Options
Is this a victory?
rebornFixer
Posts: 4,917
From http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1154525961886&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull
The Arab world professes to be amazed that Hizbullah soldiers did not drop their guns and run away but actually managed to kill some Israelis before suffering far more casualties and having their operational area overrun.
If this is defined as victory, obviously expectations are rather low. But to understand the bizarre mind-set in place, here's my favorite quote about the war:
"The Lebanese people may have lost a lot of economic and human resources... but [aside] from figures and calculations, they have achieved a lot of gains," wrote a Kuwaiti newspaper columnist. Lebanon's "heroic resistance fighters have proven to the world that Lebanese borders are not open to Israeli tanks without a price. Lebanon was victorious in the battle of dignity and honor."
In other words, what's $5 billion in damage and the loss of however many Lebanese were really killed if it makes you feel good? And, even then, he couldn't say that Lebanese borders are closed to Israeli tanks, it's just that they cannot enter at no cost whatsoever.
More than usual in the Middle East - and that's not easy - things are said which, on serious examination (unfortunately too rare), quickly collapse. For example, what's the actual material significance of all this talk of Hizbullah's victory?
Answer: near zero. What's going to change in the Middle East as a result? Is Iranian influence increasing in any meaningful way? The only places with significant Iranian influence are Iraq, where events in Lebanon are irrelevant, and Lebanon, where opposition to Iranian meddling has skyrocketed. Meanwhile, Arab regimes are mobilizing to oppose the Iranian threat.
The Sunni Islamist rank-and-file may sing Hizbullah's praises for a few weeks, but their leaders still hate Shi'ites.
OR TAKE another endlessly repeated line. Arabs say Hizbullah has restored their honor and showed Israel as vulnerable. Sound familiar? This was claimed in the late 1960s with the PLO; after the 1973 war; accompanying two Palestinian intifadas, and on other occasions. And, after all, if Arabs believe Hizbullah forced Israel out of south Lebanon and Hamas did so out of the Gaza Strip, how's this new?
And what of the eternal Arab inferiority complex? Nothing seems to heal it. Restored Arab pride wears out faster than un-refrigerated milk.
Of course, the real ego-booster should be a productive economy, higher living standards, a free society, and good educational and health systems. Yet these things are not on the agenda. In fact, the philosophy of resistance actually breeds resistance to the changes the Arab world really needs.
What truly counts is this: Israel will get the Nautilus anti-rocket system, improve its tanks' defenses and fix other shortcomings. Meanwhile, Syria and Lebanon have no serious air force, air-defense or coastal defense system. This is not going to change.
Israel will rebuild the north quickly without foreign aid. In Lebanon - despite international funding and Iranian money to Hizbullah - the damage will probably remain unrepaired for years.
Is this a victory?
IF YOU THINK in 1930s terms about the current situation, we are now in the phase of the united front against fascism. As bizarre as it seems - and despite lots of verbal appeasement - all Arab regimes but Syria now have parallel interests to Israel and the West in opposing the Iranian-Syrian axis of Adolf Ahmadinejad and Benito Bashar.
For Arab liberals, this situation poses a great dilemma. Most are now turning to support their regimes as the lesser of the two evils. Between the regimes' suppression and the Islamists manipulation, elections and democracy seem neither likely nor attractive. The closing of ranks is particularly visible in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
n Iraq, the regime wins elections, but experience with terrorism and dictatorship makes people there unenthusiastic about the new Islamist alliance, parts of which are blowing them up on a daily basis. In Lebanon, the Christian-Druse-Sunni Muslim majority are not thrilled at the "gifts" Hizbullah gave them.
Yet why should people in the Middle East risk their lives to fight tyranny (or at least an even worse tyranny) if they know the West won't support them? Iran, soon to have nuclear arms, and Syria backs Hizbullah, so who stands up for the Lebanese opposition?
