Nasrallah: our operation spared the country a worse devastation

In an interview with New TV aired earlier tonight, Hassan Nasrallah in colloquial Lebanese claimed that the 12 July operation that Israel used as pretext to launch its war on Lebanon actually saved Lebanon from a worse scenario had the Jewish state carried out a planned war in October.

“Had they carried out their plan, we would not be here to talk about it,” Nasrallah told his veiled interviewer. This plan, which allegedly was still incomplete in July, sought to finish off Hizbullah in 48 hours through a surprise all-out assault on Hizbullah and its infrastructure, occupying a strip of land up to the Litani River and wide scale bombing of Hizbullah “houses” and positions. 

The 12 July kidnapping of soldiers, Nasrallah claimed, cost Israel the element of surprise, leading to Israeli failure to destroy Hizbullah. “In October, they were planning to kill people while they slept, with their women and children,” said Nasrallah, who attempted to argue that the kidnapping of soldiers did the country a favor by sparing it a more severe devastation.

Nasrallah went on to assure us that Hizbullah survived the Israeli war nearly intact, with only few of his military officials killed, and none of the political cadres. The number of fighters or “mujahedeen” killed is still unknown to him. “I have not counted them yet,” he said. He cited Israeli generals in Israeli newspapers admitting failure, and singled out an article in Yediot Ahronot which apparently claimed the ceasefire saved the Israeli army from even a greater defeat.

“We fired less than 50% of our rockets….the blockade is useless… We are prepared for a long destructive war“, he said, adding that after 33 days, Israel was still fighting the same people on the first line of defense and that Hizbullah second line of defense was not engaged in combat. He said they were prepared for a wide scale operation thought they didn’t know it would take place on 12 July.

To absolve himself of any responsibility, Nasrallah cited Seymour Hersh’s New Yorker article to argue that Israel’s war had been pre-planned and it wasn’t about the prisoners. He said Israel would have created a pretext had they not kidnapped the soldiers, through one of their spy networks in the country. “A network like the (busted) Rafe’ network could have easily fired 7 katyusha rockets onto Israel and laid the blame on Hizbullah.”

So, in Nasrallah’s logic, their operation was used as a pretext for the war although Israel could have created one whenever they wished, and Nasrallah did the country a favor by costing Israel the element of surprise. Flawless logic!

And remember how Nasrallah claimed he did not know when the kidnapping would happen? Now he is saying the operation was planned 5-6 months prior, and that it was intended to be a “clean” operation with minimum casualties. But luck had it that two military vehicles showed up instead of one, and a tank drove on a landmine, causing soldiers to die.

Nasrallah said the decision was not only taken by him, but by 15 experienced members of Hizbullah who, with all their experience in dealing with the Israeli enemy, in-depth knowledge and studying of “the Israeli”, did not anticipate the Israeli reaction to be of this magnitude. In fact, Nasrallah said, in the history of wars, no state had ever launched a war on another state because of two captured soldiers.

“Had we known, would not have carried out this operation for moral, social and military reasons,” Nasrallah declared, conscience clear.

“All 15 of us did not think, even 1 percent, that the capture would lead to a war at this time and of this magnitude. You ask me, if I had known on July 11 ... that the operation would lead to such a war, would I do it? I say no, absolutely not.”

What a disgrace. 15 people in Hizbullah took a country to war and their leader wants us to thank him for sparing us an even greater destruction and for the safekeeping of him and the other 14.

Only Nasrallah would say the above and then add: “We do not impose our ideas on anyone. Lebanon is a diverse country, it cannot be run as an Islamic Sunni, Islamic Shia, Christian Maronite or other country.”

He actually said Lebanon needs to be a state built on consensus.

Nasrallah tried to dispel fears that he is trying to establish an Islamic Shia state, calling these fears unfounded and aimed at instilling fear in Sunnis. “The people who say that receive instructions from the American Embassy,” he claimed.

And this is how Nasrallah chose to assure Lebanese people of his intentions:

“Our weapons are directed at Israel. Can we stage a military coup d’etat? Sure we can. But we have always said our weapons were directed at the enemy. We have never used our weapons against the Lebanese people… I address Christians and non-Shia: don’t let them instill fear of Hizbullah. There is no reason or logic for that. Do not be afraid of Hizbullah.”

