TM Connect


Use "My TM" for log in & register.

Taylor Marsh has been writing on line since 1996, with the archives provided here a representation of that work.

Tag Archives | Lebanon

Dead Peacekeepers

Do not miss Steve Clemons' post on National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinksi. I've had the pleasure of visiting Clemons' digs in D.C., where important work is done. Here's Steve's headline: Brezinski: Israel's Actions in Lebanon Essentially Amount to “the Killing of Hostages”. You can find remarks here. Read the interview.

You know, surprises sometimes blow up in your face.

There's no excuse for this, none whatsoever. That is, the killing of U.N. personnel.

Just read the article below, then get a load of the headline. It illustrates the lack of truth and honesty in this debate.


Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other key Mideast players gathered
in Rome for a meeting Wednesday to discuss proposals for ending the fighting
that has claimed more than 400 lives. Key issues were how to disarm Hezbollah
and assemble an international peacekeeping force to enforce the peace along
the Israel-Lebanon frontier.

U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan said the strike on a clearly marked U.N.
border outpost was “apparently deliberate” and demanded Israel investigate.
A bomb dropped by an Israel warplane scored a direct hit on the post in the
town of Khiyam, near the eastern sector of the border, U.N. officials said.

Annan said two observers were killed with two more feared dead. Later, a
U.N. official confirmed that a third body had been recovered. The official
spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to publicly
discuss the issue.

One of the dead was identified as Chinese U.N. observer Du Zhaoyu, China's
official Xinhua News Agency reported. The other three were from Austria, Canada
and Finland but it wasn't clear which two were confirmed killed, U.N. and
Lebanese military officials said. …

Israel
widens control of southern Lebanon

Given the reality and carnage, that AP headline is surreal

Since when does the killing of U.N. officials designate a widening of “control”
over the country you're currently leveling?

I sincerely want to be a friend to Israel, but they're making it impossible.

Then I started going through some of my emails to come upon one quoting Billmon's
latest, delivered by reader JH. Perfect. I'll quote it. It's easier.


The last time the Israelis and Hizbullah went at it in a major way, in 1996,
the IDF accidentally (I think) lobbed an artillery shell into a U.N. compound,
killing 102 Lebanese civilian refugees. It brought the whole operation to
a crashing halt — just as the 1982 massacres at the Sabra and Shatila refugee
camps in Beirut brought the curtain down on Ariel Sharon's big production.

Billmon

The last thing Israel wants to do is to occupy southern Lebanon. The last time they were there the Lebanese threw them out and Hezbollah was born. So I'd make
sure I wasn't wiping out peacekeepers and neutral parties. Frankly, Israel's
current behavior is more like giving the world the finger.

There's only one reason Israel thinks she can get away with what's happening, which includes ignoring the world crescendo over
the carnage. It's the man currently residing at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. He
calls himself a Christian, but must have missed Jesus's message about peace.

Oh, and by the way, tempers are still boiling in Turkey.

Oh, and p.s., T.Rex isn't too happy, either.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Who’s for a Cease Fire?



Oh, and by the way, nobody wants to send troops.

Who's shocked? Question is what do we call the nations who will be drafted?
They're not a coalition of the willing. They won't even be a coalition of the
coerced. I think we've got only one reality left, thanks to Bush.

Ladies and gentlemen, I bring you the coalition of the dragged kicking and
screaming. Victims to be announced at a later date.


The United States has ruled out its soldiers participating, NATO says it
is overstretched, Britain feels its troops are overcommitted and Germany says
it is willing to participate only if Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia which
it would police, agrees to it, a highly unlikely development.

“All the politicians are saying, ‘Great, great’ to the
idea of a force, but no one is saying whose soldiers will be on the ground,”
said one senior European official. “Everyone will volunteer to be in
charge of the logistics in Cyprus.”

There has been strong verbal support for such a force in public, but also
private concerns that soldiers would be seen as allied to Israel and would
have to fight Hezbollah guerrillas who do not want foreigners, let alone the
Lebanese Army, coming between themselves and the Israelis.

There is also the burden of history. France — which has called the
idea of a force premature — and the United States are haunted by their
last participation in a multinational force in Lebanon after the Israeli invasion
in 1982, when they became belligerents in the Lebanese civil war and tangled
fatally with Hezbollah. …

(snip)

For the moment, at least, Israel is laying out an ambitious, if perhaps unrealistic,
view of what the force would do. Israel wants it to keep Hezbollah away from
the border, allow the Lebanese government and army to take control over all
of its territory, and monitor Lebanon’s borders to ensure that Hezbollah
is not resupplied with weapons.

(snip)

The Europeans, by contrast, including Britain, France and Germany, envision
a much less robust international buffer force, one that would follow a cease-fire
and operate with the consent of the Lebanese government to support the deployment
of its army in southern Lebanon. …

Nations
Reluctant to Commit Troops to Lebanon

Yeah, this will work. Britain said it will not go; America can't (see Iraq).

Dr. Rice, time for that birthing
epidural
.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Condi: NO CEASE FIRE

Israel stopped the bombing for Condi. I'm touched.

Last night, Anderson Cooper frankly admitted that Hezbollah had ambulances
waiting for the right moment for the cameras, with Nic
Robertson
admitting Hezbollah had control
over his piece, too.

