Israel's Sheer Stupidity

Launching a major ground offensive less than 72 hours before you've agreed to a cease fire has to be one of the most foolish things I have ever seen. I realize it allows Israel to quickly move troops over the border so they are in place for however long it takes for an International force to deploy.

But that only serves to reinforce the impression of this entire war as a ridiculous joke on the part of the Olmert government. Evidently they had no genuine plan going in and are scrambling around for one on the way out. Perhaps Bush and Rumsfeld are giving them advice on how to fight and not win a war.

The free democratic people of the West and America in particular, along with Israel, had better be genuinely concerned. It seems as though the current political leadership in place is unwilling and unprepared to fight the battle which ultimately must be fought.

The free world's population has not been effectively educated by its leadership on the war against Islamofascism and this latest debacle will not make that easier. It also leaves the situation even worse.

If the failure of America's current political leadership opens the political door to the appeasement movement on the Left in the next two years of elections, troubled times lie ahead. We may well wind up losing a city before the right leadership comes to power as a result of a population more fully aware of the threat from Islamofascism because of the tremendous suffering America will have to endure.

Comments

[Gotta Know]

That is my great fear, that it costs an entire city to really engage us. It is particularly disconcerting that here at home the left hyperventilates over every imagined civil rights violation possible, without understanding that our national security is comprised of trade-offs. If we don't allow some monitoring of communications and financial transfers, we will never catch these people. If we don't secure our borders, it is only a matter of time before we pay a very, very high price.

[Maggie45]

It is with great sorrow that I say that I finally think that your last sentence is true.

[xxx]

Or, maybe Dan, they are simply showing themselves to be what they are, a country with such a victim complex that they simply believe rules do not apply to them, a country with a long, long history of ignoring UN resolutions that don't suit it's purpose. They are bad faith negotiators, end of discussion.

I mean, if they wanted more ground troops, then why didn't they just stall agreeing to the cease fire for a couple more days and then agree once the troops were in place? Instead of agreeing to the cease fire and then upping the troop strength, kind of like when they agreed to a 48 hour cease fire on bombing but it only lasted for about 12 hours...

Can you really not understand why other countries in the ME don't trust Israel and don't consider the United States to be an honest broker?

It is obvious that Hezbollah had done a lot more infrastructure/planning than Israel thought, they thought they could go in and bomb the area to smithereens and dislodge them without having to, you know, actually see any of the civilians that were dying, but they miscalcuated.

I go back to the fact that everything Israel has done defeats her own interests over the long term. More Lebanese now support Hezbollah, not less, more Arabs across the ME support Hezbollah, not less. Since Hezbollah is made up of Lebanese who are backed by Iran and Syria....while this will severely weaken them in the short term, in the long term, it makes them stronger.

Oh yeah, and that destroying of Lebanon's burgeoning democracy might not have been too good of an idea. What happens if Hezbollah resurges as a freaking political movement and takes over the government, now that even moderate Lebanese and Lebanese Christians for crying out loud are calling Israel the aggressors?

[Gary Maxwell]

Dear jackass

Israel does not sit on the Security Council. The resolution was sponsored by France and the US. The Israelis have said their cabinet will meet on Sunday and may, at that time, agree to the cease fire. The Lebanese government, not a true party to the hostilities has not yet aceepted the cease fire which begs the question. If they do, are they speaking for the terrorists?

Get yourself some facts and then think. Only then type. Saves having to clean yourself afterwards.

[Elisabeth]

"they are simply showing themselves to be what they are, a country with such a victim complex that they simply believe rules do not apply to them, a country with a long, long history of ignoring UN resolutions that don't suit it's purpose"

It is not Israel that didn't comply with resolution 1559.
As for breaking the rules, the ceasefire starts monday at 7:00 in the morning, meaning they have still a day to uproot as many rocket launchers as possible. Saying so, we just got another barrage of rockets here, 20 minutes ago.

That is utter bull what you are writing.

[Gary Maxwell]

Thanks Elisabeth. Please know that the vast majority of Americans strongly support Israel in this effort. Ignor the jackass troll here. It is not the first time he has demonstrated an appalling level of understanding of basic facts. I am willing to bet it wont be the last either.

[K]

I thought there was no agreement until Monday and until the resolution is accepted by Lebanon. And they are thinking about it.

Last night people began saying Israel is still shooting. No one said Hez is still shooting.

[Carol Herman]

I don't agree. Israel needed the time to get into position to move troops up to the Litani. As well as to blow up the connective points between syria and lebanon. Now, there's only one bridge, left.

And, it seems Assad still doesn't want to engage. While for some reason so many people are looking at Israel. Intead of the rest of the map.

I'll start with my first recognition of a major fact: THIS WAR ON TERROR WILL NOT BE SOLVED IN A FEW WEEKS. Or even a few months. It's for the long haul. ANd, sure. This produces stress points. And, stress, in general. What's needed is an ability to keep up the momentum. So continuous thrusting works against ya.

