TCS Daily

Terrorists Win - What Next?

By J. Peter Pham & Michael I. Krauss - August 15, 2006 12:00 AM

The Second Battle of the Litani (following our Civil War practice of naming engagements after the strategically significant waterways along which they are fought) is over. With a ceasefire called for by the unanimously-passed United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) ended offensive operations in Lebanon at 8:00 a.m. local time on Monday.

This battle was sparked -- lest it be forgotten -- by an act of war when Iranian- and Syrian-supported Hezbollah terrorists, unimpeded if not rooted on by the troops of Lebanon's government, penetrated Israel's internationally-recognized northern border and kidnapped two IDF soldiers, killing eight others in the process.

All the political spin notwithstanding, it is clear that Israel has not fared well in the conflict. In a little more than a month, the brave Israeli population has been on the receiving end of over 3,700 rockets, including nearly 900 that hit heavily populated urban centers, killing 52 civilians and injuring more than 2,300. That there were not more casualties was providential as well as a tribute to the extraordinary preparedness of Israeli civil defense. Although, to be sure, the IDF was slowly degrading Hezbollah, as its guided ordnance struck the terrorist positions with increasing deadly accuracy. In the end, a combination of less-than-stellar civilian leadership on the part of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Amir Peretz and hostile world public opinion (the latter a product, in part, of Hezbollah effective propaganda machine) forced Israel to accept a cessation of hostilities having accomplished virtually none of its declared objectives. Even the captured soldiers remain unaccounted for.

In contrast, by setting his strategic objective so ridiculously low -- at one point he declared that his group "needs only to survive to win" -- Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah has emerged from the ordeal that he imposed on Lebanon with bragging rights for having withstood the IDF in a way no other Arab leader has done since the Arabs tried to strangle the nascent Jewish state in its cradle in 1948.

For those concerned with the consequences of a terrorist victory, there is a ray of light in this dark tunnel: the current ceasefire is really the intermission after the first act of an ongoing drama. Those suffering from the strategic version of attention deficit disorder should keep this in mind. The UN resolution ends nothing. If anything, it contains within itself the seeds of its own irrelevance, just as did its seven predecessor resolutions that the diplomats shamelessly invoked in the first paragraph of the document.

First, while as of the time of this writing, Hezbollah has not fired additional rockets into Israel, its forces have continued hostilities with the IDF in Lebanon. Hence, the question remains how long the ceasefire will actually be respected on the Lebanese side. If serious moves are made to actually implement the plans for a reinforced United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) and to deploy the Lebanese army into southern Lebanon, this would preclude Hezbollah's state-within-a-state and prove intolerable to its Iranian and Syrian masters. And while the UN resolution imposes an arms embargo on non-governmental forces in Lebanon, assurances that Hezbollah will not have its arsenal replenished are worthless without the agreement of Iran and Syria. Nevertheless, the resolution studiously avoided any linkage that would suggest what everyone knows: that Hezbollah is an Iranian surrogate.

Second, it remains to be seen whether the international community will actually manage to assemble and deploy the vigorous and substantial force of which it writes and, if so, when.

In short, there are a number of ways that the ceasefire may well amount to much less than it has been billed. Certainly the parallels are striking with the ceasefire, likewise hailing from the likewise unanimously passed Resolution 425, following an earlier Battle of the Litani in 1978 against the terrorists of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). UNIFIL was created then with the triple mandate of "confirming the withdrawal of Israeli forces, restoring international peace and security and assisting the Government of Lebanon in ensuring the return of its effective authority in the area." After a short respite, the PLO, far from being disarmed, launched some 270 terrorist attacks in the year preceding the IDF's June 6, 1982, "Operation Peace of Galilee" invasion, which eventually drove the PLO from Lebanon altogether.

When the hostilities resume this time 'round, assuming that the Israelis have in the interim assessed their conduct during Litani II and adapted accordingly, there will be some notable differences to the status ante bellum of July 12, 2006.

First, Hezbollah will no longer have the strategic advantage of surprise. The terrorist group's choice of weaponry in the current conflict has betrayed its Iranian and Syrian quartermasters and exposed its infrastructure within Lebanon. Absent some deadly escalation, which, of course, cannot be ruled out, the professional officer corps of the IDF will be better prepared to quickly deal with the Lebanese militants and their backers on the battlefield.