“You say that while you’re holding a weapon,” the interviewer asked him.

“I hold the weapon to defend the country against Israel, who wants to steal the water, settle the Palestinians and run the country as part of the new Middle East. That is the function of the weapons,” answered Nasrallah, claiming Hizbullah does not want to hold on to the weapons forever, but that “some people want us to disarm and go to a European country and sit with Israel and tell them we forget… we forget our national pride…”

In response to a question about Hizbullah being a state within a state, Nasrallah chose to attack the state of Lebanon.

This “state”, he said, does not want to liberate land, does not want to liberate prisoners, does not want to provide education and food. What kind of state is that? He asked. “That people are still silent about this state is strange,” Nasrallah wondered. “We are asked to either die, or be shoe shiners… If we reject that, they accuse us of being a state within a state… If the state builds a hospital where we have schools and hospitals, we will shut ours down… Where the state is absent, we have to be present.”

Responding to criticism that his party was only concerned about rebuilding Shia homes and not, say, homes as well as bridges and roads in other areas, Nasrallah tried to explain: “We said [we would help] every family whose home was destroyed… we offered them a year’s rent and the cost of furniture, and to rebuild 15,000 housing units. We didn’t say we were helping Hizbullah, but every family, whether Christian, Sunni or Shia in all regions. As for bridges and other infrastructure, (he joked), give me the state and I’m ready!”

He said Hizbullah had to act fast and offer assistance because they (Hizbullah) knew the government would stall. “It took seven days for bulldozers to start working in the suburb to clear streets,” said, claiming that he heard that the government intended to keep the situation as is for weeks to turn people against Hizbullah.

“We also felt responsible for the people. I promised people their houses will be rebuilt. In two weeks, all families will be off the streets,” he said.

When asked about Ali al-Amin’s public opposition to Hizbullah (he is the Shia Mufti for Tyre and Jabal Amel), Nasrallah acknowledged that there is no consensus on the resistance within the Shia community, just like there is division on the issue in other sects. “The division is national and not sectarian”, he contended.

The speech was long and covered other areas, notably the prisoners issue (negotiations have apparently started), and Nasrallah’s alleged cooperation with the army, which he said has the natural right to confiscate any visible weapon. And given that Hizbullah does not put its weapons or fighters on display, the militia will not have to change anything. So, for Nasrallah, Hizbullah made no compromises. 

“We will facilitate and support the work of the Lebanese army, and avoid any action that could cause embarrassment for it… we also don’t have a problem with UNIFIL since its mission is not to disarm the resistance.”

And “as long as there’s occupation, we have the right to resistance. We have been patient until now (in reference to Israeli violations), but that does not mean we will be patient down the line, we reserve the right, and we could apply it at any time. Consequently, I do not give anyone any assurances.”

Comments

[Ghassan Karam]

The real sad thing is that the official government of Lebanonstill does not get it. After all what has transpired over the past 18 months Mr. Saniora cannot get himself to accuse Nasrallah et al of acting against the interests of the country and to ask for disarming the HA fighters. The government has abdicated its responsibility and is playing games with the lives , resources, aspirations, future and existense of the Lebanese state.

By refusing to even speak about disarming HA and by apparently agreeing to confiscate weapons above the ground and not those of HA that are essentially below the ground the Lebanese government is acting irresponsibly and maybe even treasonosly. Inspite of the fact that there are certain elemental ideas that cannot be compromised the Lebanese government cannot even claim compromise in this case. The only way to describe their actions thus far is appeasement since they are only giving in to whatever HA demands without getting anything in return.

The "decapitator" has the temerity, the hubris and the arrogance to speak and act as if he is the supreme leader. Sadly no one in this august government has the courage to challenge him and so he doesnot only act as the only leader but he actually is by default. There are no other leaders in this government. What a shame.

[A disgusted Lebanese]

I just exceptionally liked the part where he said that he never imposed anything on the Lebanese and he is committed to consensus in Lebanon.
HA wages his holy war and the rest of the Lebanese have to sit unwillingly for the ride.
And please, can anyone tell me what this "new middle east" is all about, because it seems it has become phrase of the day every day over here.
BTW there used to be some people on this blog always commenting on the dangers of an imminent wahhabi attack on Lebanon usually FPM supporters. Are they still not convinced of the real threat to Lebanon!!!!!!