Welcome to war in the digital, pr age. State sponsored, freedom fighters, or terrorist, image
is all and it's crafted and timed, too.



But there's no doubt about it. They had control of the situation. They designated
the places that we went to, and we certainly didn't have time to go into the
houses or lift up the rubble to see what was underneath.

So what we did see today in a similar excursion, and Hezbollah is now running
a number of these every day, taking journalists into this area. They realize
that this is a good way for them to get their message out, taking journalists
on a regular basis. This particular press officer came across his press office
today, what was left of it in the rubble. He pointed out business cards that
he said were from his office that was a Hezbollah press office in that area.

So there's no doubt that the bombs there are hitting Hezbollah facilities.
But from what we can see, there appear to be a lot of civilian damage, a lot
of civilian properties. But again, as you say, we didn't have enough time
to go in, root through those houses, see if perhaps there was somebody there
who was, you know, taxi driver there… (CNN)

Condi came, she did her photo ops, and she never once removed her sunglasses
from atop of her head.

That's Bush diplomacy for you. Been there. Done nothing. What's next?

If you want to hear what's happened to our diplomatic status under Bush, just
listen to Senator
Tom Harkin
. As for our “honest broker status,” what Condi did
by making a surprise trip to Beirut was give the appearance of diplomacy,
without offering up the goods.

Nobody was terribly impressed with what Rice had to offer. Her appearance in
Beirut was all show, which fooled no one. Nice try, take my Katyusha, please.

Is it any wonder that the wingnuts are upset that John Kerry said if he were
president
we wouldn't be in this mess? Besides being true, it's embarrassing
for the president's WWIII bring it on crowd.

Meanwhile, John
Bolton
continues to diss the only man Hezbollah trusts. And Bolton is going
to help us out of this mess? Only if WWIII is your goal. If it is, then Bolton's
your man.

Lebanon's Nabi Berri, the speaker of the Lebanese
parliament, thought Rice's proposal a joke. Berri used to compete with Hezbollah,
as well as be very close to Syria, but is now their main guy in the government. If you don't get Berri to listen to you, Hezbollah is out
of reach.


Lebanon's parliament speaker, Hizbullah's de facto negotiator, rejected proposals
brought by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Monday, insisting a cease-fire
must precede any talks about resolving Hizbullah's presence in the south,
an official close to the speaker said.

Rice's talks with Prime Minister Fuad Saniora also appeared to have been
tense. Saniora told Rice that Israel's bombardment was taking his country
“backwards 50 years” and also called for a “swift cease-fire,”
the prime minister's office said.

Lebanese
parliament speaker rejects Rice proposals

As was said on the News Hour last night on PBS, “Hezbollah is much more
than a terrorist organization.” They deliver a lot to the Lebanese people:
religiously, empowerment, as well as socially and politically. There are thugs
in their midst, but the Lebanese people respect their leader, Nasralla.

Bush and Bolton want to diminish Hezbollah's role, which only makes navigating
the situation worse. Bush/Bolton don't care, because they don't want solutions.
They want war. Newt made it clear: WWWIII or bust, baby. That's the Republican
line. It feeds their bottom line.

In the midst of it you have 700,000 Lebanese homeless. You have $150 million
needed to again rebuild Lebanon.

Forgive me, but I'm sick of paying other country's debts because of the conservatives'
unending dreams of war. Enough.

Hey, but Condi shows up to pretend she's offering something to the Lebanese,
while backing more bombing by the Israelis; who have a right to go after Hezbollah,
but not at the expense of the entire civilian population of Lebanon.

Nobody was fooled by Condi's photo op in Beirut.

But even in the midst of it, there are stories that stick out. An American
family trying to get out of Lebanon got some help, but not from Bush, Bolton
or Condi. It came from two Democratic senators from New Jersey.


D. HAIDAR: Can I just say one thing, please.

Throughout all of this, we had Senator Menendez, Senator Lautenberg,
Senator (INAUDIBLE), they all worked with us so, so hard to help us get our
children evacuated from the area they were. They worked with us since 6:00
a.m. …

CNN
transcript

If Bush, Bolton and Condi wanted to they could end the fighting right now.
But they don't, so they aren't, while civilians continue to die. That's not
leadership. But it's what Republicans do best: war.

Where is the humanity? The Christianity.

If you want to know how we got where we are today, read on. It's fascinating.


… Armies are criticized because the excess of power that they accumulate
enables them to dictate steps of political significance during a time of crisis.
In these situations, military contingency plans become the principal alternative
available to the politicians, which is why they tend to accept the army's
viewpoint. But this time we have before us a particularly extreme case. Not
only was the military plan the only one, but the political leadership voluntarily
relinquished its duty to discuss it thoroughly. This places political thinking,
to which military thinking is supposed to be subordinate, in a particularly
inferior situation.

This inferiority stems, paradoxically, from the “civilian” label
of the present leadership. The term “civilian” does not relate in
this case only to the biography of the leaders, but to their political agenda
as well – i.e., the convergence plan. A civilian leadership often tends to
increase the army's freedom of operation, particularly when it operates in
a cultural-political environment in which half of the voters favor the use
of force to solve political problems. Under these circumstances, the civilian
leadership needs the army as a political instrument for the purpose of implementing
the civil agenda. After all, the “disengagement” plan was implemented
thanks to the support of the army, and the same will be true of the convergence
plan in the future. …

A voluntary
'putsch'

We haven't
learned a thing
since Vietnam.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Bush Flip Flops: Condi Arrives in Lebanon

I feel so much better. Condi's in Beirut. Nothing like a photo op to make the Middle East calm down.