Second, while Nasrallah has succeeded in asserting his domination of the weak Lebanese government, he has also shown it for what it is. Next time 'round, neither Lebanon's Syrian lackey of a president, Émile Lahoud, nor its terrified prime minister, Fouad Siniora, will be able to hide behind the pretence of a distinction between themselves and the terrorist group they have coddled. Everyone now knows that both men answer to the Hezbollah leader and that the "Cedar Revolution" met its match in the conjuncture of the political cynicism of Lebanon's ruling elites and the power of the Shi'a militants.

Third, while no one seriously expects the "new and improved" UNIFIL to actually disarm Hezbollah -- a step that was already mandated by Resolution 1559 two years ago -- the presence of the international peacekeepers will nonetheless complicate the terrorist group's efforts to rebuild forces that have been seriously degraded by the IDF in recent days. The Hezbollah that next faces off with Israel will do so absent senior commanders whose deaths the group has thus far concealed as well as those who, no doubt, the long arm of Israeli justice will reach over the coming weeks and months.

Litani II is over, but the war goes on -- and its issue is not in doubt.

Michael I. Krauss is professor of law at George Mason University School of Law. J. Peter Pham is director of the Nelson Institute for International and Public Affairs at James Madison University. Both are adjunct fellows of the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies.



Irish History Teaches
Reminds me of the "troubles" between the Catholics of Ireland and the Protestants of Northern Ireland.

The Emerald Isle was the poster-child for the failure of escalating military reprisals in response to religious/nationalist-based terrorism. But things quieted down once Ireland's economy took-off in the 1990's and the Irish and British governments were willing to settle differences and compromise.

Important lessons, there.

You miss the fact that Hesbullah is islamic, which preaches convert or kill all infadels, and Iran has openly declared its intention to "wipe israel off of the map." There isn't room for a compromise there.

As for the Irish Peace process...
Compromise? The Brits pulled out, more like thrown out, and the Irish have their independance, while working for unification. These are a people who, in the end, actually try to respect eachother, not contstantly threaten genocide.

what is your point?

Right Lessons from England's Wrongs
"These are a people who, in the end, actually try to respect eachother, not contstantly threaten genocide."

The immigration to the American colonies in the 16th, 17th, and 18th Centuries was due in large part to a terrbily bloody series of civil/religious war between Protestants and Catholics. For minority religious sects like the Pilgrims and the Quakers, neither side respected their rights -- better to live in uncharted wilderness then risk jail, torture, or even death. So off they went and founded New England and Pennsylvania.

"Iran has openly declared its intention to 'wipe israel off of the map.' There isn't room for a compromise."

I'm not suggesting Israel compromise with Iran, but with the Palestinians. Furthermore, it is the Iranian government whom we wish to see removed, but not the peoples of Iran.

Incredible view !!
While I wholeheartedly oppose Hezbollah, and think their abduction of Israeli soldiers totally uncalled for from a Lebanese point of view, I find this article utterly preposterous;
The fact that Hezbollah are backed by Iran and Syria DOES NOT mean that the whole country of Lebanon should be destroyed and its civilians killed.

1 Hezbollah are NOT terrorists, they're only conveniently classified as terrorists by the US, UK and Israel (of all nations). Nice. They are a resistance force.

2 No need to speak about the non-terrorist Israeli army killing 1070 Lebanese civilians, and 35 Lebanese soldiers, when Hezbollah killed 150 Israeli soldiers, and 52 Israeli civilians (while Hezbollah are the ones who are supposedly terrorists targeting civilians).

3 The hostile world public opinion is called a worldwide human conscience reacting with disgust, and sympathy for the unnecessary targeting and killing of helpless civilians, the 100 000 refugees, the destruction of all the civilian infrastructure, and the whole coast of a country drowned in fuel, not a ridiculous so-called "Hezbollah effective propaganda machine".

4 Hezbollah always fired rockets at Israel as a reaction to Israeli aggression (even after Hezbollah unjustifiably abducted the 2 soldiers; rockets were fired at Israel after the latter targeted the Beirut airport, not during or after the abduction per se). There were clear rules of engagement (sad, but nontheless real) that have been in effect for 6 years on the border between two countries at war.

