Libanon (4)
Between a rock and a hard place, Israel weet even ook niet hoe het nu verder moet, dat wil zeggen: het lijkt er echt op dat de hele campagne tegen Libanon geen wezenlijk, althans haalbaar strategisch doel had.
Ari Shavit in Haaretz:
"There will be no resolution from the air, even if the pilots ultimately manage to locate Hezbollah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah and kill him. Despite the media euphoria and the patriotic spin, the aerial war led by Chief of Staff Dan Halutz is not heading for victory. In the best case, it is heading for a limited military achievement."
Met meer couleur locale - de kleur van bloed, om precies te zien - via Cole een Patrick McGreevy:
"AUB [American Univeristy of Beirut] is moving medical staff and other essential personnel on to campus apartments as foreigners depart. The hospital is in desparate need of blood. The refugee problem is overwhelming. AUB is trying to do its part with the folks who have moved in from the southern suburbs. We understand that the Israelis have decided to stop hitting Lebanese infrastructure, perhaps because there no longer is any infrastructure. We know people are talking about the end game, but it is very difficult to imagine how this can end any time soon. Short of a massive ground invasion, Hezbollah cannot be destroyed; and Isreal has backed itself into a corner; if they stop, Hezbollah can claim victory. Hence the madness goes on. Eventually, people will have to talk to each other, but apparently only after a great deal more bleeding. "
80% van de bruggen zijn inmiddels vernield, dus veel is er niet meer over, en de kippige boordschutter die dacht dat Hezbollah zijn raketten op een pleintje in een christelijke wijk van Beiroet bewaart zal inmiddels wel een desk job zijn toegewezen.
Billmon roept het beleg om Beiroet in 1982 in herinnering. De oorlogen van 1967 en 1973 hadden in elk geval nog het voortbestaan van de staat Israel tot inzet, maar Sharon's invasie van Libanon en de beschietingen en bombardementen van de burgerbevolking van Beiroet horen tot de historische oorlogsmisdaden van de twintigste eeuw. Billmon citeert een onverdachte bron:
"On 12 August [1982], in spite of diplomatic progress under American sponsorship, Sharon ordered, without cabinet approval, the IDF to launch its most massive bombardment of the city. The aerial assault lasted from 0600 to 1700, a day that became known as “Black Thursday.” Targeting focused on the refugee camps and the area around PLO headquarters. At the end of the day, losses stood 128 killed and 400 wounded, mainly civilians. Sharon apparently had wanted military pressure to convince Arafat to accept the American-sponsored evacuation plan. In this way, Israel could claim its military had clearly defeated the PLO.
When challenged by the cabinet to explain his independent action, Sharon tried to justify the attack by claiming that PLO artillery fire had killed 2 and wounded 77 Israeli soldiers the day before. Unconvinced by this explanation, the cabinet stripped Sharon of all authority to order military operations."
Vervolgens kwam nog de massamoord in de vluchtelingenkampen Sabra en Chatila, waarna Sharon op advies van de Kahane-commissie uit het Israelische kabinet werd gezet. Later had het Israelische electoraat de goede smaak deze man tot eerste minister te kiezen.
Terug naar het heden. De defense forces hebben Libanon grondig vernield, grondacties in het Zuiden leveren zoals te verwachten voorzichtig gezegd de nodige problemen op, de klok tikt. Billmon, in een stuk dat alleen al vanwege zijn schitterende taalgebruik alle aanbeveling verdient:
"Condi's packing her bags and pulling on her boots, which means her office husband is going to have to call off the dog, probably sooner rather than later.
Talk of a deadline, of course, tends to devalue any fight-to-the-finish rhetoric eminating from Jerusalem -- which already has been depreciating rapidly over the past few days. We've gone from Hezbollah delenda est, to Hezbollah must be disarmed, to Hezbollah's capabiltites need to be degraded to: "Gee, wouldn't it be great if somebody could get Hezbollah to stop shooting rockets at us." "
En dus begint Louise Arbour, soft spoken, terecht over oorlogsmisdaden, en is voor Kofi Annan de tijd rijp om te spreken van excessive force. Het fiasco tekent zich af, de partij van God kan zichzelf tot winnaar uitroepen, en Libanon is opnieuw het slachtoffer.