Bill Scher offers some interesting insight into the conflict.


On June 20, the Associated
Press
reported that “Hamas is drawing close to a compromise on a
document that would implicitly recognize Israel” for the first time.
This political effort was spearheaded by Palestinian Authority Prime Minister
Ismail Haniyeh, a pragmatist. But Hamas' militant wing, led by politburo chief
Khaled Meshal from exile in Syria, did not approve.

As a Syrian political analyst reported in last Saturday's Asia
Times
, Haniyeh was reaching out to Israel because he “wants to run
a country” and seeks “to prove that he was not in power to combat
Israel but to improve the livelihood of the Palestinians.” Meshal, however,
“leads the anti-pragmatism fold in Hamas that still wants to destroy
the Jewish state.”

So five days after the AP report, an Israeli soldier was abducted in an operation
believed to have been directed by Meshal. The Jewish
Week
reported that the kidnapping had “caught Haniyeh by surprise,”
and that the prime minister attempted to order the soldier's release, but
was “ignored” by those from his party's militant wing involved in
the operation.

How did Israel react? It retaliated with military force. Just what Meshal
and the militants wanted. …

Bill
Scher

Reading the rest of Scher's post, you also find this statement from him: Truly
befuddling is why the Bush administration did not use its leverage with the
Israeli government to shore up Hamas pragmatists.

Bill knows his stuff and is a pragmatic man. He truly believes heads of state
should have deep thought processes and understand the complexities of the Middle
East.

Unfortunately, we have George W. Bush in office, a man who does not do nuance,
so I don't find it “befuddling” at all that Bush is ignoring the pragmatists
who want peace. Our president long ago proved he is not a man of peace; nor
is he a man of deep thinking. If he were we wouldn't be in this mess.

Oh, and we wouldn't have Condoleezza Rice showing up doing photo op, light
switch diplomacy a week late. As one of my dearest friends wrote me this morning:



(we) just noticed that ms. condi rice wore her SUNGLASSES ON HER HEAD during
her weekend meetings in lebanon.

that's really poor form. did she forget where her plane landed?

Exactly.

Now, evidently understanding how obtuse the Administration has been on Israel's
escalation, we get this today. Light switch diplomacy has turned into a
flip flopping foreign policy, because they don't know what they're doing. Again, yes, Israel has every right to defend herself
against Hezbollah, but Olmert's been baited into oblivion, with world opinion against Israel's overreaction.


Today, that message took on a notably different focus, one of concern for
the future of Lebanon. Short-term, the Bush Administration is worried about
a growing humanitarian crisis. Long-term, it fears that unchecked damage done
to Lebanon could create a failed state that would pose even more of a threat
to Israel.

That was the emphasis of secretary of state Condoleezza Rice's surprise stop
in Beirut today, as she sought to make a dramatic show of support for Lebanese
leaders staggering under the Israeli bombardment and siege. Rice had planned
to fly to Jerusalem, but she diverted to Cyprus at about noon local time,
boarded a Chinook helicopter manned by the U.S. Marine Expeditionary Unit
24, the same unit that was the target of the Marine barracks bombing in 1983.
Rice's chopper, armed with tripod-mounted machine guns, landed on U.S. embassy
grounds in Beirut at about 1 p.m. local time. She was driven in an armored
SUV to the office of Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora. Afterwards, another
fast, bumpy ride took her to the home of the speaker of the parliament, Nabih
Berri, a Shia leader. Outside Berri's residential office, Rice said, “I'm
deeply concerned about the Lebanese people and what they are enduring. I'm
concerned about the humanitarian situation. President Bush wanted me to make
this the first stop.”

Rice's appearance here in Beirut was aimed as much to send a signal to Israel
as one to Lebanon. Although Rice has never wavered from the Administration's
position that the U.S. supports Israel's right to defend itself, her rhetoric
has taken on a cooler edge as Israel has continued to bombard Lebanon's infrastructure
and has blockaded land and sea routes into the country. …

The
Message Behind Rice's Surprise Visit to Beirut

Bush is backtracking as fast as he can.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Survivor Lebanon

By on 21 July 2006


This destruction panorama of Lebanon is stunning.

In response, Condi
rules out a cease-fire
. I say, send these sadists to the front.

Larry Johnson weighs in.


Condi Rice still holds the crazy belief that Lebanon's Army, which is 50%
Shia, will magically deploy and confront Hezbollah. She also deluded herself
into believing that the radical groups, like Hezbollah and the insurgents
in Iraq, are stirring up trouble because the US mission of speading democracy
is actually working. Maybe Condi also believes that the Tooth Fairy passes
out coins for lost teeth, but believing in fantasies does not make fantasies
come true.

So far Condi has ruled out talking with Hezbollah about any issue. They are
a terrorist organization and we don't talk to terrorists. Following our lead,
Israel is will rebuff any UN entreaty to negotiate a ceasefire. The table
is set for the next evolution of bloodshed.