[bad vilbel]

I'm digusted just reading Abu Kais' recount of the interview.

Seriously, why can't Lebanon have a strong leader, someone would come up, arrest all these bozos and have them tried for treason? Every single one of them.

Sometimes, the idea of a strongman seems appealing....

[Aziz]

Nasrallah talks like he has the balls, but we all know he doesn't. He still sits in a rat hole. Lebanon should hang him. Inshallah.

[Richard Silverstein]

The guy is downright diabolical, isn't he?

I think he & his 15 cronies miscalculated as badly as Olmert & his cronies did. In a way, Hezbollah & Israel are a match made in heaven. The former didn't expect Olmert to react like a madman; and Olmert didn't expect Hezbollah to put up much of a fight against his vaunted fighting machine. They both made monumental errors of judgment for which I'd like to see both throttled within an inch of their lives.

I'm afraid it won't happen, at least not to Nasrallah.

[Karim al Jamal]

Nasrallah has destroyed the country to satisfy the ego of 15 cronies who wanted to show they were a match for israel. Militarily, they did manage to slow the israelis. But not the next time. And there will be a next time because this egoist actually believes he saved Lebanon from a worse fate further down the track.
Just imagine, he saved us from oily beaches, rubble strewn streets, bombed out buildings, smashed infrastructure, impassable bridges and roads and a bill for billions of dollars.

What Hariri, Siniora and their associates built up in years, he destroyed in 23 days to save us.

May we saved from his war plans if this was the fruit of his peace plan.

The man has basically condemmed himself to a life in hiding and subterfuge because he will remain a target of opprotunity till he dies.

We did not deserve such a fate. He deserves whatever befalls him.

Inshallah

[Another disgusted Lebanese (like millions others who aren't speaking-up)]

This interview is very "re-assuring" in a cynical way. Nasrallah is clever in some ways, but dumb in so many others.
RE: “some people want us to disarm and go to a European country and sit with Israel and tell them we forget… we forget our national pride…”
- why doesn't Saudi Arabia or the Palestinians answer him and tell him to shut-up. Since when did the arab world or the Palestinians delegate the fate of Arab-Israeli relations to this unelected mad-man?

Nasrallah joins the club of charismatic, ennigmatic leaders that lead their people backwards, just like Kim Jong Il, Castro, Assad, Khomeini and a handful of others mad-men.

The future of Lebanon is doomed. Please Israel, take this man out for the sake of humanity. We will forgive you later.

A disgusted Lebanese (like millions others who aren't speaking-up)

[JoseyWales]

I am as disgusted as all of you.

With Nasrallah of course, but more so with all other leaders who keep silent. This speech is full of holes, and is totally incoherent.

PS Was it Dante who said the worst circle of Hell is for those who witness evil and do nothing about it.

[Hamid- Liban]

Under the nose of the Lebanese Army and the non existent UNIFIL2

Hizbullah has dismantled 14 posts on the Israel-Lebanon border near the Shaba Farms, Lebanese security sources reported on Monday.

Eyewitnesses said that bulldozers were used to flatten the bases in the Arkov area and block access to tunnels and bunkers.

A French news agency reported that the group evacuated the posts using trucks to carry artillery shells, missiles, other weapons and military equipment northward, while other Hizbullah vehicles laden with generators and furniture made their way out of the region.

According to the Lebanese newspaper A-Sapir, the Lebanese army had deployed troops along the border with Syria and soldiers had blocked routes used by weapons smugglers.

Meanwhile, the Lebanese government demanded from Palestinians in refugee camps in the Litani area to disarm in accordance with UN Security Council Resolution 1701, senior Fatah operative in Lebanon, Monir Al-Makdah, said on Monday morning.

Reportedly, Lebanese Prime Minister Faud Saniora made the request to Fatah representative in Lebanon Abbas Za'aki.

Al-Makdah rejected the demand in an interview with Jordanian newspaper Al-Dostur, saying that the Security Council resolution was illegal since it did not include the right of return for Palestinian refugees.

