Comments on: BUSH, BLAIR CALL FOR MUTUAL CEASE FIRE

By: Hector

Hector — Mon, 31 Jul 2006 15:07:25 +0000

I think the UN peacekeeper force that should stay in south Lebanon should be made up of Israeli forces. They are already there.

By: MoveOnAndShutUp.org

MoveOnAndShutUp.org — Sun, 30 Jul 2006 12:59:10 +0000

Oh it’s not anti-semitism…

It’s just conflict impotence that manifests itself as anti-semitism.
One of the biggest problems with the left’s oh so useful “if you don’t support X, you’re clearly a bigot against [insert victim group]‘, that they frequently use, is that it f…

By: The Heretik » Blog Archive » In the Immediate Future

The Heretik » Blog Archive » In the Immediate Future — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:55:05 +0000

[...] Sometime today some will discuss whether a ceasefire in Lebanon and Israel will be immediate or whether it will be eventual. If the ceasefire is eventual, some will immediately die and that will go on until a ceasefire becomes more immediate. The question really is who will win the ceasefire. [...]

By: Kate

Kate — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 12:43:57 +0000

Overly gloomy, Rick. The MNF could be there for 5-10 years. If the US plays it cards right, the discontent among the younger people in Iran could lead to the overthrow of the entrenched, corrupt and powerful Mullahs.

Then Hizzaballah would lose both its patrons, Iran and Syria.

The immediate issue is to make sure Israel degrades Hizzballah and its capabilities sufficiently this time. The US seems to be willing to do this, just need Israel to pick up the pace.

By: Rick Moran

Rick Moran — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 10:41:04 +0000

I should have made clear that the 3-4 week timetable was from the start of hostilities which would mean that the Israels initially planned on about 10 more days of comabt ops in southern Lebanon.

http://strategypage.com/qnd/israel/articles/20060721.aspx

They key is Bekaa. So far, the Israelis have confined their ground ops to a few Hez strong points near the border - regimental or battalion size engagements. In order to make a run for the Bekaa Valley and the massive presence of Hizbullah, Syria, and Iran there, the IDF would need a invasion force - Stratfor says 20,000 or about 4 divisions with at least two armored - in order to make the run. It would be dangerous and apparently the cabinet has nixed the idea for the moment - although they did agree to call up 15,000 more troops.

Bekaa is the brass ring for the Israelis. If they can bust up the infrastructure there, Hez is finished as a fighting force for years. The problem is that their are Syrians and Iranians there and it is probable that those two countries would not take kindly to their nationals being killed - hence the cabinets reluctance to engage. But I think eventually, the Israelis will realize that if they’re serious about degrading Hizbullah’s capability to hurt them, they simply must hit the Bekaa Valley.

By: kreiz

kreiz — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 10:24:51 +0000

My own estimate, based on Israelâ€™s timetable for destroying Hizbullah, is 3-4 weeks. This is the first time I’ve heard such an optimistic assessment, Rick. Frankly, I’m skeptical. Can you steer me to a primary source? Given the nature of radical Islam (an internal belief), how can Hiz be destroyed militarily unless all of its believers are killed? If you’re saying that Hez can be severely crippled for a time, I get that. Otherwise, I’m confused.

By: Drewsmom

Drewsmom — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 01:06:27 +0000

I agree with both of the former posts. Hezbollah ain’t given up jack and will not keep any so called un resolution.
Isreal must NOT lose their will to crush these monsters and someone needs to smoke the main hez guy outta the iranian embassy where he is hiding like a freightened kid while all his bullies are out fighthing. Kinda like binladen hiding and making tapes at aljazeera when binnie sits there chillin.
What pieces of crap they are.

By: Thoughtsonline

Thoughtsonline — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 00:52:49 +0000

The BIG reason Bush is such a drain…

Back when Bush was riding high in the polls, one of the things that people liked about him was his black-and-white view of the troubles facing us. There was no gray, people “were either with us or against us”.

By: Matt Hurley

Matt Hurley — Sat, 29 Jul 2006 00:48:15 +0000

I think it is about time we bring back the concept of “unconditional surrender.” And I think Bush and Blair should make that known prior to any discussion at the UN. You are right, Hezbollah will NEVER give up their guns voluntarily and Israel would be foolish to agree to any cease fire without that condition having been met. So why go through the 12 years and 17 resolutions when we all know that the US is going to have to form yet another coalition of the willing to go in there and sort this mess out???