(snip)

Although Hezbollah uses terrorism as a tactic, it is not primarily a terrorist
organization. It has evolved over the years into a genuine political movement
and conventional military force. This is a reality we can ignore at our peril.
If we choose to view Hezbollah strictly as a terrorist threat then we convince
ourselves that we have only one option–fight. But understand this–if we
fight Hezbollah we will unleash a new war front that we are not prepared to
pursue. At a minimum we can expect to face the fury of Shia militias attacking
our troops and personnel in Iraq.

There are some other options. …

The
Rut Becomes a Grave
, by Larry Johnson

Meanwhile, Israel is about to invade southern Lebanon to eviscerate Hezbollah's
stronghold on their border. I bet they're dreading this one. Memories of 1982
have to come flooding back. The last thing Israel wants is to occupy Lebanon.
But once you send ground forces in things have a way of escalating.

But let me get this straight. Israel's planning a ground invasion of southern
Lebanon, and they're telegraphing it to the whole world via satellite TV. Israeli
security is renowned, so why are they showing us the ground build up? Ho-boy,
here we go.

Via Juan Cole:


Thousands of Lebanese were trying to flee the south after Israeli warplanes
dropped leaflets warning people to leave, stirring fears that an Israeli ground
invasion was imminent. But hundreds of thousands more remain stranded in villages
and towns across the south, unable to leave their homes because of the intensity
of the sustained Israeli bombing campaign. United Nations and Lebanese officials
warned of an impending humanitarian disaster unless food and medical supplies
are allowed to reach the stricken area and called on Israel to establish a
“humanitarian corridor” to allow aid to get through.

Humanitarian
toll hits southern Lebanon as violence continues

From Lebanon…


Dozens of buildings were demolished in Haret Hreik and Bir al-Abed in the
southern suburbs, where 200,000 people formerly resided. Lebanon
Daily Star

If you haven't seen it, be sure to check out Marc Lynch's Abu
Aardvark
, which has an analysis of some of the issues I addressed regarding
Lebanon
.

Meanwhile, I wonder what our Groper in Chief will be doing this weekend? Nice,
relaxing time at Camp David, I suppose. Pass the butta.

Was it Bush's idea to drop leaflets
on Lebanon?
You never know, because they're the ones who originally held
Americans stuck in Lebanon hostage to a promissory note in the middle of a war
zone.

It's been a tough week all 'round. I don't know about you, but I need a massage.

graphic compliments of Bob Geiger.

Read full story · Comments are closed

While Lebanon Burns

By on 20 July 2006

cross-posted at firedoglake



I'd like to get Joe Lieberman's opinion on the Middle East escalation going on right now. I bet he'd back Bush all the way.

First we had Bush's lackluster Katrina response, Lebanon-style, which held Americans hostage to a promissory note in a war zone. MSNBC just talked about people driving to the Syrian border to get out because they're afraid of what tomorrow will bring. Still, we've got continuing hands off diplomacy. I guess we can just be thankful that Condi wasn't caught shoe shopping. What will it take for the president to engage? Waiting until more children are killed and Lebanese civilians die is not the answer.

President Bush is allowing the current Middle East escalation to continue, because he's hoping Israeli Prime Minister Olmert can take out Hezbollah in a week. Outsourcing American foreign policy isn't the answer. Olmert has a duty to defend Israel against Hezbollah, but Olmert has overreacted badly and miscalculated horribly by pummeling the Lebanese government's infrastructure, including water purification plants, electrical grids, as well as the airport, which is why we leased a cruise ship. The collective punishment of Lebanon is endangering this fledgling government, which has been given absolutely no backing by Bush except his ad nauseam speeches about “democracy.” It would have been nice to actually put efforts behind Resolution 1559 during all these months, instead of expecting Lebanon's Siniora to do it on his own, with Hezbollah breathing down his neck. Meanwhile, because of Bush's light switch diplomacy, which has blown a fuse, things get ever more dangerous in Iraq.

For those of you keeping score, here's the breakdown, as far as I can tell. Hezbollah is Shia (Shiite), with support and backing from Iraq, Syria and the Iraqi government sitting inside the Green Zone. Hamas is Sunni, with the support of Saudi Arabia, Jordan, the Palestinians, Syria (playing all sides), Iraq insurgents and Egypt. That's simplistic, but you won't hear it explained on cable, with the nitwits and wingnuts cackling about how Arab leaders are condemning Hezbollah. Well, no kidding, because most of them doing the condemning are Sunnis. The Sunni – Shia showdown could one day be the Israeli – Palestinian conflict on steroids, if we're not careful. The situation is getting more complicated by the minute.

One of Saudi Arabia's leading Wahhabi sheiks, Abdullah bin Jabreen has issued a strongly worded religious edict, or fatwa, declaring it unlawful to support, join or pray for Hezbollah, the Shiite militias lobbing missiles into northern Israel.

The day after Hezbollah abducted two Israeli soldiers on July 12, Sheik Hamid al-Ali issued an informal statement titled “The Sharia position on what is going on.” In it, the Kuwaiti based cleric condemned the imperial ambitions of Iran regarding Hezbollah's cross border raid.

The surprising move demonstrates that Sunni Muslim fundamentalists in the Middle East are deeply divided over whether Moslems should support Hezbollah, Iran's Shiite proxies in the war raging in Lebanon.