[Hamid- Liban]

Nasrallah's words were in a marked contrast to Hizbullah's claims that the war was a "divine victory." That Nasrallah felt compelled to make these comments, he said, indicated the depth of his problems in Lebanon.

Hizbullah, did not only want to be the arm to export Iran's revolution, but also wanted to be seen as a positive force in the Lebanese political landscape, and this was badly damaged by the war.

If someone would have told us that in another month and a half an international force and the Lebanese army would move south, that UN Security Council Resolution 1559 would begin to be implemented, that UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan would say that the international force could dismantle Hizbullah, that there will be an embargo on arms to Lebanon, supervision on the border crossings, and all this while the IDF was in Lebanon and has not been drawn into confrontations, and that there is a sea and air embargo on the country.
Nasrallah, during his interview, said Hizbullah would "not be provoked," and that "there are attempts to enforce Israel's new conditions, such as the deployment of UNIFIL forces in Lebanon's airport, ports and along the northern border with Syria."

At the same time, he said that as long as IDF soldiers were in Lebanon, Hizbullah had the "right to resistance," claiming that Hizbullah had shown "restraint and tolerance" but would reserve the right to react "at any time."

He also said that Hizbullah would not publicly display weapons in southern Lebanon, except during funerals.( what a fuicken lie. We saw them moving in trucks in the Arqoub area with weapons, Katyusha rockets and ammunition, moving North.

"This is our policy - to refrain from displaying weapons. If the Lebanese army notices any gunman, it is its natural right to expropriate the weapons," he said.

According to various reports, Hizbullah was giving out some $12,000 - money believed to be coming from Iran - to help people whose homes were damaged during the war. ( this is not sure- it was done only in front of the cameras as a propaganda ploy)

Meanwhile, he air and sea blockade of Lebanon would continue, and the IDF would remain in south Lebanon, until the Lebanese army and the enhanced UNIFIL force took up positions in south Lebanon and at border entry points.

[e]

Castro was an incompetent leader and look how long he is in power. How about the Asad family? Aren't they excellent but they have managed to put in place a dynasty. Why? Because they have the guns. If Saniora pushes HA too hard there will be a coup. An animal is most dangerous when it is cornered. Saniora is very smart and is making sure HA does not have a reason for a coup. It is helpful that HA do not want to rule Lebanon because then it would make fighting them easier as all of Lebanon would become a legitimate target.
So I ask the Lebanese on this blog, why not give Saniora time? Saniora is giving Nasrallah just enough rope to hang himself. In a year's time even the most hardened Shia supporter in the south will realize that what HA caused cannot be just undone with promises. Iran is not going to invest the billions needed to revive the south because HA is not a strategic asset anymore and in any case it is going to take years.
So let Saniora chip slowly and peacefully at Nasrallah with the help of the new and improved UNIFIL. As much as you would like to see a show of force from Saniora in the face of Nasrallah, this would be unproductive because it could cause HA to become extreme and would also alienate the Shia in the south.
e

[A disgusted Lebanese]

"Another disgusted Lebanese (like millions others who aren't speaking-up) | Monday, August 28, 2006 at 06:33 AM"

Kibir 2albe fik.

Hopefully, the disgusted Lebanese within the Shiaa community will also start voicing their disgust towards the situation, because these have a big role to play if we are to recapture the future of Lebanon from the hands of the decapitator.
Finally, I hope all his victories are like this one, full of delusion and flase hope.

[someone]

Nasrallah want to assure the people that there will not be another round in the near future,and that the worse has gone,or at least we have avoided the worse that was coming in october,and now it is time fo re-organization.

Lebnaon is not prepared for another round right now.Nasrallh knows that Olmert feel pressure ,and he want to escape this pressure by preparing for another round as soon as possible,to save his political future.
So he want "israel" to accept the failure for now,and avoid a counter-attack,for the moment.

Nasrallah want political results right now,an re-arrangement of Lebanon,and to launch this arranegement ,he assure the policians that he doesnt want to impose something on them,i.e the militia will still be only a resistance movement ,nothing more ,as maybe many lebanese start to think about a strong influence of Nasrallah over the politics of Lebanon.

So the message is as ai understood it:

"The worse is over, we are still capable of further resistance,we dont want to influence the lebanese politics ,we will return to our position as only a resistance movement,and there will be no fear of other mass destruction from "israel" ,take it easy for now,and go further toward a united Lebanon."

