What's on your mind?
General interest discussions, not necessarily related to depletion.
by rwwff » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 02:18:04
Shoot, got me to post in here again. Very bad for my disposition....
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Miki', 'T')hat's irrelevant. They still won *this* war. Hisballah was not disarmed; there's no effective buffer zone protecting Israel. Those were their aims---by your own admission. Thus, they lost.
Have to disagree with you a bit.
Hezzb's military capacity was cut in half; whether by expediture or destruction. Strategically good for Israel either way.
There is now a VERY effective buffer zone protecting Israel; a more effective one than Israel ever could have put together themselves. Not as sexy, of course, and certainly embarrassing, but what works, works.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')oreover, we don't need another war. All we wanted in the first place was to get the prisoners back, to push Israel to negotiate about Shebaa Farms, and to keep Israel out of our territory for good. The UN resolution that Israel granted us covers all that.
"the prisoners" is notably vague. Numbers, names?
I think you've lost Sheeba Farms for good, but who knows.
Israel is kept out of Lebanon, Lebanese are kept out of Israel. Thats good for everyone I think.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')egligible is a relative term, isn't it? Do you know how much money they lost by having Haifa frozen for 1 month, and in exchange of no political aims?
Negligible; we'll bail'em out with the next 'loan' package if they have any serious trouble. Getting that buffer zone established is probably worth the cash all by itself though.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')lso, their political face has been damaged greatly both among their people and among the other governments of the world.
Political face is something that impotent Arabs care about.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'B')y the end of the war, both Israel and the US had to put up with a resolution that contradicted every single thing that they wanted to achieve.
Listen less. Read more. Observe more.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'w')ar you had France and the Arabs against Israel and the US was unable and probably unwilling to continue supporting Israel's failures.
I do wonder if this might indicate some US desire to get a Likud government in place in time for a strike on Iran. ??? Interesting possibility.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'w')orld who is the real aggressor here. And if they don't atack Israel and the international forces are here, how is the IDF going to disarm Hisballah?
They don't really need to. They just need to make each rocket an expensive, hard to replace rocket. Without thousands of long range rockets, Hezzb isn't a strategic threat, and plans for an attack on Iran can continue unhindered.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')nd if Hisballah doesn't atack them first, how will the IDF create a new excuse to atack Hisballah in the future when the international forces are observing their every move in Lebanon?
by Miki » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 05:53:41
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rwwff', 'S')hoot, got me to post in here again. Very bad for my disposition....
It's not my fault if you're that interestd in the topic or if you hate to admit it when you're wrong
.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ezzb's military capacity was cut in half; whether by expediture or destruction. Strategically good for Israel either way.
There is now a VERY effective buffer zone protecting Israel; a more effective one than Israel ever could have put together themselves. Not as sexy, of course, and certainly embarrassing, but what works, works.
1-I'd still like to see the news report where Hizballah admits they lost half of their military capacity, and particularly the part where they say that they lost their expensive long range rockets. Throughout the war they said repeatedly that they had not lost much. Moreover, by the end of the war they were still firing rockets all the way from Baalbek and the Syrian border.
2-If the UN forces were such an effective buffer zone for Israel, the US and Israel wouldn't have pushed so much to have Israel have their own buffer zone. The original UN resolution that the US itself proposed included wording that allowed Israel to stay in Lebanon as long as necessary. That resolution was only changed because all the Arab states (and France) pressured the US into changing the wording. And both the US and Israel were forced to put up with it because Israel had failed in all its military operations.
3-How long do you think the international forces would stay here if the war was to start again? And how is that for a buffer zone?
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '"')the prisoners" is notably vague. Numbers, names?
I think you've lost Sheeba Farms for good, but who knows.
Israel is kept out of Lebanon, Lebanese are kept out of Israel. Thats good for everyone I think.
How would anyone know the numbers and the names when they are just starting to negotiate? I'll get you a news article once there is one. In the meantime, aren't you pondering why the two prisoners are still here over 2 weeks after the ceasefire? And why Israel is barely complaining about it? Food for thought.
Shebaa Farms is more a matter of getting the Syrians to sign a paper than a matter of arguing with Israel. Hizballah knows that very well. Until Syria signs, Israel has an excuse to stay there. The Syrian government is pretty bastard too. We'll see.
I agree that the international forces can protect both sides of the border. As I said, we're happy to keep Israel out of here for good. Let's hope the Israelis respect the ceasefire and the international forces.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')egligible; we'll bail'em out with the next 'loan' package if they have any serious trouble. Getting that buffer zone established is probably worth the cash all by itself though.
by mekrob » Tue 29 Aug 2006, 12:08:46
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')s Doly smartly pointed out, their intelligence on Hisballah is quite poor. Otherwise, how do you explain their ineffective campaign in which they atacked by air to destroy armament hidden in underground bunkers, they were shocked by the fact that Hisballah's had anti-tank weapons that could destroy the most secure tanks that the world ever saw, they had one war ship hit on the first day of the war, and---most importantly--they were ridiculed on the ground, where their soldiers were repeatedly ambushed and whatever land they occupied was a land that Hisballah recovered the next few days?
The really scaring part for the IDF will come when Hizbullah gains some sense and invests in some Stinger and such anti-aircraft missiles. Then the one thing the Israelis have (air power) will diminish (although it can't be wiped out completely). Add that with their intensity on the ground war, and Israel would/will have a very hard time taking the Litani.
Also, if Hizbullah ever gains knowledge of the IDF airbases (assuming they don't now), they can easily wreck some havoc on IDF air.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'O')h please. Why have all the Israeli authorities been pulling their hair for the last two weeks then? After all, they achieved their main goal which was the buffer zone, right? Do you think they would be all crazy just because they did not achieve their aim militarily? They did not achieve anything.
Sorry to ask, but how far up is the buffer zone? Does it go up to the Litani?
I want to put out the fires of Hell, and burn down the rewards of Paradise. They block the way to God. I do not want to worship from fear of punishment or for the promise of reward, but simply for the love of God. - Rabia