We are used to the impulse to betray Israel in exchange for supposed economic or strategic benefits. But now Lebanon plays the role of Czechoslovakia, dangled as a prize if Damascus and Teheran just promise to behave.
That is why a key element in our seemingly eternal regional tragedy is the Western intellectuals and politicians who think the world is living in the Age of Aquarius, when it is actually stuck in the Era of Ahmadinejad.
Nevertheless, the adversary's nature is a source of hope. It will not let those Westerners rest on their illusions but keep pushing until they are forced to understand and fight back.
Of course, many look for easy solutions: Perhaps Syria can be separated from Iran, or vice-versa, or Hamas and Hizbullah can be made moderate? These are futile hopes because they run against not only the extremists' ideology but also against their interests and current sense of confidence.
Ironically, appeasement is at its most dangerous when extremists are ready to make a deal on favorable terms for themselves. If Saddam Hussein had been ready to bargain in 1991, he would have gotten many billions of dollars and a slice of Kuwait. If Arafat had made an agreement with Israel in 2000, he would have had a Palestinian state and $20 billion. These dictators could have used such gains as a springboard for more aggression. Fortunately, they - and their current avatars - don't think like this.
The new conventional wisdom that Hizbullah won and everyone must rush to beg the radicals to accept concessions is not reality. Remember the last two "victorious" restorers of Arab pride: Saddam Hussein (in his cell), and Osama bin Laden (in his cave).
The writer is director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center, editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs, and Journal Editor of Turkish Studies.
The Arab world professes to be amazed that Hizbullah soldiers did not drop their guns and run away but actually managed to kill some Israelis before suffering far more casualties and having their operational area overrun.
If this is defined as victory, obviously expectations are rather low. But to understand the bizarre mind-set in place, here's my favorite quote about the war:
"The Lebanese people may have lost a lot of economic and human resources... but [aside] from figures and calculations, they have achieved a lot of gains," wrote a Kuwaiti newspaper columnist. Lebanon's "heroic resistance fighters have proven to the world that Lebanese borders are not open to Israeli tanks without a price. Lebanon was victorious in the battle of dignity and honor."
In other words, what's $5 billion in damage and the loss of however many Lebanese were really killed if it makes you feel good? And, even then, he couldn't say that Lebanese borders are closed to Israeli tanks, it's just that they cannot enter at no cost whatsoever.
More than usual in the Middle East - and that's not easy - things are said which, on serious examination (unfortunately too rare), quickly collapse. For example, what's the actual material significance of all this talk of Hizbullah's victory?
Answer: near zero. What's going to change in the Middle East as a result? Is Iranian influence increasing in any meaningful way? The only places with significant Iranian influence are Iraq, where events in Lebanon are irrelevant, and Lebanon, where opposition to Iranian meddling has skyrocketed. Meanwhile, Arab regimes are mobilizing to oppose the Iranian threat.
The Sunni Islamist rank-and-file may sing Hizbullah's praises for a few weeks, but their leaders still hate Shi'ites.
OR TAKE another endlessly repeated line. Arabs say Hizbullah has restored their honor and showed Israel as vulnerable. Sound familiar? This was claimed in the late 1960s with the PLO; after the 1973 war; accompanying two Palestinian intifadas, and on other occasions. And, after all, if Arabs believe Hizbullah forced Israel out of south Lebanon and Hamas did so out of the Gaza Strip, how's this new?
And what of the eternal Arab inferiority complex? Nothing seems to heal it. Restored Arab pride wears out faster than un-refrigerated milk.
Of course, the real ego-booster should be a productive economy, higher living standards, a free society, and good educational and health systems. Yet these things are not on the agenda. In fact, the philosophy of resistance actually breeds resistance to the changes the Arab world really needs.
What truly counts is this: Israel will get the Nautilus anti-rocket system, improve its tanks' defenses and fix other shortcomings. Meanwhile, Syria and Lebanon have no serious air force, air-defense or coastal defense system. This is not going to change.
