way to end that very comforting situation for them is to recognize that people who donate a penny to Hezbollah are as evil as Nasrallah himself and deserve a similar kind of consideration.

    Iran and Syria can contribute expertise and money to the Hezbollah. But it is the Palestinians and the Lebanese who contribute the bodies. It’s time that Israel cut off this supply line.

  • When this whole thing started with the Isreali incursions into Gaza I was all “What on earth do they think they are doing?” Now having read the comments here and elsewhere I have been persuaded to reconsider. You have managed to illuminate a seemingly impenetrable situation and given a relative layman food for thought. Thankyou.

  • lucklucky

    The reality once again proves that Dale Amon rant is/was 100% wrong.

    The case of the attack against Israeli ship at 16km from the coast : An anti-ship missile of 2 tons(chinese origin that most probably came from Iran) with guidance helped by coastal radars of Lebanese state.

  • It appears that Israel is focusing on Hezbollah facilities and arteries/nexuses of transportation: airport, ports, bridges, by which Hezbollah has been supplied weapons (particularly the CZ-102 cruise missile, a dwarf of our Tomahawk design) by Iran. Effective warfighting is eliminating the enemy’s ability to wage war, which means cutting of his avenues of supply first before engagement of combat forces.

    While it is quite apparent that Hezbollah initiated this fight at the direction of Iran, who is seeking distraction and delay from action in the Security Council against its nuclear ambitions, it seems to me we might also see if rumors/evidence that Saddam’s WMD went to Syria, and possibly to the Bekka Valley facilities of Hezbollah before the US invaded Iraq have any merit.

    Just as NK seeks distraction from its nuke program with its missile launches, Iran seeks distraction via use of its terrorist arms. I would not say that Israels response is excessive given 150 Katyusha rocket launches into northern Israel.

    That Egypt, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia are remaining silent on this situation makes clear that they know what is going on.

  • lucklucky

    particularly the CZ-102 cruise missile, a dwarf of our Tomahawk design) by Iran.

    Tomhawk is a very diferent beast.

    There werent 150 rocket launches against Israel but 700.

  • Hezbollah brought this upon themselves when they crossed the border and took Israelis.

    The only thing that continues the existence of Israel is their willingness to fight back. Anything less will result in them being overrun and slaughtered to the last woman and child.

  • The only thing that continues the existence of Israel is their willingness to fight back.

    And? Sorry but the answer to “So what should Israel do?” needs to be a bit more than “fight back” as I take that as a given.

    How it does that is what I am interested in because it has long term political implications. I think that in the long run Israel cannot survive just by military means. At the moment Israel is much stronger than anyone in the region. Will it still be in 10 years? Yes, it probably will be. 20 years? Perhaps. 30 years? Impossible to say. At the very least it needs some people in the area who are systemically and fundimentally not potential enemies (i.e. it needs more than just a friendly government because governments can change in the blink of an eye or in the blast of an assassin’s bomb, it needs a people who do not see Israel as a ‘problem’)…and a modern secular Lebanon would seem the most logical long term hope of greatly simplifying Israel’s security conundrums.

  • Erase Islam

    Nuke ’em all till they glow in the dark.

  • Uain

    What should Isreal do? How about just what they are doing?

    Hizbullah has handed Isreal and the West a golden opportunity to kick another leg off the stool on which the axis of evil rests it’s fetid arse.
    By taking out the airport and bridges, they are denying Iran and Syria any heavy lift capability to resupply Hizbullah, or for Iran’s 100’s of Spec Ops to beat a hasty retreat. I would not be surprised if Isreali hunter-killer teams don’t slip over the boarder and bag some persian trophies.
    Right now Syria and Iran are checkmated (militarily and diplomatically by Arab League!?) and can only rant while Isreal decimates Hizbullah and all that expensive terror infrastructure built up over the last 10 years. Isreal is demanding the full commitment of the UN to implement Resolution 1559 (disband/ disarm all Militias in Lebanon, Lebanese Army control of Southern Lebanon). It seems we are witnessing yet another dividend of the Iraq endevour.
    Go Isreal!

  • Nick M

    This is rapidly turning into all-out war. Above everything Israel needs to appreciate that if that’s what it’s gonna do, it’s gonna have to do it thoroughly. Half-arsed “proportionate” action is nonsense. If Israel is really serious about kicking the shi’ite outta Hezbollah (and they seem to be) then they’ve gotta do it thoroughly and preferably quickly. In war there is no substitute for the capacity to astonish with violence.

    And yes, if they could take out some more of the trash – in Damascus and Tehran – that would be most excellent.

