Middle East conflict

[Balta1701]

Thanks to Iranian oil dollars, Hezbollah has already started cleanup/rebuilding efforts. This is how Hezbollah is going to win its final victory in this conflict...they're going to wind up being the ones who rebuild that country.

 

Nehme Y. Tohme, a member of Parliament from the anti-Syrian reform bloc and the country’s minister for the displaced, said he had been told by Hezbollah officials that when the shooting stopped, Iran would provide Hezbollah with an “unlimited budget” for reconstruction.

 

In his victory speech on Monday night, Hezbollah’s leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, offered money for “decent and suitable furniture” and a year’s rent on a house to any Lebanese who lost his home in the month-long war.

 

“Completing the victory,” he said, “can come with reconstruction.”

 

On Tuesday, Israel began to pull many of its reserve troops out of southern Lebanon, and its military chief of staff said all of the soldiers could be back across the border within 10 days. Lebanese soldiers are expected to begin moving in a couple of days, supported by the first of 15,000 foreign troops.

 

While the Israelis began their withdrawal, hundreds of Hezbollah members spread over dozens of villages across southern Lebanon began cleaning, organizing and surveying damage. Men on bulldozers were busy cutting lanes through giant piles of rubble. Roads blocked with the remnants of buildings are now, just a day after a cease-fire began, fully passable.

 

In Sreifa, a Hezbollah official said the group would offer an initial $10,000 to residents to help pay for the year of rent, to buy new furniture and to help feed families.

 

In Taibe, a town of fighting so heavy that large chunks were missing from walls and buildings where they had been sprayed with bullets, the Audi family stood with two Hezbollah volunteers, looking woefully at their windowless, bullet- and shrapnel-torn house.

 

In Bint Jbail, Hezbollah ambulances — large, new cars with flashing lights on the top — ferried bodies of fighters to graves out of mountains of rubble.

 

Hezbollah’s reputation as an efficient grass-roots social service network — as opposed to the Lebanese government, regarded by many here as sleek men in suits doing well — was in evidence everywhere. Young men with walkie-talkies and clipboards were in the battered Shiite neighborhoods on the southern edge of Bint Jbail, taking notes on the extent of the damage.

 

“Hezbollah’s strength,” said Amal Saad-Ghorayeb, a professor at the Lebanese American University here, who has written extensively about the organization, in large part derives from “the gross vacuum left by the state.”

 

Hezbollah was not, she said, a state within a state, but rather “a state within a nonstate, actually.”

 

Sheik Nasrallah said in his speech that “the brothers in the towns and villages will turn to those whose homes are badly damaged and help rebuild them.

 

“Today is the day to keep up our promises,” he said. “All our brothers will be in your service starting tomorrow.”

 

Some southern towns were so damaged that on Tuesday residents had not yet begun to return. A fighter for the Amal movement, another Shiite militia group, said he had been told that Hezbollah members would begin to catalog damages in his town, Kafr Kila, on the Israeli border.

 

Hezbollah men also traveled door to door checking on residents and asking them what help they needed.

[kapkomet]

Balta, you're right in your comment. And Iran KNEW that this is how it would be played. Brilliant policy - and we got caught with our hands underneath our rear-end.

 

BUT - I think underlying all of this is the 'liberal' regime that is in place in Isreal now. They were not prepared like they usually are. And it made them look foolish.

[NorthSideSox72]

Balta, you're right in your comment. And Iran KNEW that this is how it would be played. Brilliant policy - and we got caught with our hands underneath our rear-end.

 

BUT - I think underlying all of this is the 'liberal' regime that is in place in Isreal now. They were not prepared like they usually are. And it made them look foolish.

I'm sorry... and there is what connection between 'liberal' and unprepared? Because I see zero.

 

I do agree though, that Israel and the US have been caught with their pants down. Again. And Israel continues to lose their war.

[kapkomet]

A hard liner would have blitzed these guys. But, they had to do it the 'soft' way. And, the 'leftist' party is in charge now in Isreal. I absolutely see the connection. It's much the same as saying if we wanted to take care of business, we could. But we have to 'debate' and 'compromise' and 'carry on diplomacy'. What part of existing UN resolutions that says Hezbollah must disarm is so difficult? What was so difficult that Iraq had to FULLY comply with UN resolutions? Oh, only if it serves purpose to make the US look bad. Whatever.