Briljant.
posted by willem @ 12:47 AM
6 comments
6 Comments:
Ik wordt hier zo moe van ...
Wat had Israël dan in hemelsnaam moeten doen?
Vergeet niet dat Hezbollah met de ontvoering/gevangenneming van de drie soldaten niet 'out of the blue' begonnen is met het treiteren van Israël. Het af schieten van raketten in alle soorten en maten is al jaren lang een hobby van die jongens .. Niet dat je daar ooit veel over hoorde van onze media ..
Doe daarbij de incidentele zelfmoordaanslag en ik durf te wedden dat wij na enige jaren in een zulke positie nog veel en veel minder terughoudend zouden reageren als dat het Israëlische leger al die tijd heeft gedaan.
Het IDF heeft altijd op allerhande manieren geprobeerd om slachtoffers onder non-combattanten te vermijden.
Hezballah, Hamas en hun collega's hebben al deze jaren gewoon de Israëlische bevolking op de korrel genomen.
Sorry Willem maar ik heb de indruk dat jij even vergeet dat Jan met de Pet in Israël ook liever zijn leventje wil lei(ij)den zonder stress.
Wat ze hadden moeten doen? Nou, het uitvoeren van 242, 338 en de Oslo-akkoorden, bijvoorbeeld.
En moet ik nu alle akkoorden en resoluties die door de palestijnen en hezbollah zijn genegeerd en geschonden gaan opsommen?
Ga je gang. Serieus bedoeld! Altijd bereid iets te leren.
Om te beginnen resolutie 1152
De ontwapening van hezbollah.
De osloakkoorden waren alleen bedoelt om Arafat stinkend rijk te maken verder hebben de palestijnen zich ook nooit maar een woord aan die akkoorden gelegen laten liggen.
Enzovoort .... iedere aanslag en raketaanval van de afgelopen jaren is een grove schending van het oorlogsrecht geweest en nog steeds probeer je Israel hiervan te beschuldigen zonder ooit iets van al die andere schendingen te noemen.
Ik vind het triest dat ik je dit uit moet spellen .. het duidt (lijkt voor mij) toch op een bepaalde eenzijdige kijk op de gebeurtenissen.
Sorry het moet zijn resolutie 1559
lees dit eens.
http://web.israelinsider.com/Views/8912.htm
Cutting through the fog of war
By Bernard J. Shapiro July 21, 2006
Israel is at war and you need to know how to separate fantasy from reality. Understanding the meaning of words in such a situation is very difficult for even the best linguist or psychologist. We must go back and remember the classic book by George Orwell, 1984, in which a totalitarian government manipulates the meaning of words to confuse its citizens about reality. He called this new language "newspeak". While Orwell's book was an attempt to satirize the Soviet communist regime, its meaning extends much more broadly.
A QUICK DECODER
1. Remember that Arabs lie and the figures given for civilian casualties are greatly exaggerated. Since most Hizbollah and Hamas terrorists wear civilian clothes and mix with the local population, it is very easy to distort the true toll on civilians.
2. Damage to Lebanese infrastructure is also greatly exaggerated. Photographers and reporters in Lebanon MUST repeat the Arab terrorist propaganda line or be tortured or executed. No such threat hangs over reporters in Israel. When the media reports from both sides, you can get a very distorted picture. We tend to think that the veracity of the two sides is equal.
3. It is a hoax that there is NO MILITARY solution to Hezbollah, Hamas, Iran and genocidal terrorism. Those that come to kill Jews must be destroyed. There is no other choice. No "Mr. Nice Guy". The most moral position for Israel is to protect its own citizens and soldiers.
4. It is a hoax that the UN can do anything good for Israel. That also goes for Europe, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The usefulness of international forces separating Arab terrorists from Israeli defenders is nil, nada, zero. In fact, it is a negative, inhibiting Israel's defensive measures.