[e]

Someone,
The message from the Israeli public is very simple and does not need much analysis:
1) We will replace Olmert with Netanyahu or someone else more determined.
2) If 1701 is not implemented fully there will be another round soon (within 3 years).

I hope Nasrallah understands this simple message and doesn't underestimate Israeli reaction again like he has admitted to doing. As long as HA is armed, a big bull's eye is painted on Lebanon. If HA think they are defending Lebanon, they are deluding themselves.

e

[bad vilbel]

e,

I'm with you here. Give Siniora (or whoever) time to chip away at HA. That's what was happening before July 12th (albeit too slowly and tentatively) and that has been somewhat "put in the spotlight" now.

My fear, though, is that the international community will lose focus on this matter, if progress is too slow and takes too long. Lebanon has always suffered from this "quickly forgotten" status when it comes to the international community, and we simply cannot afford that this time. The lebanese need to disarm Hezbollah, for sure. But we also are going to need every ounce of aid and help from the international community to accomplish this goal (be it military aid to the Army, logistical help on the borders, reconstruction aid for the South, etc.)

[e]

By the way Someone,
You say Lebanon is not prepared for another round now.
Do you think Lebanon was prepared for the current war? If so why?
e

[e]

Bad vilbel,
With 7000 European troops in the line of fire, there is less of a chance of this falling under the radar. Also, for the next few months everybody is going to be dealing with the prisoner exchange and the blockade so that should keep Lebanon in focus.

It looks like some generals and parts of the public in Israel are adopting Fubar's position and want the prisoners returned as a condition for lifting the blockade. We need to see how this plays out. It may be another way for Saniora to be "pushed" reluctantly by the international community to weaken HA in the interest of Lebanon.

e

[Solomon2]

This plan, which allegedly was still incomplete in July, sought to finish off Hizbullah in 48 hours through a surprise all-out assault on Hizbullah and its infrastructure

All responsible militaries craft contingency plans. That doesn't mean they actually plan to initiate hostilities, only that when hostilities do occur, there is some sort of plan to deal with them. Otherwise, people might complain of the military lashing out "indiscriminately".

I think everyone can surmise that Hezbollah has now provided Israel enough information about its capabilities for Israel to complete or reject any "48-hour plan" to eliminate Hezbollah's military capability. Exactly who has lost the element of suprise, then?

[Josh Scholar]

To absolve himself of any responsibility, Nasrallah cited Seymour Hersh’s New Yorker article to argue that Israel’s war had been pre-planned and it wasn’t about the prisoners.

Thank you Seymour Hersh.

[someone]

e,

For the moment ,there is a need for a political re-arrangement,and thats why Aoun called for a new government,thats why another round now is not favorable.

As for the current war,it was coming soon or later (october),and Lebanon was prepared politically for this war (political alliances),and thats why there were no public unrest or an anti-militia voices during and after the war,this was the most important preparation.The waited war just happened the 12 july,and the results were partially obtained,waiting for the political results to establish more clearly.

But now,it is time for re-contruction,and the population will return to the south and feel more safe with the coming unifil forces ,lebanese army presence in the south,as a shield and protection from the possibly coming round,whoever lead this round.

[e]

Someone,
The war was not coming in October. Just like Nasrallah made a mistake in estimating Israeli reaction he made a mistake about Israel's intentions for October. The current Israeli government would never have entered a war without HA provocation. Seymour Hersh is just plain wrong.

You say that the most important preparation was political. How about the military preparation? I always thought that was important before a war. Was Lebanon prepared for the war militarily?
e

[e]

Someone,
"the population will return to the south and feel more safe with the coming unifil forces ,lebanese army presence in the south,as a shield and protection from the possibly coming round,whoever lead this round"

So now it is UNIFIL and the army that are protecting the south. I thought that was HA's job. Don't the people in the south feel safe with only HA there? Didn't HA say that only it could protect the south? Why has it changed its mind?

e

[someone]

e,

You said Olmert wouldnt have gone to war without provocation, isnt the presence of an armed militia in the south of Lebanon a provocation,you said above that there will another round just because the militia is armed,even if it doens provoc.