  • lucklucky

    “Hizbullah has handed Isreal and the West a golden opportunity to kick another leg off the stool on which the axis of evil rests it’s fetid arse.”

    Sadly you are wrong the West doesnt want to kick Hizballah. Consistent with much of recent West history it only buries the head in sand and feed the crocodiles.

    “Above everything Israel needs to appreciate that if that’s what it’s gonna do, it’s gonna have to do it thoroughly. Half-arsed “proportionate” action is nonsense.”

    Yes of course. But they didnt learned it yet, they just like to brag: flyovers of Assad palace, we gona kill Nasrralah really, really really !!! . If you have a problem you fix it.
    You shouldnt wait for World Trade Centers and have 10000 of casulities in your side to start serious actions.

  • lucklucky

    You just need to compare the European countries declaration for this crisis and the declarations of Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia to see how rotten is the West.

  • lucklucky

    Yahoo News titles

    • Hezbollah rockets hit Haifa, killing 8
    • G-8 leaders urge Israel to show restraint

    That is the WEST

  • Uain

    I too fear that the natural fecklessness of the West is always a threat, but Isreal is playing the UN and US game book. Just as Bush justified Iraq in part by claiming to project the will of the UN, so too is Isreal doing the same in claiming to be the vanguard to implement UN Res. 1559 and help the Lebanese government take control of their country.
    The astounding thing is that the Arabs are not united against Isreal, since the majority Sunni states now realize Iranian influence on their borders and Nukes in Tehran are definately not in their long term interest. They are getting a reality check and realize that “Joos” on their borders are preferable to Shi’ite “missionaries” armed to the teeth sneaking across those borders.
    I think Hizbullah and their handlers in Iran/ Syria have shot their wad on this. There will be more civilian casualites, as terrorists are want to do, but Hizbullah is now isolated with their supply lines cut and having their bunkers, men and weapons caches (10 years worth) sytematically picked off.
    As Nick M so aptly put it, Hizbullah is getting the Shi’ite kicked out of it and there is a very good chance that Iran and Syria could see their terror investments in Lebanon and Gaza take a severe loss on investments, which will profit the region greatly.

  • Are we witnessing the beginning of the End Game in the Middle East?

    Hamas and Hizballah for decades were non-state actors imbedded in the weak government of Lebanon and the quasi government of the Palestine Authority. Hamas is now the duly constituted government of the PA, and Hizballah could be facing another diaspora.

    I’m wondering if some combination of the IDF, the Lebanese Army, possibly the UN or NATO, with backing from others could push what is left of Hizballah into Syria. No one could ever argue that Syria isn’t strong enough to control them.

    What would we be looking at then? There would no longer be any non-state actors in this part of the Middle East. The remaining two terror supporting regimes of Iran and Syria now responsible for the acts of Hizballah, and the PA isolated and fair game when it attacks Israel. For all of the media outcry, the insurgency is losing in Iraq. The Horn of Africa countries are horrible but consumed in internal battles.

    Without their proxies, countries would have fewer options when it comes to attacking neighbors…and much greater expectations of reprisals. Nukes? As offensive weapons, they are only a bargaining chip before they are used…and the classic answer to one nuke is two.

    A new paradigm.

  • Paul Marks

    On B.B.C. Radio Four this morning (“Today” programme) a reporter said that the “Lebanese government” does not even have its own troops guard its H.Q. in the capital as this would be an “insult” to the Hiz.

    As the B.B.C. is wildly anti Israel (for example calling every non regular Lebanese army death a “civilian”) I think that shows what the situation is.

    The Lebanese government is a joke – just a bunch of nice people (“babes” as Dale put it) who go on marches.

    Far from fighting the Hiz they actually invited them into the cabinet.

    Israel may fail to defeat the Hiz (after, contrary to what is being reported, it is trying to keep civilian casualties down and the Hiz always use civilians as human shields), but at least it is trying to fight the Hiz.

    I see no sign that anyone else is going to do this.