All diplomacy is also a hoax. Only the power of the IDF allows Israel to survive. Right and justice are nice, but in the final analysis, a nation's ability to survive depends on raw military power. Treaties, cease fires and negotiations are useless.
5. It is a hoax that public opinion is of great significance to Israel's survival. A strong aggressive public relations campaign is quite important, but is NO substitute for unflinching resolve to protect Israel's security and guarantee its survival.
Golda Meir once said: "I would rather have a thousand angry editorials directed at Israel, than one beautiful eulogy."
I would have to use the words of Harry Truman to express my contempt for the world that has murdered, raped, pillaged, expelled, forcibly converted and finally exterminated us. As Truman once said: "They ain't worth a bucket of warm spit."
6. Another hoax is that Israel depends on American aid and must be willing to sacrifice its security to the interest of its ally. The reality is that Israel and America have a very useful symbiotic relationship. The many ways in which the U.S. benefits from the relationship hardly need enumeration -- intelligence, technology, counterterrorism techniques and much more. America gets its money's worth and more. BUT THIS IS NEVER MENTIONED IN POLITE CIRCLES.
For that matter, much or most of the monetary foreign aid to Israel is spent in the U.S. and goes into the American economy. It is Israeli leaders, for their own political purposes, who fail to utilize Israeli power to alter its asymmetric relationship to America.
7. Another hoax of the Left and the Islamists, for the past 13 years, is that when Israel defends itself it hurts its cause. That is, it should try to "win the hearts and minds" of the enemy, and "harming civilians" is counterproductive. Of course, we know that Hamas and Hezbollah barbarically and illegally operate freely within civilian neighborhoods in S. Lebanon and the PA.
A very wise Rabbi Schiff gives the analogy:
"If you and I were neighbors, and I allowed a family to move into my house in my living room and shoot rockets at your house from my yard, and to store their rockets in my basement, and the police do nothing about it for years, and have "Peace Now" on my lawn telling you not to harm me standing in my kitchen - what would you do?"
Orwell Meets Alice - Through The Mid-East Looking Glass
We have been treated to the modern equivalent of Orwellian newspeak, not to mention a harrowing trip through Alice's looking glass. One could not help but notice the extent to which the Arabs were being portrayed as pure and innocent. A casual observer would certainly think that all violence in the Middle East was a product of bloodthirsty Jewish settlers roaming the Judean-Samarian hills looking for Arab prey.
The PLO/PA leadership, its hands dripping with Jewish and Arab blood, demanded protection from the vicious Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria and Gaza (YESHA). It refused to return to negotiations until its demands were met. The gullible international media took this whole charade seriously. The United Nations began debating a resolution to give protection to the poor vulnerable Palestinians. The PLO demanded that all Jewish communities of YESHA be ethnically cleansed of those rotten murderous Jews. At the very least they needed to be disarmed, to make them easier targets for Arab terrorists.
The high and the mighty beseeched Arafat to return to the talks with Israel. The late Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, obviously anxious to please his PLO friends, began a crackdown on Kach and Kahane Chai and other so-called Israeli extremists. Consider this "logic": Rabin determined that Baruch Goldstein acted alone in his reprisal act. He then decided to outlaw the organizations associated with him. Guilt by association is what made McCarthy big in the 50's. It was wrong then and it is wrong now.
Reality Check: Now Kach and Kahane Chai have been labeled as terrorist organizations, although they never have committed a single act of terror as a body. The PLO, which is guilty of thousands of murders of Arabs and Jews, continuing still, is labeled a "partner for peace" and will be given arms to kill some more (as "policemen").
Reality Check: Are Arabs in danger from armed Israelis in YESHA? Some research reveals the following figures since the famous handshake on September 13, 1993:
Israelis killed by Arabs = over 1600, plus 10,000 injured and maimed for life
Arabs killed by Arabs = over 500
Arab attacks on Israeli targets = 25,000+
Private Israeli attacks on Arabs = 1 (Goldstein killed 29)
(Of course MANY terrorists were killed in their FAILED attempts to murder Jews. This point is NOT relevant to this discussion).