[NorthSideSox72]

A hard liner would have blitzed these guys. But, they had to do it the 'soft' way. And, the 'leftist' party is in charge now in Isreal. I absolutely see the connection. It's much the same as saying if we wanted to take care of business, we could. But we have to 'debate' and 'compromise' and 'carry on diplomacy'. What part of existing UN resolutions that says Hezbollah must disarm is so difficult? What was so difficult that Iraq had to FULLY comply with UN resolutions? Oh, only if it serves purpose to make the US look bad. Whatever.

You attached the word 'prepared' to 'liberal' as a negative correlation. There is no evidence of such. Having a hardline government in place would not have made them any more 'prepared'. They simply may have been more willing to go futher militarily. That is not preparation.

 

Our highly NON-liberal government here in the US has been more than willing to drop the hammer on an Iraq that was irrelevant to the war on terror... and yet, we were obviously and painfully unprepared for the realities of said war.

[kapkomet]

Nope. They *ARE* prepared to do more, but the peace people won't have it. We'd be too aggressive...

 

And, since Hezbollah has done such a WONDERFUL job being the aid workers, why don't they just come in our country to replace FEMA?

[Balta1701]

Nope. They *ARE* prepared to do more, but the peace people won't have it. We'd be too aggressive...

 

And, since Hezbollah has done such a WONDERFUL job being the aid workers, why don't they just come in our country to replace FEMA?

You know the sad thing? When I first saw that article, the thought actually did cross my mind. At least it seems they have working radios.

[kapkomet]

And while we're at it, how about a "cease fire" in Iraq from the UN that has to be honored by the terrorists? It seems to be working so well, after all.

 

[Balta1701]

Nope. They *ARE* prepared to do more, but the peace people won't have it. We'd be too aggressive...

So, on a more serious side, what would you say the U.S.'s problem is in Iraq? That we haven't been aggressive enough?

 

I for one don't think that even if Israel decided to destroy every single person in the south of Lebanon, they'd get rid of this problem in the least. That's the real problem with terrorism...military solutions tend to just spawn more terrorists. Exactly as we've seen in Iraq, and with Israel for many years. As long as there are Shi'ite Muslims in bad conditions in Lebanon (Bad for whatever reason), there is going to be a Hezbollah. Driving to Beirut would not have stopped that, having Israel lose its entire army in a guerrilla war will not stop that.

[southsider2k5]

US stopped Iran from sending missles to Hezbollah

[NorthSideSox72]

US stopped Iran from sending missles to Hezbollah

 

Very nice. Good to see some good news once in a while.

[Balta1701]

France throws U.N. Peacekeeping force into disarray, declines to contribute significant additional troops to the region.

[NorthSideSox72]

France throws U.N. Peacekeeping force into disarray, declines to contribute significant additional troops to the region.

Hm. To me, the headline news in that article wasn't France - it was the US saying it was unwilling to contribute ANY ground forces.

 

I can't say I'm happy about either one.

[southsider2k5]

Hm. To me, the headline news in that article wasn't France - it was the US saying it was unwilling to contribute ANY ground forces.

 

I can't say I'm happy about either one.

 

I think that is more of a smart move than anything. How well would it go over to have US troops on the ground in another Arab country, especially one that just got done fighting with Israel. I don't think there would be any winners in that scenario.

[NorthSideSox72]

I think that is more of a smart move than anything. How well would it go over to have US troops on the ground in another Arab country, especially one that just got done fighting with Israel. I don't think there would be any winners in that scenario.

That's a good point, but I am not so sure that would be a problem. My only concern in that way is that our troops might be specifically targeted by some groups. But overall, if we were one twentieth of some 100,000 person force over there, that might work pretty well, even in terms of PR.

[Balta1701]

I think that is more of a smart move than anything. How well would it go over to have US troops on the ground in another Arab country, especially one that just got done fighting with Israel. I don't think there would be any winners in that scenario.