The milita doenst protect the south militarily,remember it is a resistance movement and not a well equiped army with para-troopers ,but it can prevent the occupation of the south,make it not fruitful ,and nonsense,as for the air strike you maybe will point out,there is no real protection but a launch of rockets as a response ,which was a surprise for Olmert,and an under-estimated response,which now is well known and taken in consideration .

The military preparation ofr Lebanon was never at its best ,because it was decided by the US to keep Lebanon un-armed to assure safety for "israel" so this is non-preparation is not new,but for the militia ,they were prepared for an invasion,and for rocket launch,the point is to make a force balance ,this was the main goal,when achieved now,there is no need for a near coming round ,and deployment of the lebanese army is not very dangerous for the militia so still exist.

[e]

Someone,

I always say that HA will make a mistake and then there will be another round. After all, if HA doesn't use its arms against Israel for a while, people in Lebanon start asking why they need them, and then HA does something stupid like on July 12. In addition, because of 1701 any smuggling of weapons into Lebanon is also a provocation that Israel can react to. HA are on a very short leash. How about the Sheba farms, how will they free them without using arms?

You admit that HA does not protect the south, so why is it needed? Israel does not want south Lebanon and that is why we left in 2000. For years the Israeli government is saying that Israel wants the Lebanese Army in the south. If no one plans to occupy south Lebanon and HA can't protect it, then why do they need arms?

As for the rockets, HA promised to hit Tel-Aviv and was unable or too afraid to do it. 75% of the rockets landed in open land. HA was not able to hit any military base. In fact, one quarter of the rockets fell in Kiryat Shemona an empty city during the war. In addition, about one third of the Israeli civillians killed were Arabs. What this tells is that HA don't have a clue where their rockets will land. The rockets have a nuisance value but they will not deter Israel from attacking with the least provocation from HA. I hope you understand this.

Are you really serious that there is a balance of power between Israel and Lebanon now? I fear that this frame of mind if held also by HA will lead very quickly to the next war. You are making the same mistake Nasrallah admitted to making. You just don't understand Israel and Israelis. Why don't you ask me some questions and you could learn about us a little more.

If the military preparation was not at its best, then why did HA go to war?

As you say in a previous post, the war brought to Lebanon massive destruction. You seem to think this is good and is part of a successful defense strategy by HA. I really don't understand how such a defense can be good for Lebanon. Perhaps it is not Lebanon's interest that you have at heart. And if you believe that HA will continue to rearm and not cause another round, you are deceiving yourself. I really wonder sometimes why HA is bothering to rebuild.

e

[S]

I cannot believe this maniac Nasrallah. So israel was going to hit us anyway and he saved us!!!!. I wonder why, maybe because HA was still armed. Israel has no intrest at this point in attcking lebanon if HA was not armed. So yes in a way or another, whether he liked it or not the Sayyed brought this war on us. And now He talks about the government not doing its job. Everytime this government tries to Do something someone makes up a big mess and slows it down. If Hariri was alive none of this shit would have happened. I think everybody benefited from his death. And I am so sad for the lebanese that were bought by Iranian money. We will never prosper as lebanese as long as we put our religious affiliation before our country. And to those that think that we won, I reassure you that lebanon lost a lot. When you say someone defended your home, you expect to go back to it and find it standing, not total devastation. What kind of defense is that.
I wish they capture this traitor and send hiim and his BF Bashar to hell. They should stop messing with lebanon and let us have a life.

And I agree with whoever said that we should give saniora more time. the man is very smart and if he lashes at HA now he will create an internal problem that is to big to handle now. he should just do things his way to bring the Lebanese to the realization that HA did not do them any good and it needsto disarm.

God help us and rid us of all those who do not have lebanon's interest first.

[Hamid- Liban]

Hizbullah is division in theIranian army. He will do as he is told. There are no free lunches.