Leading Saudi Sheik Pronounces Fatwa Against Hezbollah

The real problem right now is that America has no credibility in the Middle East. George W. Bush isn't trusted, because America is no longer seen as an honest broker. Continue Reading →

Read full story · Comments are closed

What About the Lebanese Christians?

By on 19 July 2006

What About the Lebanese Christians? –updated–

Today, 10,000
Arab-Americans united
in Dearborn, Michigan in support of the Lebanese. One Arab-American blog has the action, but beware, because the pictures of dead children are gruesome.

But President George W. Bush is not sending Secretary Rice to the Middle East
until next week. Why?

There's only one reason and it's ugly. Bush is allowing Israel to pound CIVILIAN
structures, endangering the already fragile Siniora government in Lebanon, because
he thinks Hezbollah will be scared away. Not a chance.

Meanwhile, the Republican Party has launched an all out pr offensive.

I'd like to remind people that there are Christians
in the line of fire, not just militant Islamists and Muslims, but American, Arab *and Lebanese Christians. Does Bush have a clue? Here's just one article on The
Forgotten Christians of Lebanon.

The number of innocent people in the line of fire hasn't inspired Bush into
action. How many times do I have to say it: Israel's targeting of government
and civilian structures is only going to strengthen Hezbollah among the people.
What is he thinking?

As for the Lebanese Christians,
many of whom are Catholics, they've become fodder for the conservatives, who
have sold out American interests and outsourced our foreign policy to Israel,
who is a good ally, but who is using our silence to escalate this war. And I know I'm repeating myself, but remember Iraq? It's bad, people, and Olmert doesn't care. Perhaps that's because he knows Bush will do nothing.

Where is the American press? Where is the leadership in the Senate?

Why aren't America's interest placed first? Ian's post, The Sunset of the Pax Americana, is a must read.

On that note, there are yet more humiliating stories about Bush's
Katrina-style response
to the Lebanese crisis, with more here.
I talked about the dangers of the cruise
ship – navy destroyer escort
earlier. Today, it's full out damage control
by the Bush administration.

Again I say, Israel has every right to go after Hezbollah, but the indiscriminate
bombing and destruction of the Lebanese governmental infrastructure is making
a mockery out of the Jewish cause. That President Bush is supporting these efforts
through inaction, or worse, outright support through turning away, is inexcusable.

America is the only hope the region has, so we must regain our honest broker status.

What's happening to Lebanese Christians is being lost in the mix.


In English and in Arabic, shedding tears and sweat, Washington's Lebanese
Catholics prayed yesterday for peace in their homeland, filling a new white
church at noon on a sweltering workday.

Catholics are the largest Christian community in Lebanon, and the special
Mass at Our Lady of Lebanon Maronite Church was celebrated by Cardinal Nasrallah
P. Sfeir, considered one of the most influential leaders of the country's
Christians. Nasrallah was in the United States this month when the violence
began and spent his last day — yesterday — speaking about the holy nature
of peacemaking.

(snip)

Also yesterday, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops urged in a statement
for the United States to “exert greater leadership” to work toward
a cease-fire, to restrain Israel and to move quickly into negotiations between
all the parties.

The statement, written by Bishop Thomas G. Wenski, chairman of the conference's
Committee on International Policy, said that although current fighting may
have been provoked by “extreme armed factions” of Hamas and Hezbollah,
Israel's military response has been disproportionate and sometimes indiscriminate.

“Our Conference appeals to all leaders in the region and to the leaders
of our nation to make it clear that violence, from whatever side, for whatever
purpose, cannot bring a lasting or just peace in the Land we call Holy,”
the statement said.

Lebanese
Cardinal Leads Peace Service

*UPDATE (7.25.06): I need to clarify something written above, where the * appears, beyond the italicized portion, which I've add. But rather than offer my own explanation, I'm going to let a reader Ross talk about it, even though my assessment isn't quite the same as his. However, I hope another viewpoint, one much more personal, is beneficial here.


Hi, I must say you have a great site. I'd just like you to know that the Lebanese Christians cannot be refered to as “arab christians” because they do not have arab bloodlines at all. By calling them “Arab” you are denying their heritage which has been suppressed by the Arabists and Islamists for hundreds of years. The fact is that Lebanon wasn't an Arab country before the Arab conquest. The Christians are the last decendents of the Phoenicians. Arabs could never enter into their community because of islamic law. The Christians could however enter the Muslim Community. This is why the Muslim communities in Lebanon may have some non-arabs but the Christian community is totally Arab free. Please Write an article of something about this because I feel like the Lebanese Christians deserve to have their Identities acknowledged and not be thrown in one group with the people who stole their land. Thanx for your time. Once again wonderful site. Keep up the good work. – Ross

<.p>

Read full story · Comments are closed

U.S. Ships at Hell’s Gate

By on 18 July 2006

–updated below–

Today during the press briefing, Tony Snow said he preferred to “kick
the can” down the road on the whole Israeli – Hezbollah thing. We now have the
definitive Bush strategy for the Middle East. As for when Condi will show up,
well, a week or so, you know, no hurry.

As I wrote a few days ago, the USS Iwo Jima (pictured here) is on its way from maneuvers in
the Red Sea to the Mediterranean. Now we find out that it's not just one ship,
but also the USS Gonzalez. I'm feeling worse by the minute. A navy destroyer
escort for a great big boat filled with juicy targets?