Israel will rebuild the north quickly without foreign aid. In Lebanon - despite international funding and Iranian money to Hizbullah - the damage will probably remain unrepaired for years.
Is this a victory?
IF YOU THINK in 1930s terms about the current situation, we are now in the phase of the united front against fascism. As bizarre as it seems - and despite lots of verbal appeasement - all Arab regimes but Syria now have parallel interests to Israel and the West in opposing the Iranian-Syrian axis of Adolf Ahmadinejad and Benito Bashar.
For Arab liberals, this situation poses a great dilemma. Most are now turning to support their regimes as the lesser of the two evils. Between the regimes' suppression and the Islamists manipulation, elections and democracy seem neither likely nor attractive. The closing of ranks is particularly visible in Egypt and Saudi Arabia.
n Iraq, the regime wins elections, but experience with terrorism and dictatorship makes people there unenthusiastic about the new Islamist alliance, parts of which are blowing them up on a daily basis. In Lebanon, the Christian-Druse-Sunni Muslim majority are not thrilled at the "gifts" Hizbullah gave them.
Yet why should people in the Middle East risk their lives to fight tyranny (or at least an even worse tyranny) if they know the West won't support them? Iran, soon to have nuclear arms, and Syria backs Hizbullah, so who stands up for the Lebanese opposition?
We are used to the impulse to betray Israel in exchange for supposed economic or strategic benefits. But now Lebanon plays the role of Czechoslovakia, dangled as a prize if Damascus and Teheran just promise to behave.
That is why a key element in our seemingly eternal regional tragedy is the Western intellectuals and politicians who think the world is living in the Age of Aquarius, when it is actually stuck in the Era of Ahmadinejad.
Nevertheless, the adversary's nature is a source of hope. It will not let those Westerners rest on their illusions but keep pushing until they are forced to understand and fight back.
Of course, many look for easy solutions: Perhaps Syria can be separated from Iran, or vice-versa, or Hamas and Hizbullah can be made moderate? These are futile hopes because they run against not only the extremists' ideology but also against their interests and current sense of confidence.
Ironically, appeasement is at its most dangerous when extremists are ready to make a deal on favorable terms for themselves. If Saddam Hussein had been ready to bargain in 1991, he would have gotten many billions of dollars and a slice of Kuwait. If Arafat had made an agreement with Israel in 2000, he would have had a Palestinian state and $20 billion. These dictators could have used such gains as a springboard for more aggression. Fortunately, they - and their current avatars - don't think like this.
The new conventional wisdom that Hizbullah won and everyone must rush to beg the radicals to accept concessions is not reality. Remember the last two "victorious" restorers of Arab pride: Saddam Hussein (in his cell), and Osama bin Laden (in his cave).
The writer is director of the Global Research in International Affairs Center, editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs, and Journal Editor of Turkish Studies.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
For example... do you know how many battles the U.S. Military lost in Viet Nam? Zero. Yet, do we see that war as a victory? The same holds true in Iraq. Our military has overwhelmingly trounced the smattering of Iraqi, Saudi, Jordainian, Egyptian, Syrian, Iranian, Pakistani, Kwaiti, Yemenese, Sudanese, Afghani one-off fighters running around Anbar with shoulder mounted grenade launchers in every occasion. Why no victory?
The same holds true in Lebanon with Hezbollah and Israel. Victory for Israel means a military victory where Hezbollah surrenders and builds the transistors of the new millenium... all Hezbollah has to do is survive.
And especially in the Middle East... perception is greater than reality. The perception of Hezbollah surviving against a technologically superior military... is greater than the reality of them getting their asses handed to them in a wooden basket.
The Arabs learned in 1967 and 1973 that their militaries suck... and suck big time. This was re-enforced in 1991 when the greatest Arab Army was crushed like a maggot in the sand. This is why they resort to these tactics. Because they know they will surely die if they put on a uniform and hop in a 1960s vintage Soviet made tank. Their best method... the one they have adopted... is the one they are using.