Beyond that, what troops exactly does the U.S. have that it could actually contribute to this? I think ours are a bit busy. And yeah, given that the U.S. basically backed and negotiated as Israel's proxy, putting U.S. soldiers in there would basically look like a proxy for Israeli soldiers coming in. That'd be a terrible idea, unless someone actually wanted a war between the U.S. and Hezbollah (which of course, is the only way they'll be disarmed by anyone outside of Lebanon)

 

The reason France was so important to this U.N. mission is that they're basically the only western nation left with a sizeable military who actually has well equipped troops that could be deployed over there. That, combined with the fact that they're already in command of the small UNIFIL force, and the fact that they were one of the 2 key parties negotiating the cease fire (alongside the U.S., with the U.S. advocating for Israel's position), makes them absolutely a necessity in any enlarged peacekeeping force.

 

That's a good point, but I am not so sure that would be a problem. My only concern in that way is that our troops might be specifically targeted by some groups. But overall, if we were one twentieth of some 100,000 person force over there, that might work pretty well, even in terms of PR.

The U.N. resolution calls for enlarging the force up to a maximum of 15,000. And there really aren't 100,000 troops available anywhere except China to be committed to that sort of peacekeeping mission.

[southsider2k5]

That's a good point, but I am not so sure that would be a problem. My only concern in that way is that our troops might be specifically targeted by some groups. But overall, if we were one twentieth of some 100,000 person force over there, that might work pretty well, even in terms of PR.

 

The US is obviously contributing in adding logisticaly and financial support, so it isn't like they are neglecting the solution at all. I just think with the cultural sensitivies of the current enviornment of the middle ease right now, the less American faces in Lebannon, the better.

[NorthSideSox72]

The U.N. resolution calls for enlarging the force up to a maximum of 15,000. And there really aren't 100,000 troops available anywhere except China to be committed to that sort of peacekeeping mission.

 

15,000 won't be enough to achieve and maintain real stability for Lebanon. I remember saying this when all this started. If we want the Peacekeeping force to be successful, it can't be small like that. We'll just end up back down the same road.

 

The US is obviously contributing in adding logisticaly and financial support, so it isn't like they are neglecting the solution at all. I just think with the cultural sensitivies of the current enviornment of the middle ease right now, the less American faces in Lebannon, the better.

 

I am sure we are, and that is good. And I do understand what you are saying. I just think a few thousand US troops, as a minority of a UN-led force, would not cause such a ruckus, and in the long run would make us actually look better.

[Balta1701]

I am sure we are, and that is good. And I do understand what you are saying. I just think a few thousand US troops, as a minority of a UN-led force, would not cause such a ruckus, and in the long run would make us actually look better.

The U.S. marines were only a portion of the UN force that arrived in the early 80's. But because they were the U.S., and they were marines, even though they didn't try to take sides in the conflict then, they wound up being direct targets.

[NorthSideSox72]

The U.S. marines were only a portion of the UN force that arrived in the early 80's. But because they were the U.S., and they were marines, even though they didn't try to take sides in the conflict then, they wound up being direct targets.

Which I just said the post before that - they'd be targets. Just like they are in Iraq. Except we have a better chance for success and peace in Lebanon, and a lot more help.

[Balta1701]

 

There are other pictures out there of people hanging "Made in the USA" signs on the rubble.

[NorthSideSox72]

 

There are other pictures out there of people hanging "Made in the USA" signs on the rubble.

Is that Iraq or Lebanon?

[Balta1701]

Is that Iraq or Lebanon?

That's Lebanon.

[kapkomet]

I'm glad to know that some people here mock this stuff. No, wait, *you* didn't mean it, you were just showing us the picture. Now, let's turn around and read the positions you support. Oh, then it gets better. You all turn around and get pissed off when you get called people who dislike our country. To make it clear, I'm not advocating that, but some people will say it, because you're sucking in every negative facet of this and other war campaigns. After all, we're just a bunch of warmongering, Christian hate groups going around the world bullying everyone under the sun.

 

What a damn joke. Let's all just go negotiate with these pricks - who start stuff just to get a response so we can be "more hated" and "recruit more terrorists against the US". Whatever.

 

THESE PEOPLE WANT TO KILL ALL OF US. What is so hard to understand about that?

 

Nevermind, I'm wasting my bandwidth.

[Balta1701]

Actually, I was sort of putting that there to illustrate why exactly i think a U.S. presence wouldn't work. But anyway...