Also, not just the propaganda angle, where the GREEN HELMET GUY exposes all the ruses used by lebanon in its quest to remain "above the fray." When what's happening in lebanon is that ultimately the Shi'a go back to collecting garbage.

IF Syria engages, and sends its 40,000 conscripts up the GOLAN, then the party's over for iran. Because they've gotten caught in the bear trap.

By the way, for those who are very short-sighted, Bibi's ego inflates at the thought he can "bounce" Olmert. Man's got no capacity to see the problems. Seems he wants vindication that the Disengagement was wrong. Good luck to him. He's got his followers. But they are outside the government.

And, when new elections come down the road, I'm sure Silvan Shalom will gladly give Bibi a push. By sticking a knife in his back. Given the drubbing the Likud took, you've got to be smoking powerful stuff.

But what do I care? I'm relaxed. And, that's something special. I didn't go drop my common sense and join the idiots barking in the night. Things are gonna get better. And, the War on Terror will move forward. While lots of Americans benefit, too, from the Learning Curve.

As to the propaganda, it's from dying industry elites. No matter to me at all. While the UN is trying to hold onto some amount of relevancy. Do they? Don't they? Again, it's just a diplomatic-pants-dancing game. And, it looks like a lot of state players are getting desperate.

Stay tuned. This War's not over. As a matter of fact, Bush's plate is full. The choices abound. He's doing very, very well. While the chump, Bubba, tries to get some attention. What a clown.

[bogo]

I assume the term 'Islamofascism' is too imply that the Islamists (who suck) are as bad as the Nazis. The Iranian econo-political structure bears no resemblance to classical Fascism and HezbAllah is not advocating a Fascist econo-political structure in Lebanon. In fact, Iran is moving closer to a European style lite-Socialism economy.

Why not simply use the term 'Islamists'? Or even 'radical Islamists', or 'fundamentalist-Islamists', or 'crazy-religious extremists'? Appending 'fascist' is so wildly inaccurate that it simply comes of as rhetoric.

Bogo sez: "You're a Fascist... no, YOU'RE a Fascist... no, the ACLU are Fascists, no, Rumsfeld is Fascist... goddam pot-smoking hippies."

[ronbo]

"I realize it allows Israel to quickly move troops over the border so they are in place for however long it takes for an International force to deploy."

Exactly.

"But that only serves to reinforce the impression of this entire war as a ridiculous joke on the part of the Olmert government."

That's also true, unfortunately, but I'd rather see Olmert try to undo (or at least ameliorate) his policy failures than maintain them in the name of consistency. Olmert's failure isn't moving troops in now, it's not having moved troops in earlier.

[rwilymz]

"Olmert's failure isn't moving troops in now, it's not having moved troops in earlier."

Bingo. You don't win wars from the air.

'x' bloviates:
"I go back to the fact that everything Israel has done defeats her own interests over the long term."

How can you go back to that "fact" when that isn't close to a fact? What you wrote is a conclusion, which ideally derives from facts. A conclusion is an opinion, by definition, and is either valid or not, depending upon the robustity of the factual analysis that went into it.

But "everything Israel has done defeats her own interests over the long term" is not a fact; it is your opinion.

Facts you might use to support that opinion are:
Israel has not complied with umpteen UNSCRs. Yes; you're right.

But then, if you're going to be honest -- as you chirp and whine and mewl about the US not being an "honest broker", it would seem that you'd go out of your way to be honest yourself -- IF you're going to be honest, you'd also have to caveat the cheap shot on Israel's failure to follow those umpteen UNSRCs by saying "...and neither has anyone else".

But you didn't. Because only Israel, it would seem, is obliged to follow UN directives, and the fact that no party in the Middle East follows UNSRCs means -- to the soft anti-semitism you display -- that it's all Israel's fault.

If you're going to be honest you will also have to admit to the fact, and thus incorporate into your analysis from which you derive your conclusive opinion, that the UNSCRs directed at Israel are commanding Israel to do what no other nation in the history of ever has been directed to do: essentially surrender accepted international protocols of sovereignty on behalf of a belligerent party. We don't have any UNSCRs directing Poland to return East Prussia and the port city of Danzig to the Germans ... do we? Why, then, do we have UN busybodying directing Israel to essentially do that for the Pal-Arabs?

Because, frankly, the world is dominated by hard anti-semites who try to conceal their hard anti-semitism under the soft anti-semitism you display.

'

I'm going to side, here, with Carol and not with Dan. Major ground offensives [offensii?] leading up to planned truces are the norm, usually undertaken by the dominant force in order to consolidate gains and attain last-minute position -- either tactical or diplomatic.

And I'm going to echo Ronbo: the Israeli prosecution of this operation did not follow the tactical rulebook. Ground troops sooner, not later. No ground troops leaves Hezbollah rockets in place. A purely cynical view of the operation coincides with that weenie from the Washington Post: Israel wants Hezbollah rockets coming at Haifa for the PR; almost none of them do any damage. Minimal risk; maximal sympathy.