And before any of you get all in a huff... pull that g-string out your ass crack... I am NOT condoning this type of warfare. Merely pointing out that this is what we are now facing.
We need to adapt and come up with tactics and methods to counter their form of warfare. Using technology and military might alone is not doing the trick. It is a tough problem to solve and the simple solution of 'Blow stuff up' that we... and the Israelis employ... isn't going to do anything. Good old fashioned police work and human intelligence to locate and de-fuse the terror organizations from inside is probably worth more than a raid of F-15 Strike Fighters.
What can we do? I don't fucking know... I'm no military strategist. But, i do know... what we are currently doing today is not a solution we can leave for our kids to solve.
Hail, Hail!!!
that may be the case if history starts a month ago. Israel has a history of violence and oppresion, and the numbers back that up, worse than any group in the region, State or not.
Lebanon and lebanese were fucked and lost a lot materially and otherwise. But they weren't a warring faction. Hizbollah was.
Peace
Dan
"Every judgment teeters on the brink of error. To claim absolute knowledge is to become monstrous. Knowledge is an unending adventure at the edge of uncertainty." - Frank Herbert, Dune, 1965
yes it was on hizballah NOT the lebanese.
if a bomb happened to fall on us well gosh 'wrong place at the wrong time' is their motto. if we happen to loose friends and family in the process, wrong place at the wrong time
my motto, wrong war at the wrong place.
the US wants its puppets Israel to look strong. try taking on someone stronger than a small 'terrorist' organization and a country with one of the weakest and smallest army forces in the world. try doing something a little more appealing to the world than killing women and children and bombing bridges. so you get what about 15 pilots and they take it as a walk in the park ( oh and the good part is while they take shifts they get to give motivational pep talks to the little girls while they sign the bombs that land on our heads! isnt that FUN!)
and whats this latest news i hear:
Israel rejects U.N. blockade appeal
Reuters - 1 hour, 21 minutes ago
JERUSALEM - Israel rejected a call by U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan on Wednesday to lift its air and sea blockade of Lebanon, saying it would end the seven-week-old siege only when all aspects of a ceasefire were in place. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert also told Annan he would not withdraw Israeli troops fully from southern Lebanon until the full implementation of the truce, which took effect on August 14 and ended 34 days of conflict with Hizbollah guerrillas.
Oh i see so if hizballah doesnt give in and you dont get the two soldiers back well then you just want to make sure hizballah has less weapons so the war will only last about a year this time around.
great move ehud, props to you my man, only tens of thousands will die this time and we owe it to you, might have been more, heck maybe diseases and such.
--- WE WON WE WON --- is that what you want me to say? no we didnt win, people died we're still suffering and war isn't can never be a win for both sides. but for postives i guess that we succeeded for the first time ( or should i say they; hizballah) in getting the worlds attention at the cruelty of a nation so keen for decades and decades to climb their way to beirut.
LEBANON IS LEBANON- LEAVE IT ALONE.
There was a point to this, LEBANON IS NOT FOR ISRAEL.
PEOPLE ARE NOT FOR YOUR PRISONS
LIVES ARE NOT TARGET PRACTICE AND MISSILE TESTING FOR YOUR PILOTS.
HEARTS ARE NOT STEEL PLATED
HOMES ARE NOT BOMB SHELTERS
FUNDS ARE NOT UNLIMITED
LIFE IS NOT FOREVER
and one last time for everyone to hear loud and clear...
LEBANON IS FOR ITS PEOPLE!
E-N-D O-F S-T-O-R-Y
My god its been so long, never dreamed you'd return, but now here you are, and here i am.
Man ... This "puppet" nonsense is just an insult that has no real bearing on the issues. You could have left that out and just said "Yeah, dan, I agree ... Hezbollah and Lebanon are not the same thing."