5 Pretending that the Lebanese government answers to Hezbollah is an affirmation that is not even worth refuting so mind bogglingly irresponsible it is.

Disarming Hezbollah can only be achieved when Hezbollah have no excuse left to justify their arms to Lebanese public opinion (aka when Israel returns the Shebaa farms, The prisoners, The South Lebanon mine maps, Stops abducting, bullying and harassing fishermen daily off the coast of South Lebanon, Stops its weekly breaches of Lebanese airspace), not by giving the Lebanese public more reasons to support Hezbollah’s arms.
Thank you for promising another onslaught by the brave "professional officer corps of the IDF" and the righteous reach of the "long arm of Israeli justice" (we all know how the "justice" of the most moral army in the world will prevail)

Other than that, great article indeed

Ireland is a nation vastly more advanced culturally, intellectually, and morally than any Muslim-controlled Middle Eastern nation. (For that matter, so is Great Britain.)

Additionally, the objective of the Irish was not the extermination of the British; nor was it the objective of Irish Catholics to exterminate Irish or British Protestants. It was the ousting of the political and territorial remnants of what can authentically be called British Terrorism instituted by Oliver Cromwell (may he burn in flames fed by the fat of his own horse).

Don't compare apples and beans.

Are you illiterate?
Or are you just morally depraved?

Or is it both?

To what act of terrorism
by Oliver Cromwell do you refer?

1) Any group that uses terroristic tactics, is a terrorist organization. How can they be a resistance force, Israel withdrew from Lebanon 6 years ago. The only reason they went into Lebanon in the first place was to stop cross border raids. This time and last.

2) You are correct, there is no need to speak of the non-terrorist Israeli army. Israel goes to great lengths, even putting their own soldiers lives at risk to avoid killing civilians. Hezbollah only goal is to kill civilians. Then they hide amongst civilians, in complete disregard fro the Geneva Conventions.

3) If Hezbollah hadn't started the war, and then hid amongst the civilians, there would be no civilian deaths, and there would be no refugees.

4) Hezbollah has been firing rockets at Israel for years.

5) If the Lebanese govt does not answer to Hezbollah, then they are too afraid of Hezbollah to do anything.

congrats to the terrorists
The sure won this round because of the betrayal of the west. They still might take up my suggestion to turn the hizb into an underground organization by killing all male relatives of all know hizb members. When you are underground then it's easier for counter terrorists forces to monitor them, ironically. Remember when the germans had the problem with Baader-Meinhof gang. They actually took that one seriously and reenacted some of the methods of pinning down people that they remembered from gestapo days. It was effictive, they wiped out the BM gang, then they also quietly disbanded the anti-terrorist group afterwards so that they wouldn't be accused of being ***** again. The same can be done with all such underground gangs. In fact I'm proud to say I've helped the cause myself years ago and caused there to be less commies in the world. Of course then we didn't have to fight with one arm tied behind our backs the way westerners do nowadays.

Why would you complain about lebanese civilians getting killed, they still get martyrdom out of it right? They keep saying how they are pround to die for their cause. So what's the basis of your complaint?

A reprint, with a purpose.
I reprint this post from the "Why Israel Lost" because it contains my own definition of victory. To put it simply: The West must inspire such bowel-knotting terror in our Islamofascist enemies that they are afraid to take action against us, and the populations around them are afraid to let them operate. Unless the Muslim street knows that we will retaliate immediately with such overwhelming force that entire blocks will be destroyed, they will never settle this problem on their own, and any Islamic country is a potential battleground.

Here is the post:

First, who is our enemy?

1) They do not have any moral compunctions about lying to any non-Muslim. In this way, they are a lot like the Communists, who were not bothered at all about lying to Western dupes. Take the faked photos in Qana for proof if you like, or Ahmadinejad's blatant lies to Mike Wallace, or Arafat's speeches in Arabic to Palestineans versus those made to Western audiences.

2) They actually SEEK death for themselves, as opposed to being willing to die for their cause. This makes them different from Communists, ***** and most of the other enemies we have fought. This fact means that deterrence is, in essence, impossible. You can only deter someone who does not want to die. Of course, some Islamofascists need a little help. For example, in Fallujah, the terrorist insurgents needed to be doped up on amphetamines, painkillers and adrenaline to give them the courage and endurance to fight American soldiers. However, the vast number of suicide bombers they have used tends to suggest that many Islamofascists are willing and eager to die for their cause, and get their 72 virgins.