When I heard this news yesterday a cold chill ran down my spine. Here's
the upshot
: The Orient Queen, a commercial ship hired by the government,
will sail into a Beirut port Tuesday escorted by the destroyer USS Gonzales
and possibly the USS Iwo Jima. The cruise ship will try to rescue the estimated
5,000 citizens who are so far wanting to leave.

Israel is currently blockading Lebanon, though after first refusing to do so,
is now allowing evacuee ships through.

There's more. Bush is also planning or prepared to put around 2,200 U.S. Marines
“in the area” to protect Americans, if need be, but that's not the worst of it. We're watching a Middle East Katrina unfold before our eyes. Via MSNBC comes the news that the U.S. State Department can't handle the job:
McCormack said the cost of a massive evacuation was beyond U.S. resources.

So to review, we've got a war in Iraq, with Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah
going after one another, as the Lebanese government becomes weaker every day.
Meanwhile, the indiscriminate bombing by Israel has the Lebanese people moving
closer to Hezbollah, with the U.S. admitting we can't handle the situation, which the White House has chosen to kick down the road.

As for Israel's role, it's 1982 deja vu.

Hey, but that hasn't stopped the neocons from wanting more of it, war, that is. Man, these
guys are never satisfied.

Maybe that's why George Will took out after them today, and when I say went
after them I mean it. Steve Clemons has an
analysis
. But George gets brutal.


“Grotesque” was Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's characterization
of the charge that the U.S. invasion of Iraq was responsible for the current
Middle East conflagration. She is correct, up to a point. This point: Hezbollah
and Hamas were alive and toxic long before March 2003. Still, it is not perverse
to wonder whether the spectacle of America, currently learning a lesson —
one that conservatives should not have to learn on the job — about the limits
of power to subdue an unruly world, has emboldened many enemies.

(snip)

But there also is democratic movement toward extremism. America's intervention
was supposed to democratize Iraq, which, by benign infection, would transform
the region. Early on in the Iraq occupation, Rice argued that democratic institutions
do not just spring from a hospitable political culture, they also can help
create such a culture. Perhaps.

But elections have transformed Hamas into the government of the Palestinian
territories, and elections have turned Hezbollah into a significant faction
in Lebanon's parliament, from which it operates as a state within the state.
And as a possible harbinger of future horrors, last year's elections gave
the Muslim Brotherhood 19 percent of the seats in Egypt's parliament. …

(snip)

“We might consider countering this act of Iranian aggression with a
military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. Why wait? Does anyone
think a nuclear Iran can be contained? That the current regime will negotiate
in good faith? It would be easier to act sooner rather than later. Yes, there
would be repercussions — and they would be healthy ones, showing a strong
America that has rejected further appeasement.”

“Why wait?” Perhaps because the U.S. military has enough on its
plate in the deteriorating wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, which both border
Iran. And perhaps because containment, although of uncertain success, did
work against Stalin and his successors, and might be preferable to a war against
a nation much larger and more formidable than Iraq. And if Bashar Assad's
regime does not fall after the Weekly Standard's hoped-for third war, with
Iran, does the magazine hope for a fourth?

Transformation's
Toll
, by George Will

Oh, I almost forgot. Speaking of hell… (p.s. – Billmon just cross-posted this at firedoglake.)

UPDATE (2:12 p.m.): One of the things I've been thinking about lately is something that Madeleine Albright writes about in her book. Billmon lays it out today, which I excerpt below. The reality, it seems to me, is that the Israelis and the Palestinians are worn out. The other reality is that Bush has not done the work needed to make the Siniora government in Lebanon strong enough to stand up against Hezbollah. Until Lebanon's central government can push back at Hezbollah, this is all just history repeating itself, especially since Olmert took the bait. Something to keep in mind is who's on each side: Hamas is Sunni and is aligned with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Iraqi insurgents, Palestinians and Syria; Hezbollah is Shia and aligned with the Iraqi majority and Iran. That's simplistic, but gives you an idea of the players besides Israel and the U.S. Another important point is that Israel, in my opinion, is now backing off because Hezbollah's strength, rocket power and the new distance of their rockets took Olmert and Bush, let me add, by surprise. Now to billmon:



… How far such a realigment could go is anybody's guess. A friend (see above) told me today that he'd heard through the grapevine that the other King Abdullah, of Jordan, recently told Shrub he believed the Sunni-Sh'ia showdown would soon supplant the Israeli-Arab conflict as the defining grudge match in the Middle East.

UPDATE II (2:45 p.m.): Here's an important link: US Embassy Beirut Lebanon

Read full story · Comments are closed

What About the Israelis

By on 15 July 2006

UPDATE II (11:01 p.m.): Robin Wright writes: Hasan Nasrallah is exactly where he always wanted to be. And Israeli Prime Minister Olmert helped put him there. That is, long after he joined Hezbollah, after the Israelis invaded Lebanon so long ago. Lessons learned: 0.