It is clear that except for the attack by Goldstein, the Arabs have not been threatened by Jews and certainly need no special protection. If you travel to YESHA you will notice that every Jewish village needs a security fence, while every Arab village is open. Doesn't this tell you who is threatened and who isn't? All the talk about disarming the Jews is a cover for the Arab desire to murder them. And if you desire murder, wouldn't it be nice to disarm your victim first?
The media has begun to adopt another tactic which we should protest. In the New York Times, The Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post, The Houston Chronicle, CNN and most of the other media, opponents of the suicidal Oslo, Roadmap and Jewish Expulsion Plan are being referred to as rightwing extreme, Arab-hating and anti-peace groups. Do you ever remember the PLO, PA, Hezbollah or Hamas ever being referred to as Jew-hating groups, although their covenants and speeches are filled with hatred of Jews? Arafat and then Abbas often referred to Jews as "filthy, sons of monkeys and pigs", but are still rarely referred to in the media as Jew-haters.
Reality Check: To the best of my knowledge there is a distinct difference between Jewish feelings about Arabs and Arab feelings about Jews. Arabs are taught from the earliest grades to despise Jews, and their clerics preach hatred (Itbach El Yahoud - slaughter the Jews) in many of their services. Jews, on the other hand do not preach hatred, but those who are not brain dead recognize, after 120 years of being attacked, that Arabs mean them harm. The media is totally obfuscating the truth about the conflict by the use of such clichיd phrases as "Arab-hating Jews" or "cycle of violence."
Another problem with media coverage of the Israel-PLO/PA so-called "peace negotiations", is the way their opponents are described. Arabs opposed to the deal because they want to kill or expel all Jews from "Palestine" immediately, are equated with Jews and Israelis who want Israel to survive in secure borders. Opponents of national suicide are called "anti-peace", as opposed to supporters of such suicide being "pro-peace".
Reality Check: Most opponents of the deal with Arafat/Abbas oppose it because it is suicidal for many strategic, historical and objective reasons. None of us are anti-peace. We just recognize that the path chosen by the Rabin/ Peres/Barak/Olmert governments will lead not to the hoped for and advertised peace, but to Israel's destruction.
In another bizarre twist of logic the Los Angeles Times reports that Israel's leading peace group, Shalom Achshav (Peace Now), had urged Sharon to remove 500,000 Jewish inhabitants of YESHA (including Jerusalem) to avert widespread bloodshed under Palestinian self-government, and to forcibly evict all Jews within five years. They said that their continued presence, "fostering violence and bloodshed, endangers peace prospects."
Reality Check: The facts demonstrate that it is the Palestinians and not the Jews that are the cause of 99.9% of the violence. Why not remove the Palestinians? What Peace Now is really admitting is that there is NO PEACE nor any prospect of PEACE.
The liberal Jewish establishment and most of the media were appalled when Rabbi Meir Kahane first began talking about transferring the Arabs from Eretz Yisrael. Most are still appalled at this idea. A new idea has come into fashion, though, among these same righteous Jews: transferring the Jews from YESHA (heartland of Eretz Yisrael). Former Secretary of State James Baker once said it would be a good idea to use the $10 Billion in US loan guarantees to buy out and transfer the Jews from YESHA. US President Bill Clinton seemed to like the idea and so did Rabin's coalition partner Meretz.
Reality Check: There is no moral difference between transferring either Jews or Arabs from YESHA. What Kahane said years ago about the inability of Jews and Arabs to live together is being validated today by the same people who condemned him.
The 120-year war of extermination launched by the Arabs against the Jews of Israel has had many twists and turns. Sadly, it seems headed for Alice's looking glass and the world of 1984, where black is white, war is peace and good is evil.
Views expressed by the author do not necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
Waar er twee vechten hebben er twee schuld ....
en nog meer van die onzin ....
Waarom heeft Israel volgens de linkse denkwijze dan altijd veel meer schuld dan de arabieren?
Calimero-complex?
Liefhebbers van underdogs?
Stockholm-syndroom?
...?
Een reactie plaatsen
<< Home