3) Our enemy seeks to maximize civillian casualties on their own side as a PR stunt. We see this taking place in Lebanon and Iraq right now. The use of civillian areas as rocket-firing positions is clearly intended to ensure that the maximum number of civillians are killed by counter-battery fire. They know our chief weakness, and are willing to exploit it. Those who die are written off as "martyrs," and their corpses and ruined homes are displayed for maximum propaganda value.

4) Our enemy mixes with the local population, and uses it for cover. Like any terrorist insurgency, the Islamofascists seek to use local populations sympathetic to their goals as cover. This means that any strike against them when they show themselves must be quick and decisive, or they will disappear again.

5) The Islamofascist movement is totally incompatible with Western Civilization. They demand our complete subjugation.

We face three key limitations:
1) Our side will not stand large-scale casualties.
2) Our media is sympathetic to the destruction of Western Civilization. (Once again, Qana. Furthermore, the NYT has revealed most of our effective programs that target terrorists.)
3) Our populace is sensitive to the death of innocents.

Based on the characteristics and limitations of both sides, a few things become clear:

- Since you cannot deter Islamofascists, you must kill them if you want to live peacefully. Offensive action is the only way to win. Settling for anything less than the destructon of our terrorist enemies' operational capabilities should be considered treason.

- Since these terrorists are determined to use the civillian population of countries like Lebanon as cover, we need to make these populations pay a price for allowing themselves to be used. To quote an exceptionally wise philosopher: "When you have them by the b@lls, their hearts and minds will follow." While Islamofascists may be willing to die, my guess is that many of the civillians in terrorist nations are not. Make it clear that you will bomb civillian areas regardless of who lives there, and civillians will start turning over terrorists left and right.

- We need to enforce our laws against treason. The New York Times should be shut down, as should the Washington Post and USA Today. All of these newspapers have repeatedly revealed classified information, and provided aid and comfort to the enemy by doing so. The reporters and editors responsible should be arrested. Similarly, Congresspersons and leakers who commit treason should suffer the same penalty as everyone else who does so: A wall, a cigarette, a firing squad. (Would the liberals object more to the cigarette, or the execution?)

The Islamic world does not love us, nor will they ever. Now, it is time to make them fear us. Right now, we are a joke because we will not fight in a rational manner. We need to kill a few more people to make our point clear.

short of a nuke...
or just carpet bombing, which could be just as bad as a nuke... That might work.

The key is to start so huge that you don't need to escalate.
"Escalating reprisals" means you did not use enough force in the first place.

Israel lost here because Olmert did not have the strength to keep going until Hezbollah was no longer an effective military force. This cease fire simply means that they have time to re-arm and regroup for the next round of rockets.

The fact that the people of Southern Lebanon did not help to destroy these animals themselves means that they are not afraid of the consequences for themselves and their families. If they were afraid, anybody who tried to launch a rocket would have ended up with a heavily-armed citizens militia firing at them from the windows.

The key is to make people afraid of those consequences. Israel failed to do so, and they also failed to kill enough Hezbollah members to stop the threat.

Kill 'em, or make 'em cower. Those are the only options for victory.

I recommend fuel-air explosives.
A fuel-air bomb produces explosive effects roughly-equivalent to a nuclear weapon, but there is no radiation. The massive pressure produced by one of these puppies will flatten a few blocks around the area in which it is dropped.

Drop a few of these, and let the media photograph the aftermath. After people see it once or twice, they will shoot any idiot with a Katyusha on sight.

The Ire of the IRA
"Kill 'em, or make 'em cower. Those are the only options for victory."

Or, you could develop the region's economy and negotiate national claims to land as did Ireland and England.

Let's get something straight. You CAN'T negotiate with Muslims. The Q'uran teaches Muslims that they are NOT to make treaties/truces/pacts with kaffirs (that's us "infidels") unless it is to buy time to strengthen themselves for future combat and the defeat of their enemy --- that's ALL us non-Muslims, in case you didn't know.