  • Robert Wright

    Israel has given the Palestinians every opportunity for Palestinian people to establish their own state but instead they insist on armed conflict, suicide bombing and armed incursions over establishing their own independent Palestinian State. I feel it is time for Israel to take over all the lands of the Palestinian enemy and unite it under the Israeli flag once and for all. To the victor go the spoils, which was the way all wars were fought until recent times. Only Israel could make the desert profitable and relieve the poverty of the area. Israeli citizens should not have to fear walking to a market because of a neighboring enemy bent on Anarchy and Chaos over democratic peaceful coexistence. The Palestinians have proven time and time again that they are unwilling to find peaceful solutions to their situation. World opinion be damned Israel is right to protect its own citizens and having a Palestinian controlled country beside it governed by terrorists is not in its best interest Nor is having a Hezbollah puppet government bordering Israel. Israel has bent over backwards to appease the Palestinians and world opinion …. To what avail? To get smeared by the U.N. to be rebuked publicly by the United States when it does what any other country would do in the same situation and I might add with more restraint than any other country has demonstrated to date under similar conditions. The enemy has to be destroyed or absorbed into an Israeli controlled state. Both America and Israel are locked in a war with terrorists and both of Nations are shackled by public and world opinion … because the only way to defeat this enemy is to not only kill the terrorists but to kill their mothers, fathers, sisters, wives and daughters before you actually go after the terrorist because they do not fear loosing their own lives for their convoluted cause but the loss of their families would be too great of a price to pay, It would be the death blow to all terrorist cells. But in a civilized world we don’t do things like that, instead we use too much restraint and we loose the lives of many young soldiers when we don’t use every means available to us when we fight our enemy …. Wars are fought to be won with all the weaponry and resources available to the given country. This is why America is failing in Iraq … the restraint we show the enemy will not be shown to us. I am neither Christian, Muslim or Jew.. I was raised and remained a pacifist for many years but the realities of our world and the challenges our enemies present us has somewhat opened my eyes. 1.3 billion Muslims and growing with 99% of all regional conflicts involving Muslims leads me to believe it is time to buckle up and prepare for a very bumpy ride because civilized humanity no longer has what it takes to actually win a war.

  • Robert Wright

    While working as a security guard for a local auto auction in 2002 I came across an water soaked Quran in the back of a pickup truck that was brought in for a sale and stored in my lot. I opened it to 3 different pages and found passages that called on Muslims to kill Christians, Jews and Infidels …there was no searching an index or skimming through to find these passages I just opened the Quran to Three different pages and there they were .. passages of hate, violence and murder . Now I would be curious to see actually how many references there really are commanding violence against these groups. I find after reading about the Muslim faith that you can be killed for converting to another faith, that in many Muslim countries there is no freedom of religion …. This strikes me as odd because it tells me that the Muslim faith can not stand on it’s own merits. Then I read of the love of Allah and how the Muslim faith is a faith of peace … somehow it does not seem to ring true. Not saying there isn’t hate in the Christian bible … because there is. But maybe if there really is a God just maybe it is time to see if he can stand on his own two feet or not, because a real God would not need his followers to carry out his fights, or be a defender of the “Faith”

  • P.G.

    I cannot believe some of the things I am reading here. Does the mounting death toll mean nothing? Are over 600 civillian casualties “acceptable”? You can deliberate all you wish safe in your homes knowing it will not blow up in the near future but tell your theories to the victims of this horrific aggression and see wheere that leads you. You cannot get rid of Hisbullah as they are far more than a militia. They operate social services, have elected members in the government and are the only force strong enough to even try to stop oustide aggression. The predominant actions of the group have been defensive or retaliatory. I do not agree with all but it is Isreal’s attacks that keep support flowing to the group and make certain the Lebanese government is kept crippled so it cannot create a strong enough miltary making resistance groups necessary. Attacks from Israel have not stopped even after the withdrawal in 2000. This incident with the kidnapping is part of ongoing conflicts and also follow similar tactics used against palestinians, Hibullah’s ally, a short time earlier.
    People need to get a grip and realise just because a group is lebaled something by some, does not suddenly make the situation black and white. What should occur is an attempt at stabalising relations and a cease to the hostilities which would then make ongoing aggression by militias something the people woulds have less reason to support and may eventually make Hiszbullah meld into just a politcal party. A more immediate response is a ceasefire and talks betweenALL parties involved not just the ones Israel and the US Choose to. You cannot end a conflict if talks are one sided.

  • Askari

    You cannot get rid of Hisbullah as they are far more than a militia. They operate social services, have elected members in the government and are the only force strong enough to even try to stop oustide aggression.

    By that logic the armies of Nazi Germany should not have been attacked. If victory over Hezbollah means doing to Lebanon what the Allies and Soviets did to Germany in order to defeat the Nazis, then that is exactly what must be done.

    A more immediate response is a ceasefire and talks betweenALL parties involved not just the ones Israel and the US Choose to. You cannot end a conflict if talks are one sided.

    Amazing. One of the STATED OBJECTIVES of Hezbollah is the destruction of Israel. To negotiate with someone who is working to that end is preposterous. Either Israel will be exterminated or Hezbollah will be exterminated. To think any other outcome is possible in the long run is delusional.