Hezbollah defensive strategy!
Concerning Hezbollah presumed defensive strategy one must not forget that Hezbollah never said that its strategy was about stopping Israel’s land forces from invading Lebanon. For Nassrallah himself stated that Hezbollah cannot and is not interested in holding set geographical positions.
Hezbollah’s defensive strategy, according to Nassrallah, consists of a balance of terror, using the thousands of missiles as deterrent to stop Israel from ever again attacking Lebanon, and bombing its infrastructure and targeting civilians. (check the picture below, taken before the war)
That strategy failed utterly. This presumed balance of terror did not stop Israel from going on a 33 days bombing fest. Additionally, the results of this war -even the much vaunted losses inflicted to the IDF- will not protect Lebanon from any future aggressions, on the contrary, they have built the basis for the next war, especially if Hezbollah does not disarm.
In short, Hezbollah’s defensive strategy did not protect Lebanon from Israel's aggressions and would certainly fail to do so in the future...And for those who like evidence this picture, taken before the war, is for you:
Translation: Our homes will not be destroyed
Our children will not be killed
Our people will not be displaced
Those days are over
posted by BOB @ 3:14 PM
63 Comments:
I agree.
The War proved our defensive weapons weren't enough, so we should disarm completely, bend over and wait for the next one.
what jamal said.
I agree with jamal.
"Bending" is a good defensive strategy in addition to the "phone diplomacy".
Bob, Same idea has been said before by you. Nothing new in this post.
But what caught my attention is the balance of "terror" phrase, instead of balance of "power". ;)
A good reply for ur repeated idea will be this article.
Tab let us make a deal...
we have tried your way battle, war, arming for 60 years and... nothing was gained, only more destrcution, misery and poverty.
Let us try my way. Just try peace, real peace for once, and if we make peace with Israel and they attack us i will carry a gun and fight in the Lebanese army.
till then you want us to stand tall and proud (like nassrallah in his hole) well be my guest, i prefer to sit around a table with israel and solve this problem once and for all...
peace
hilal
regarding your previous post, if you truly wanted to be fair, you would have allowed comments...
i for once would love to say that "i told you so"...
and would love to see some apologies or at least retractions from the poster, and some who were very sure that this was ziad
but anyways thx for posting the ziad's message!
Bob,
go sit to a table with israel but first ask jordanian and egyptian people about their opinions in the peace treaties with israel.
:)
It's nice from you to use the "we". Very specific and politically very correct :)
Calm down.
Bob,
I didn't allow messages because the subject has been discussed over and over.My duty was to post it to asure the honesty of LBF.
I have no apologies for you cause I stated clearly If you rememer that "honesty makes us say that it has not be confirmed as a ziadi letter"
I'll speak for my self.
My first comment was:
"hayde moghamara ma7soobeh aw mosh ma7soobeh"
and My comment included a review on ziad work If you read it carefully.
This is not a playground for kids to tell mama we are sorry ;)
Bob,
I agree with Hilal: there really isn't anything in this post you haven't said (repeatedly) before. And going back and forth and suggesting that "let's drop your strategy and try mine" might make sense if any of us was in a position to do that. Till then, we are at the mercy of a flawed political system that, I hate to say, is much larger than us...
Thank you for our concern about my "calm" but i prefer that keep you keep it to yourself...
Now is this about the Jordanian or Egyptian people or about us the Lebanese!
I used we because yes whether you like it or no i am not the only one who want peace, and I was mirroring Jamal's "we"
And I prefer a bad peace over a good war any day!
So do tell me what is your solution to the problem? Ahmadi najad's? or maybe perpetual war?
On lighter subject (Ziad's article), I can't help it, I have to say it again "I told you so!!"
And I feel that our mam might get sad because you did not apologize to her, too bad…
bob, maybe Ziad got one of those things i've been asking you for?
my offer still stands, no expiration date.
If the peace treaties were verygood, then why after all these years, peoople refuse to normalize relations with israel?
the better to add on this is what an egyptian blogger said on his state's defensive strategy previously on this site:
"
Egypt's defensive strategy :))
Bob, I believe that you are refering to the Camp David peace treaty Sadat signed with Israel in 1979. That peace treaty was imposed on Egyptians by a US allied dictator. The overwhelming majority of Egyptians have rejected (and continue to reject) this treaty and thousands of Egyptian intellectauls were put in prison for that reason.
The Egyptian regime's defense strategy for Egypt can be summarized as follows "acting as a US dog in the region". If the Egyptians rose up, overthrow their dictator and brought about a regime that more truely represent them, then Egypt could be as vulnerable to US/Israeli aggression as Lebanon or any other regime in the region who chose not to take orders from the White House.