ON THE LIGHTER SIDE: My wife is from Russia. So --- she and I are watching the news about Israel and Lebanon and Hezbollah and they put up a picture of Hassan Nazrallah, the Numero Uno of Hezbollah.

My wife starts laughing and, of course, I want to know why. She said it's Nazrallah. In Russian, "naz" is a prefix that means "all over the place." Nazrallah is a "colloquialism" in Russian that means --- "shits all over the place."

So, Hassan Nazrallah means "Hassan shits all over the place."

It figures!

Then What?
"You CAN'T negotiate with Muslims."

Then what else do you propose? Occupation? Conversion? Genocide?

Boy, are you STUPID!!!
YOU CAN'T, CAN'T, CAN'T negotiate with Muslims because they will not do so in good faith UNLESS you are another Muslim. Did you bother to read what I wrote? That's what the Q'uran teaches them. That's what Hezbollah and Iran are doing. You may want to negotiate until you turn blue --- it's useless unless you're Muslim. All you have to do is read the history of Muslim "negotiations." Try picking up the Q'uran or the Haddith sometime and READ them --- or have someone who can read it to you.

Enlighten Me
If you can't negotiate, then what? Do you even have an answer to that question?

Try act 6, or is it 7?
The U.N. keeps stopping these conflicts before they come to a conclusion on their own. I do not understand why the U.N. is worried about a widening conflict, so why do they continued to interrupt? Simple, they know Israel will triumph and, for many in the U.N., that is not tollerable.

Look for the next act to begin anytime in the next five years. Don't touch that dial!!

I don't think it will take 5 years
Hezbollah is already saying that it won't disarm, the most they are willing to conceed is that won't display their weapons in public as frequently.

The Lebanese govt is also declaring that it's not their job to move the Hezbollah out of the area south of the Litani.

The cease fire accord has been fully violated before it can even go into affect.

Of course, when the Israeli's are forced to respond to Hezbollah agression, the world will blame Israel.

Diminished expectations
I think Nasrallah may have a point when he says they only have to survive to win. Israel has made its rep by single handedly defeating the entire Arab world, not once but on several occasions. Now this mighty fighting force, assisted by American weapons deliveries, can't manage to eradicate a local militia of approx. 3,000 fighters.

Not the sort of image I think Israel would want to project. Plus, the massive civilian casualties have really gone over badly in the world's eyes. This little exercise in making a point may well prove to be counterproductive for Israel. They should hope it blows over.

Using bad psychology
"Drop a few of these, and let the media photograph the aftermath. After people see it once or twice, they will shoot any idiot with a Katyusha on sight."

That's not actually how it's going down, though. In those devastated neighborhoods, in the aftermath of US imports like 500 pounders, bomblet clusters and apparently also Willie Peter, they're now calling it "America's war". And they're now standing behind a Hezballah that just before the invasion a majority of Lebanese distrusted. So the tactic of inflicting massive civilian casualties has in fact backfired for Israel.

Just saying so doesn't make it so
You can't negotiate with Muslims? That comes as news.

Egypt and Israel. Jordan and Israel.

These peace treaties were made decades ago. Have they dishonored them, either in letter or in spirit? These were countries whose word was their bond.

Hamas and Israel.

Hamas kept up a one sided cease fire for well over a year, during which time Israel killed hundreds of civilians in the most blatant of sloppy assassinations and reckless gunslinging. Finally, after the murder of that family on a Gaza beach, Hamas realized there was no negotiating for peace with Israel. So they terminated the cease fire. This would have been a good occasion for Israel to enter into a binding agreement, as their enemies had laready stopped firing at them. If, that is, Israel had been acting in good faith to secure an equitable end to the struggle.

The reason it's so hard to get some people to sign peace agreements is that they are being offered in bad faith.

Not quite
It wasn't a lack of strength, it was dithering over the response to make. The Israelis committed to primarily an aerial response even though it was obvious by the end of the first week that this was not doing the job. They then delayed over what to do next.

This isn't a lack of strength, it's bad leadership, and poor tactics through failing to understand the enemy.