UPDATE (10:25 p.m. PDT): Read this earlier. Cujo359 in the comments excerpted it, so I thought I would put it up front. I spoke with Larry Johnson in Las Vegas recently, after Zarqawi was captured. Today, he nails Israel with point blank precision. Feel the backlash from the bombs, baby. … by the way, my friend Ian has a very interesting post about Hezbollah I suggest you check out. Now, here's Larry…



… While most folks in the United States buy into the Hollywood storyline of poor little Israel fighting for it's survival against big, bad Muslims, the reality unfolding on our TV screens shows something else. Exodus, starring Paul Newman, is ancient history. Hamas and Hezbollah attacked military targets–kidnapping soldiers on military patrols may be an act of war and a provocation, but it is not terrorism. (And yes, Hezbollah and Hamas have carried out terrorist attacks in the past against Israeli civilians. I'm not ignoring those acts, I condemn them, but we need to understand what the dynamics are right now.) Israel is not attacking the individuals who hit their soldiers. Israel is engaged in mass punishment. …Larry Johnson

I have stated unequivocally that I think Prime Minister Olmert is not being
our ally in his overreaction to the current crisis escalating with Hezbollah.
Their rhetoric on Iran
is not only hyperbolic but calculated, I believe.

Now I want to share with you a little tidbit from just one of the American neocons.
It needs very little introduction, no explanation. It will illustrate why I've been saying,
especially in the comments, that Israel is up to no good, with a lot of
help from the AEI faction.

Many people believe that Michael Ledeen is one of the people behind the Niger documents,
though no one can conclusively prove it. No doubt, if he is, it was part of
jump starting the neocon premise of “creative destruction” through
preemption. This is the mindset of Mr. Ledeen.



… Ledeen repeatedly urged war or destabilization not just in Iraq but also
in Iran, Syria, Lebanon, even Saudi Arabia. “One can only hope that we
turn the region into a cauldron, and faster, please,” he wrote. “Faster,
please” became his mantra, repeated incessantly in his National Review
columns.

Rhapsodizing about war week after week, Ledeen became chief rhetorician for
neoconservative visionaries who wanted to remake the Middle East. “Creative
destruction is our middle name, both within our own society and abroad,”
he wrote after the attacks. “We must destroy [our enemies] to advance
our historic mission.”

The U.S. must be “imperious, ruthless, and relentless,” he argued,
until there has been “total surrender” by the Muslim world. “We
must keep our fangs bared,” he wrote, “we must remind them daily
that we Americans are in a rage, and we will not rest until we have avenged
our dead, we will not be sated until we have had the blood of every miserable
little tyrant in the Middle East, until every leader of every cell of the
terror network is dead or locked securely away, and every last drooling anti-Semitic
and anti-American mullah, imam, sheikh, and ayatollah is either singing the
praises of the United States of America, or pumping gasoline, for a dime a
gallon, on an American military base near the Arctic Circle.” …

The
War They Wanted, The Lies They Needed

That we are in real trouble in Iraq goes without saying. So to see Israel launch
such a provocative offensive is not only dangerous but puts our efforts in Iraq
in further jeopardy (if that's possible at this point). It's not what nations
do when their friends are fighting and struggling a losing battle; mind you, I know Israel had to do something about the abducted soldiers, but this?

You simply must read Steve Clemons' latest post, which offers real insight on the Israelis, I believe. To say that many of the theories I've been offering here were substantiated during reading is not wholly comforting. The snippet below will give you only
one section of his thesis, which simply must be read in its totality.


… The Israeli response to the Hezbollah incursion is exactly what Hezbollah
wanted. Adversaries rarely give each other the behaviors the other actually
desires unless there are other objectives involved.

My view is that three broad threats were evolving for Israel from the American
side of the equation. One one front, the U.S. will be attempting to settle
some kind of new equilibrium in Iraq with fewer U.S. forces and some face-saving
partial withdrawal. To accomplish this and maintain any legitimacy in the
eyes of important nations in the region — particularly among close U.S. partners
among the Gulf Cooperation Council states — America “might have”
tried to do some things that constituted a broad new bargain with the Arab
Middle East. The U.S. had even previously flirted, along with the Brits, in
trying to get Syria on a Libya like track and out of the international dog
house.

There was also pressure building to push Hamas — or at least the “governing
wing” of it — towards a posture that would move dramatically closer
to a recognition of Israel. Abbas was becoming increasingly entrepreneurial
in creating opportunities for the constructive players in Hamas to squirm
towards eventual negotiations with Israel that could possibly be packaged
in terms of “final status negotiations” on the borders and terms
of a new Palestinian state.

(snip)

The flamboyant, over the top reactions to attacks on Israel's military check points and the abduction of soldiers — which I agree Israel must respond to — seems to be part establishing “bona fides” by Olmert, but far more important, REMOVING from the table important policy options that the U.S. might have pursued. …

Some Questions
Regarding Israel's Objectives
: Is Israel Trying to Curb America's Deal-Making
in Middle East?

When I checked in on the news earlier today, multiple reports said that Olmert
was hell bent on finally taking out Hezbollah; that this was his ultimate goal. I offered it up, but something didn't
feel right about it.

The hunch that U.S. interests and Israeli interests are
colliding in the Middle East has got to be seriously considered. However, I
still think there is too much in play to know anything for sure right now. But the neocons certainly would like to aid Israel, which we'll likely see through Bill Kristol tomorrow on Fox “News.”