I am totally against Egypt having a peace treaty with Israel as long as the Palestinians continue to suffer from Israeli appartheid policies. Do you know that Egypt is selling oil, gas and cement(yes, cement) to Israel? Do you know that thousands of Israelis enter Sinai without a visa while Palestinians are imprisoned inside Gaza and The West Bank?
Even if we chose to turn a blind eye to the ethical side, I don't think that Egypt has gained economically from that peace treaty and US aligned policies; quite the contrary I believe.
I am sorry to digress, but I wanted to comment because the Egyptian regime's relation with the US and Israel is not amodel to emulate at all.
"
arch
well i know it is out of our hands, but so are most of the things we talk about! But still that does not mean that we should not discuss or argue about them. on the contrary i believe that as long as we are talking there is still a chance (maybe a small one) for peace...
hilal
you misread i said "I prefer a bad peace over a good war any day!"
bob, my comment was typed before i see ur comment it was directed to imbch.
bob,
do u mean by bad peace the "surrunderring peace"?
:)
w to make it clear bob,
ur "I told YOU so" must be "I told THEM so".
:D
Hilal
nop a bad peace is not a perfect peace...but still you did not give me your view on the solution?
ok i agree
I told all of them (you included) so!!!
Jamal
yep! but you can't get the same thing! yours will be much smaller (pun intended :)
Now, putting "islamophobia" and "childish" remarks aside.
- My view is that israel is always a threat. daily events in palestine can support my idea.
- an army doesn't solve the problem alone and didn't work in the last 60 years (sam 60 years u mentioned), guerrilla's fight is the solution for this daily threat.
It can be controlled by the government which may give it a political support.
- This political support for the a resistance has always been proposed by martyr hariri, or at least this is what future movement says. I think you forgot that.
- Treating the issue as we live on Mars and that we are not located in a hot spot is a bit politically naive. u r excluding Usa policies in the region and their project that they officially declare. What do u think about the greatest middle east? Please let me remind u with ur responce on archmemory IN CASE u answered there is nothing we can do when it comes to usa.
- u have been talking on peace without going into details (economical, diplomatic,...etc).
Doing like that Bob, makes it appear like a miss world contest where all ask for world peace.
- Details on your peace?
- Foad siniora declared clearly that lebanese are the last to sign the peace treaty with israel after solving the israeli-palestinian conflict. i know u support sanyoora (at least in posts and comments that we have been reading in LBf). are you with saniora in this point?
bob i am still waiting for ur 2 cents on memri... why dont you make us more familiar with ur sources?
Will u be going to the demo on friday? ;)
Before debating if peace is good or bad, we should agree what we want lebanon to be. We should agree on a basis to build upon for a debate to be fruitful. Do we want a country that is constantly in a state of war like it has been for the last 30 years? or do we want a stable and peaceful country? both hypothesis are defendable... but i think this is a question we must solve before deciding if we want to sign a peace treaty...
Now regarding the peace treaty, it is funny when you say Egypt didn't benefit economically from peace with Israel, Egypt is one of the countries who recieves the most aid from the USA, the hole sinai is now living on from Israeli tourists, a big part of Egypt's industy is exporting to Israel, the peace treaty brought stability that allowed Egypt to develop a viable economy etc.. now if all that money is not arriving to the people, the corrupt regime is to blame.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
chief,
u mean Lebanese should benefit from israeli and american money when signing a peace treaty and it's one of the reasons to go for it ?
:)
Elaborate.
When i talked about US money it was to highlight the economic benefits Egypt got by signing it's peace treaty. In the case of Lebanon, if such a treaty would take place it would be up to the Lebanese to decided what are the terms of the accord. But i think the biggest benefit we would gain from a peace treaty is peace itself which is invaluable for Lebanon. We have proved in the past that the country has great potential and is able to survive on it's own. It's been 30 years that we are lacking stability. And stability alone should be a good enough reason to sign peace provided that the treaty provides stability to the country.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
chief
why last 30 years?
u forgot 1958??
Chief the detail you're missing is that the decision of stability or instability is not in our hands. Instability is a fact today in the Middle East, brought by the reality of the situation. Let's not be delusional here. The United States has its vision for the region (with all its sinister implications), Israel has its objectives, Iran has its own agenda, and so on. Lebanon is in the middle of all these contradictions. You don't have to be a Hezbollah member to believe that Israel poses a threat today and will pose a threat again in the future. Let's say Hezbollah gives its weapons, and five years down the road some small armed group launches a couple of rockets to Israel. Israel retaliates by burning the country down. Only now they don't pause and think twice before invading with their troops and doing whatever they want. This is the government's defensive strategy: Do nothing and take the beating if it comes. The incident of Marje3oun and its subsequent handling and brushing off is such a crystal-clear metaphor to said strategy.