No Subject
The Brits pulled out of where? The north of Ireland? I don't think so!
The Irish have their independence? No they don't! Britain still has jurisdiction in 6 of the 32 counties of Ireland and has has had since the early 20s.
Loyalist (Protestant) terrorists - often with collusion from the RUC, British Army and Brit Intelligence - regularly murdered Catholic civilians. The sight of 'ATWD' (Any Taig [Catholic] Will Do) graffiti in Loyalist areas was widespread throughout the conflict.
Ever heard of the Shankill Butchers? They're muderous campaign against Cathloics is on a par with any Islamic fundamentalist!
Even the Protestants claimed that the IRA's campaign was designed to expel them from Northern Ireland.
Respect each other? Northern Irish society is as divided as ever. The 'peace process' has become a way of institutionalsing division.
Check your facts, fella!
How short people's memories are!

If you knew anything about Ireland ...
... you'd know it was practically a Catholic theocracy until the early 90s. Church and state were so closely intertwined that one couldn't distinguish between the two.

'Additionally, the objective of the Irish was not the extermination of the British; nor was it the objective of Irish Catholics to exterminate Irish or British Protestants. It was the ousting of the political and territorial remnants of what can authentically be called British Terrorism instituted by Oliver Cromwell'

You're quite right but I don't think you'd have been employed by the British Ministry of Truth over the past 30-odd years. That certainly wasn't how the IRA's war was portrayed.

Neither is true
The IRA were defeated politically because they couldn't be beaten militarily.
Well, let me rephrase that - they could have been beaten by a massive military bombardment of the nationalist areas of the north of Ireland a la Lebanon.
But what would have been the consequences of that? The best recruiting sergeant (from both sides of the border) that the IRA could have hoped for, acute political instability and the surest way of ensuring the Brits were kicked out of Ireland for good.
The Brits tactics? Military repression, use of Protestant auxilliaries to pressure nationalists from supporting the RA via a murder campaign and the political isolation of Sinn Fein. When this partially failed they lured Sinn Fein and the IRA into accepting the status quo with the promise of a 'recognition' of their aspirations.

Your first statement is not true.
You say "1) Any group that uses terroristic tactics, is a terrorist organization."

If this were true than the Isreal and US armies would be terrorist organizations.

In fact, the formal definition of terrorism used by the USA is very clear about that fact that established armies, as Hezbollah is, are not terrorist groups. On the other hand, te USA makes the exception to its own rule in the cases of Hezbollah.

In any case, you are wrong in your assertion.,7792,487098,00.html

Them's US
The UN is the USA in this case. It was France and the USA that brokered this resolution of the UN Security Council. Actually, France wanted it for weeks but the US Ambassador (whatshisname) vetoes or threatened to do so until Israel was able to destroy Lebanon’s infrastructure.

I beleive that Israel came out yesterday with the proclaimation that many objectives of their bombing Lebanon had been acheived.

Your right
But Israeli patience shouldn't be underestimated. Look how long, and how many attacks, it took for them to finally go back into Lebanon.

And, yes, Israel will again be held accountable for actions started by Hezbollah.

wrong all around
The U.S. wanted a neutral cease-fire recognizing, and working to correct, all the problems that creted the mess in the first place. France just wanted a cease-fire that did nothing but stop the bombing (in other words they wanted what Hezbollah wanted). Neither side got it's way and the deal hammered out is a poor one. Still, it is far better than the direction France seemed to want to go.

If the U.S. does Israel's bidding (as you and some others are often seen to claim) than France is a Hezbollah and Terrorist puppet.

Too true
At least in the eyes of the Arab world which constantly seems to be taking an a ss kicking by some other country or group.

Sadly you have a real point in the damage to Israel's military reputation and world opinion.

But this will not blow over and the two will be back at it soon. If Lebanon cannot take control of it's own borders and internal militant groups it will be destroyed. That is a sad statement for a fledgling democracy facing so many other internal problems; but it is a situation every nation faces.

side note
you may want to join me over in the jihadist big tent thread. stephen is trying to tell me how roy bean, bob jones, eric, etc, never resort to insults.

Both Rhampton and Cassius miss the pont:
The point is that we deny these terrorists a hiding place. Right now, Hezbollah is able to launch rockets from Southern Lebanon because the people around there are unwilling to stop them.