One thing on which Olmert didn't count and neither did Bush is that Hezbollah has proven they're now a real player. Israel needs to decide
what that means. Bush is too busy in Iraq to care right now. Olmert is using this fact to make our situation worse.

Read full story · Comments are closed

Saturday Middle East Kaboom Edition

By on 15 July 2006

–updates below–

Hey, baby, we know how you feel!

Good morning, enjoy your coffee?

According to CNN, Israel has struck the Lebanese side of the Syria-Lebanese
border, with strikes continuing in Beirut.

Here, let me clean that up for you… Oh, why bother, because Israel is still
pushing
the obvious
, without any facts to back it up. Again, we simply do not know.

There's also this: Aljazeera has just reported that Israeli jets attacked
4 Syrian military posts near the Lebanese Syrian border (on the Syrian side).
Both Israel and Syria deny
that report
.

See, lots of misinformation right now.

The other topic of discussion is the disarming
of Hezbollah
, which is drawn out by From Beirut to the Beltway. But if you
believe Hassan Nasrallah
will disarm I want what's in your coffee. Seriously, I really do. I've said it before,
it's not going to happen, though it's been called for since the “cedar
revolution,” when Syria withdrew from Lebanon. That's when the pressure
mounted for Hezbollah
to become a political organization and disown its violent militancy. That's
what 1559
was all about. The people, as far as I can tell, are split about Hezbollah.
They resent the current bloodshed, as they are a fledgling democracy, but they
will never forget Hezbollah chasing, so to speak, Israel from Lebanon in May
2000. That's the short version, believe me.

This post from Defense Tech is worth a look because it runs down Hezbollah's
rocket capabilities
, in short. From 14 miles into Israel to hitting Haifa,
20 miles in.

Also, if you watched the story yesterday about the
Israeli ship being hit
by an armed drone you likely have whiplash by now.
The crawlers across the cable networks went wacky about half way into late afternoon
on it. It went from armed drone to Lebanese missiles, now back to UAVs.
Get a dart board out and play the game; you'd be as accurate. Roggio
has more.

As for what the bombings have done to Lebanon's tourist season, one Lebanese
blogger
is evacuating today and you can be certain he's not alone.

Another Lebanese blogger
screams: The Tripoli Port has been shelled by Israelis! OH MY GOD!!! THAT'S
MY HOME CITY. MY FAMILY IS IN THE CAR RIGHT NOW LEAVING THE CITY UP TO THE MOUNTAINS.
THEY WERE SCARED WHEN I LAST CALLED THEM. I SHOULD CALL THEM RIGHT NOW TO DOUBLE
CHECK ON THEM. YA ALLAH!!!!!

The following is offered as a report, but I'd feel more comfortable offering it as rumor. The wingnuts for war seem to be buying it, though. I'm a lot more cautious on this whole regional war thing, frankly. It is predicated, it seems to me, on the factor that Iran, Syria and Hezbollah are stupid. They're not. It's like the canard that Iran is going to hit Israel. Really? Then we can kiss their butts goodbye, because Israel would level them and if they didn't we would. As for Syria, it just makes me laugh. They're saving thousands of Christians and others right now. But the issue of the IDF troops is real, though Israel has got to know that Hamas and Hezbollah are very capable of acting on their own. Truth be told, Asad is a wimp. Hey, but this is the Middle East so I could be wrong on all counts; everybody else has been lately.



Report: Israel gives Syria ultimatum

London-based Arabic language newspaper Al-Hayat says Israel gave Syria 72 hours to stop Hezbollah’s activity, bring about release of kidnapped IDF troops. ‘Israel will not end military activity until new situation created that will prevent Syria, Iran from using terror organizations to threaten its security,’ newspaper quotes Pentagon official as saying

The London-based Arabic language newspaper Al-Hayat reported Saturday that “Washington has information according to which Israel gave Damascus 72 hours to stop Hezbollah’s activity along the Lebanon-Israel border and bring about the release the two kidnapped IDF soldiers or it would launch an offensive with disastrous consequences.”

The report said “a senior Pentagon source warned that should the Arab world and international community fail in the efforts to convince
Syria to pressure Hezbollah into releasing the soldiers and halt the current escalation Israel may attack targets in the country.”

Report: Israel gives Syria ultimatum

Then there's the thing nobody
is covering
. Read up. Got to go, Fouad Siniora is addressing the nation on CNN… Okay, he's done, very emotional address; the message is RESCUE Lebanon. It is a “disaster zone,” but we will survive. Cue the disco – drop the bombs.

now it's time for a laugh!

UPDATE: Holy Allah, grab your burka, the Arab League lives! They're actually meeting today for “discussions,” in Cairo. Wonders never cease. The Middle East peace process is “dead” were the words from the Arab Leagues' Secretary General, according to CNN. U.N. is rumored to be their next stop, in order to get a solution to the, er… crisis. Hope they dress for the heat. The humidity is murder.

UPDATE II: See map, as well as comments, understanding that one of the main countries involved in all this, as you know, is Iran, though as I said above, I don't believe for a second they're involved in the current escalation.

UPDATE III (2:30 p.m. PST): It's official (or as official as anything is right now), Israeli ship hit by a missile (via Billmon).


What Israel's over-reaction means to our efforts and troops in Iraq, not to mention the Iraqi people.
As for the region itself, see here.

Read full story · Comments are closed