A defensive strategy means that if somebody attacks us, he'll have to know that it is going to hurt him. Give us a defensive strategy and we'll all demand Hezbollah’s arms. That's not going to happen though, because March 14 doesn’t give a rat's ass about no defensive strategy, they just want to get rid of their internal opponent. Shame.
One more thing. Egypt and Jordan managed to sign peace with Israel because they are dictatorships. They did not care for their people's opinion. Weather or not that is the right ting to do is besides the point here. Peace with Israel presumes the presence of a strong state that can enforce the peace. The state should be able to counter opposition to this peace (translated to the Arab world, this means throwing people in jail, killing them, etc). Lebanon can't do that. There is no strong state in Lebanon. Wait, I actually meant there is no state in Lebanon. The pathetic trio of March 14 calls itself a state, but it is not. Lebanon is a divided entity; no one can impose its will. Just giving the weapons away and waiting to see what happens next is pure insanity. Why don't we work on building a strong state that can absorb the country's contradictions, and then talk about the weapons? Doesn’t that make more sense? But no, we won't do that. Why? I gave the answer at the end of the previous entry.
Jij,
“…Let's say Hezbollah gives its weapons, and five years down the road some small armed group launches a couple of rockets to Israel…”
In a modern state:
All the weapons are owned by the army.
Private people with rockets are jailed.
The army doesn’t fire a single rocket without the approval of the government.
The government is elected by the people and represents the people and it’s responsible for every military act.
Military aggression on any scale against another state can be considered as an act of war and can cause legitimate retaliation.
In short, in a modern country, this shouldn’t happen.
Smith, where do you see a modern state? Did you read what I wrote? Change your assumptions.
So what are the armed settlers in the West Bank? Does this mean Israel is not a modern state? If the US uses private militias in other countries to advance its military and political goals, what analytical reprecussions (state outside a state?)? The state in a state stuff is absolute nonsense ... Absolute sovereignty in the Westphalian sense has never existed, it has always been shared sovereignty, with multiple intersecting rays and poles ...
Is the only "Defense strategy" possible by massing weapons at the border and training fighter and bla bla bla... ? Is it really worth the fight? Weren't all the past events enough to at least make us think of alternatives?
Isn't trying to avoid confrontation the most effective defense strategy? Can't we find a way to garentee peace? Is the war a fatality we can't escape?
The impact of war on our country is so great that the day a war start regardless of the result we would have already lost more than we could win in the biggest military victory.
But i think to get peace we must make concessions? But are we ready to make them? Are we ready to sacrify our overblown ego and estime of ourselves in order to get peace? Is our oh so important honor more important than peace? I know some people will disagree with me, but i believe that peace is a an objective we must achieve at any price.
To Apokraphyte,
True, some settlers in the west bank carry M16s they got from the state for self defence against Palestinian terrorists. It is all controlled and supervised by the state with full knowledge about every single M16 and its serial number. Every shot fired is investigated, and unjustified fire is treated accordingly. There’s a small number of radical organisations like “the Jewish underground” carrying guns with hostile anti Arabs intensions. They are persecuted by the Israeli security organisation (the Shabak) and jailed just like any Palestinian terrorist. This is how a modern state should operate.
John,
Do you actually believe what you just said? Controlled and supervised by the state? I will remember that one if the Israeli government ever attempts to pull out of the West Bank ...
U know Switzerland is a nice small peaceful country whose neighbors are: Germany and France. I think we should be thiking in that direction :)
Because war, for the sake of war is useless.
Our economy mainly depends on tourism and services. If we want a country we should have PEACE and have the NATO and UN as a protection. Because it is too late for any military adventure, ambition or policy. So am sorry, but let us not cry helpless in front of cameras or claim being Che Guevaras and kill thousands, in a time when people are going to the moon for fun and visiting mars to satisfy their ego.
The Lebanese have helped build the Nasa. Let us stop whining and pretend this country is doomed. We just have to put the right concessions in the right direction, which is a country protected by a league of other countries more powerful than our beloved neighbors.