Bomb a few neighborhoods that permit launches back to the Pre-Cambrian (forget Stone Age, I mean total destruction,) and people will start to see that neither they nor their families ahve any possiblity of surviving if Hezbos launch a rocket from their block. Very quickly, people will start shooting if they ever see a Hezbo launcher anywhere near their homes.

Some people are willing to die alongside the terrorists, my guess is that most are not. Once we have denied the terrorists safe haven, and places where they can operate openly, they will have no effective capability to launch this sort of attack.

Who cares if they hate and distrust us? So long as they fear us...
Israel warned all of the civillians in Southern Lebanon to evacuate. They dropped leaflets over areas they were about to bomb. Apparently, as was announced on the Rush Limbaugh show this Monday, Israeili intelligence even set up phone banks to contact the residents of Southern Lebanon neighborhoods that were about to be bombed.

Israel fought the politest war that we have ever seen on the face of the planet. Any "civillians" who dies there were either Hezbollah fighters, sympathizers or hostages.

The tactic I proposed is different. The Israeilis need to convince the population of Lebanon that it is suicidal to permit Hezbollah or any other group to launch rockets at Israel from their neighborhood. Therefore, no leaftlets, no phone calls, no warning. Vaporize the nighborhood immediately. Until the Lebanese people are so afraid of any Hezbollah activities in their area that they will shoot known Hezbollah sympathizers on sight to protect their children, this war will not and cannot be won.

Helping Refugees, Loving Enemies
"Bomb a few neighborhoods that permit launches back to the Pre-Cambrian (forget Stone Age, I mean total destruction,) and people will start to see that neither they nor their families ahve any possiblity of surviving if Hezbos launch a rocket from their block. Very quickly, people will start shooting if they ever see a Hezbo launcher anywhere near their homes."

Tried and Failed.

The Muslim Lebanonese have adopted the English attitude during the Blitz, and the Lebanese-Christians make it impossible to make it an Us vs. Them situation.

Baptists in Lebanon continue care for refugees
by Robert Marus
Associated Baptist Press, August 17, 2006

...In an Aug. 14 update, officials of the Lebanese Society for Educational and Social Development -- an umbrella group for Lebanese Baptist ministries -- noted that hundreds of refugees remained encamped at the Beirut Baptist School and nearby Arab Baptist Theological Seminary.

...Israeli air strikes and ground troops have wreaked havoc on the nation's infrastructure, which was just beginning to return to the state it was in prior to Lebanon's 15-year civil war, which ended in 1990.

Because of the destruction, the Baptist update said, "Now, more than ever before, these families are in need of relief support ... until such a time when they have regained their source of income and rebuilt their homes."

...An Aug. 11 dispatch from the Lebanese Society for Educational and Social Development said that a Lebanese Baptist youth worker, Joseph Azzi, was speaking to a group of refugees about why Christians help their neighbors, using Jesus' parable of the Good Samaritan from Matthew 5.

A Muslim man in the group, according to the report, had lost a 17-year-old son just days earlier in an Israeli air raid that destroyed an apartment block in South Lebanon. Another air raid interrupted the funeral procession, injuring one of his other sons, and the family evacuated the area.

"And here, Rev. Joseph recited to them Matthew 5:44-45 'But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven,'" the dispatch said...

The Christians are responsible, also.
If they are not shooting at the rockets, then they can pay the price. If the Christians do start shooting at the rocket teams, then there probably will be a civil war. Well, them's the breaks. If they are not going to demand that their government starighten things out with Hezbollah, if they are not going to fight for their families, then they can pay the price. War is not fair or fun, but occasionally it is necessary. If we want to win the War on Terror, or even if the Israeilis just want Hezbollah out of Lebanon, then we need to frighten the populations of any Islamic nations so badly that they will not dare permit terrorist activity inside their borders.

We have given the people of the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe food, clean water, medical care, roads and schools for decades, and what has it gotten us?

The War on Terror. Machiavelli was right, it is both better and cheaper to be feared than loved.

Machiavelli's Fear vs. Christ's Love
"Machiavelli was right, it is both better and cheaper to be feared than loved."

But Christians do not believe that philosophy, and America's Christian community is well aware of the plight of fellow Christians in Lebanon.