Bob i assume by THEM you mean me, of course i posted the letter and i apologize it turned out to be a fake. i will delete the post. hilal and i were emailing back and forth trying to check the authenticity of the letter as he raised the concern. it is my responsibility and again sorry for the error.
i would also like to ask you guys to please keep it civil.. people's measurements and accusing us of 'akel hawa' is not worthy of any of you.
maldoror,
u are ignoring that there is a daily conflict in palestine. This is not europe.
NATO seems interesting :)))
As for the letter, I assure on what Mirvat said regarding "emailing back and forth trying to check the authenticity of the letter".
Maldoror,
Another thing to add about switzerland whose defensive strategy seems not so clear for you is Fawwaz traboulsi aritcle in assafir here.
Hilal,
Why do you always feel like you should be against everyone and everything to prove a point?
Mirvat,
It is ok, everybody commits mistakes, it is not a huge problem. You should have guessed it is not Ziad Rahbani from the style and the language used. I couldn't read it till the end. Once again, it is no great sin if you were led into error.
Hilal,
With all due respect to Mr. Fawwaz Traboulsi's article, but it seems people are only writing these days to defend HA's weapons.
Ideologically, I have nothing against HA.
But Logically, one should be aware that all weapons and "dissuasive power" should be in the hands of the STATE. Am not saying it should happen tomorrow, because right now HA is more organised than the STATE, but this is a huge step that should be made in the future, because any illusions concerning the HA blending into the army should be banished. It is highly improbable. We could use their expertise in some fields, but there is no doubt that an Iranian "sponsored" militarised network in Lebanon is a huge risk to the prospect of building a sovereign STATE in the future. Mark my words: in the future. :)
maldoror,
Correct me if I am wrong.
u consider some sarcasm in my comment is "against everything and every one" to prove my point.
Come on maldoror, u have a nice sarcastic flavour in you comments, why make it exclusive? :)
moreover, You feel so much about what other feel :D
If u could elaborate i would be more than grateful.
What i wanted to point in the article is the meaning of defensive strategy and some facts about switzerland. you wanted to ignore that, well this is your choice.
I'm still waiting ur feed back about NATO. History of NATO,doesn't look so good, no?
as for:
"it seems people are only writing these days to defend HA's weapons."
I think u r not following khaleejeh and egyptian newspapers, elaph, albald, almustaqbal, some of annahar, alliwa2, lbci ,future tv.....
So i guess it's a bit balanced.
1- I need to ask something, who said you cant sit on the table & negotiate peace while you keep your weapons. I assure you the Israeli’s are not disarming their army before any peace negotiations. The question here is why don’t we just sit or through a 3rd party discuss this so called peace with Israel & see what they are offering
2- regarding HA Weapons, lets agree on one thing, Nucliar weapons do protect the US from a neoclur war, still when the war comes (with China lets say or Koria), half of the satates would be wiped out, a weapon protects not by stopping another weapon, a weapons purpose is to make the enemy think twice before going to war & this is what HA weapons are doing now to us in lebanon since the Israeli's understood the damage it can cost. now if you should disarm HA because there weapons didn’t protect, then i guess the Isreali army should leave their weapons & go home since they didn’t stop missiles from reaching Haifa???
3- I agree Hizbullah should be disarmed, but we have to consider 2 scenarios: A- What if they refuse
B- What if they accept. in scenario A, well we should be able to force them, how? we don’t have an army, we don’t buy weapons for this army so how do you intend to force them? By phone politics, or by inviting the EU & the US and repeating the Iraqi Scenario. in Option B, if HA accepts, then we have to answer to those in the south & tell them who will protect them from Israel? we have been hearing politicians asking HA to guarantee for the Lebanese people that its weapons will not be used against them, and in this case it was never used against a Lebanese, now how about those people in the south, that Israel has used its weapons against them 10s of times. i guess the problem is not HA weapons, the problem is the Army without any
The human product
Wrong, Hezbollah used its weapons on the Lebanese, check your history...
Hezbollah weapons did not deter Israel and will not do so in the future. Additionally they did not stop it from bombing us so why should we keep them in Hezbollah hands? Maybe for another round of killings in the next years
And the problem is that no one believed in the army and Hezbollah and the Syrians did their utmost to weaken it. Just check who refused to send the army to the south before 2005...
Jij
I told you before that for me the political affiliation of any author came a distant second to his article and the logic behind it.
So why do you think I will care about whoever translated an article (I checked the translation and it was accurate, not perfect but still good)
But you seem intent on sharing memri's affiliation go ahead be my guest (as if we cannot access wikipedia ourselves)
Stability in the Middle East...
hmm well I look at the Syrian Israel border I see a 30 years of stability. Now the government or the regime has nothing to do with that, and neither in egypt or Jordan. Just ask the people would you prefer to be kiled and bombed like the Lebanese or lie in peace. Then tell me what the people will say...