Ecumenical Church Delegates Relay Mideast Concerns on U.S., Israel
Christian Post Reporter, August 17 2006

The general secretaries of the World Council of Churches (WCC), Conference of European Churches (CEC), the Lutheran World Federation (LWF), the World Alliance of Reformed Churches (WARC) as well as the international director of Action by Churches Together (ACT) greeted the ecumenical delegation in Geneva on Wednesday.

The mission of the delegation's August 10-15 visit to Beirut and Jerusalem was to express global ecumenical solidarity with churches and people affected by the conflict in the Middle East and report the hopes and messages of the churches in Mideast to the international ecumenical body ... In both cities, the delegation listened to people's experiences from the conflict, prayed with local Christians, and met with government officials and members of civil society organizations.

...Meanwhile, the United Methodist Council of Bishops wrote a letter to U.S. President George W. Bush on Wednesday, praising him for his leadership to bring the cease-fire between Israel and Hezbollah.

"Thank you for your leadership in the United Nations adopting the resolution which has served as the basis for the cease fire in Lebanon and Israel," wrote Bishop Janice Riggle Huie according to United Methodist News Service (UMNS). "We are grateful that you have worked to lay the foundation for further negotiations to bring long-term stability to the region."

stephen tortures the dictionary until it screams
Israel and the US military have never used terrorist tactics.
Hezbollah uses them every day.

I am not certain I understand you...
Are you trying to say that Christians are a unified group?

I certainly disagree with a lot of what some Christian groups say. I think the Amish are well meaning, but totally insane. They may follow my religion in the broadest sense, but they believe some very different things from me. Furthermore, they only exist because people who believe like I do are alive to protect them from people who would conquer them. I also disagree with people within my own religion. I am (or was, depending upon who you ask,) an Episcopalian. I left the Episcopal church after they elected a gay bishop. So did quite a lot of other people. I similarly disagree with the various anti-global warming church groups.

As to the question of whether Christians can take up arms against their enemies or not, I would refer you to the debate we are engaged in elsewhere.

The Message
"Are you trying to say that Christians are a unified group?"

Nope, just the opposite.

To claim that Christians can OR can't take up arms against their enemies is only as meaningful as 1) the specific situation, and 2) the particular Christians, of which you're speaking.

However, no true Christian believes that Jesus Christ preached to FEAR one another.

Kosovo syndrome.
I can certainly agree that this situation smells of Kosovo and the desire to avoid any casulaty-intensive fighting, and I agree that the Israeilis used bad tactics and had weak leadership.

I see the failure here as the failure to use the strength that Israel posesses. The United States is guilty of the same thing. Both nations pussyfoot around as if we were very careful bulls trying not to break anything in a china shop. We need to break a few things, we need to use enough force against those that engage in terrorist acts, and those who permit it to continue through indifference and inaction that the people who shelter Hezbollah will become unwilling to do so.

For PublisJr
Where exactly have I missed the point?
The Brits have won in the north of Ireland by outmanoevring the Irish republican movement.
That part of Ireland is now in as secure a position in the United Kingdom than it has been for 800 years! There is now no resistance to British rule. Republicans have had their aspirations of a united Ireland recognised and been given seats on the Executive. Even better than that (for the Brits) the republicans think they have achieved some sort of victory!

Sinn Fein/IRA come from the nationalist communities of the six counties so, if we follow your tactics, the Brits would 'have to' bomb the s*** out of residential areas of Belfast, Derry, South Armagh etc. But careful of those Protestants living nearby and among them or you could have had them resisting Brtish rule for the first time in living memory. Not to mention the inevitablity of an uprising in the South against their Brit-allied gov't.
A success story in the making? I don't think so!

It's all very well looking big and hard in front of your mates but I suppose your analysis is the reason why we have the diplomats and politicians we have and you're just blogging away.

Quite true, Publius
That's because both are democracies and must endure both its strengths and its drawbacks. The drawback in this case is that, because they depend upon popular support for governance, they cannot use the full measures that other, less consensual regimes can.

However, it's also clear that, aside from political considerations, the Israeli military appears to have significantly underestimated Hezbollah's military capacity and training.

Mark, I gave several links to prove my point. You give none.
What kind off fools do you take the pople here for?

What you say is simply what you say.

What I say is simply the truth
What you say is lies.

Now that is a good joke!!!

TCS Daily Archives