What else... of course hilal. Who can forget hilal
Quick note, maybe Maldoror meant people on LBF in his comment that people are defending HA.
Now Palestine, i think we as Lebanese we paid our dues concerning this cause. So for me i do not care about that, they have an elected government and they can deal with heir problems. End of story!
Now about the Palestinians in Lebanon, there is many solutions that can be reached n a comprehensive peace deal...
You asked me about my views of peace, very easy. PEACE. no more attacks on both sides, a three folds solution to the Palestinians in Lebanon (check the unofficial geneva accoords agreed upon by "unofficial" delegation from Palestine and Israel)
A multi national force to act as a buffer zone between Israel and Lebanon. of course disarming HA and maybe folding part of it under the control of the army or handing its weapons to special secret army brigades...
wow longest comment ever... i need to rest...
Hilal,
Check your comments on this post and see how many times you disagreed with people :)
Am just amazed bu your wit :) No comment :)
Alla y2awwik :)
thnx maldoror.
I don't know what's the problem with disagreeing with BOB.:)
u prove post after post and comment after comment that you can be respected.
:)
Hilal, yi leih ma 3refet, one is entitled to dazzinet disagreements, w shi 3 agreements, w 5 noss noss 3ala kil post. w 2illa min ballesh nem7eh comments! :)
Eve,
This is the last thing I expected to read from an administrator as wise as you, on this respectable blog.
Thank you!
ghareeb, it was the first thing in your case.
and you're welcome! :)
Eve,
You never cease to amaze me! :)
sorry Hilal, 2ata3tillak hadithak, khallina nerja3 lal moufid :p
Birds of a feather flock together..
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
amazing maldoror,
you don't stop showing ur high standards.
:)
Cry-baby Hilal,
You are welcome anytime, up here, on the level of my standards...it must be pretty boring to stay down there...it is so crowded in that kindergarten of yours :)
maldoror,
please tell us what do u think on palestinians ;)
Hilal,
I see you too are starting to develop "Maldororo-phobia" ;) Good!
You have ears everywhere, MOU? ;)
Anyways, now it is time for me to go to bed, I will correct your papers tomorrow and hopefully by then, you would have corrected a few "typos" ;) here in there in most of your posts.
After all, one should learn how to express himself correctly before he starts copy pasting and expressing opinions.
Nighty kiddo, it was fun.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Come on maldoror.
you didn't answer the question..
:)
tayyib bob, if you're not going to be there, do you know at least if Mona Fayad is going to cover the demo tomorrow?
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
she can add:
"Being a shiite is to attend the divine victory demo".
:)
Bob,
I agree with you that the Syrian’s did their best to keep this army broken & weak, but that is no excuse that Lebanon Still doesn’t have a strong army. We have been hearing for over a year & a half now about The Free Lebanon, why isn’t the government buying any weapons, at least defense ones.
im not defending Hezbollah, im saying the only way to solve this is by having a real army & that should be our focus because Lebanon cannot only depend on the international community, with all respect, they have never been to anyone’s side but their owns & Israel’s.
Now regarding HA weapons, I think after following up Haarets & Ynet, yes they did change the equation and Israel has to re evaluate before they consider anytime soon invading Lebanon. Im not talking about HA propaganda, im talking about the Israeli Army announcements. Man they really got kicked in the south & they weren’t expecting it, you can see it all over the Israeli Newspapers and that is a fact they aren’t denying, why would we
Now regarding HA using your weapons against Lebanese, I guess you are highlighting the HA/Amal war, because HA fought only against Amal, PLO & Israel. Remember that this was an internal conflict since HA came from Amal in the 1st place & this is something normal (not saying its right) that happens in all political parties.
Still, HA never used their weapons against any Lebanese.
I would like to have your honest opinion regarding the government role & the army issue
product
the goverment mad a lot of mistakes, but u need to know that HA is also in hte goverment and desicion are made with the agreement of HA and Amal. So the goverment made mistakes and so did 14th of march... I am not like the aounist or HA who pretend that their leaders have never done a mistake...
Internal or external HA attacked Amal and many were killed including lebanese civilians. So i am sorry but u cannot say HA never attacked lebanese civilians...
michael kors handbags
ferragamo belt
air jordan
michael kors outlet
michael jordan shoes
longchamp bags
kobe sneakers
jordan retro
nike air zoom
nike roshe uk
Post a Comment
<< Home