[Hamid- Liban]

L' Orient Le Jour:

Nasrallah – qui a écarté catégoriquement un deuxième round de combats – est une position purement médiatique ou ponctuelle (destinée à permettre au parti chiite de réorganiser ses rangs) ou si, au contraire, ils traduisent réellement un changement de cap de la part de l’allié de Téhéran, sous le poids du prix démesuré supporté par le Liban du fait du dernier conflit. Il est, certes, encore trop tôt de lever l’incertitude qui plane à ce sujet. Mais quelles que soient les intentions des uns et des autres, les différentes composantes socio-communautaires du pays se trouvent, une fois de plus, face à un choix en tout point historique : mettre de l’ordre dans la maison libanaise, ou continuer à jouer les Don Quichotte en prenant des initiatives aventurières aux conséquences incalculables et, surtout, incalculées.

[Hamid- Liban]

The Hizbullah systen of indoctrination.

http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/hezbollah_funds.htm

[someone]

e,

The militia doesnt want to disarm itself because it needs its arms maybe not now ,but surely in the future,this is clear,if it doesnt use it in the near future,that because a near coming round is not favorable as i said,if Iran is armed but dont go to war for the moment,then the iranians doesnt ask the government why they buy weapons,it is nonsense,of course it will use it,if needed.

You call the emprisonment of the two soldiers a stupid action,but maybe you dont see the global tactic,it was needed because "israel" will not release the lebanese prisoners whitout an exchange ,so it was not a stupid action,there will be an exchange of prisoners as you can see.

The militia want to free all lebanese soil ,i.e the shabaa farms ,or at least a withdrawal of "israel" from it,this is the cause why they are in the south now ,if you say there is not intension to occupy the south,i will say there is no garanties for that,it is the same logic as "israel" saying to Syria that there is no intension of "israel" to attack Syria,so why not disarm Syria ,they will live in peace,but we dont give any guaranty to them,until they agree to a peace-treaty.

Nasrallah said he will hit "Tel Aviv" if Beiruth is hit,Beirut town was not hit or bombed,so it was not needed,and i cant know what rockets have hit,the important is that they can be launched at anytime.

The militia didnt go to war,it made a small millitary operation ,and Olmert wanted to be a hero and turned it into a war,to thenp blame Nasrallah,and push the national dialogue further, this strategy has failed.

There is no milittary balance ,but things have changed in the region,the next round will be different,and you cant say it will be the same as this one.

The destruction of Lebanon is not good ,and the reaction of Olmert was not predicted,but a same reaction in the near future is not possible,maybe the militia will continue importing weapons,and this can cause another round ,but what is sure is that this round is not in the near future,and it will be different ,there will be no mass destruction,and this is good for Lebanon,a re-building is a garanty that this will not happen again.

[Battal Agha]

Ya someone, you are really incredible. To continue to believe in the fairy tales the way you do is a but a clear sign of stupidity. Continue this way and you will have a very bright future. Juast tell who is the moron who would want to invest in a Lebanon threatened and occupied by a thug militia

[e]

Someone,
1) Why won't there be mass destruction in the next round?
2) Why is re-building a guaranty that mass destruction it will not happen again?
3) Why are you sure there won't be another round in the next 3 years? Can you predict what the results of the next Israeli elections will be?
e

[someone]

Battal Agha,

The message above was adressed to the person writing under the nickname "e" ,and not to you.Neglecting you is the sign of intelligence ,i am stupid if i dont.

e,

1) Because now there is lebanese forces and UNIFIL coming to deploy in the south ,and 1701 that will be applied,simply there will not be another 1701 for the next round,there is already one to avoid such disaster..
2) re-building is a guaranty for people,because the militia who devote itself to re-build ,will not provoque "israel" in the near future.
3) There will not be another "provocation" in the near future,and thus no other round,unless Olmert provoque the lebaneses ,but he dont have another chance to be a hero.

[e]

Someone,
2 and 3 make sense, but 1 seems to have an internal contradiction since 1701 talks about disarming HA. If HA won't disarm then 1701 won't be fulfilled. This I thought was the main point of disagreement between us. I think HA should disarm in order to prevent the next war and you think it is unnecessarry. But if you accept 1701 then you accept the disarming of HA and then I become confused.
e

[someone]

e,

I think 1559 talk about disarming the militia,and after two years there is still a national dialogu for that resolution and how to apply it ,but i mean applying 1701 will include the deploy of lebanese army + UNIFIL,maybe there will be another round,but to answer you question 1) above there will be no mass destruction when so many forces take positions in the south,another round will not be the same as the previous one,if "israel" is not satisfied,then it can complain (the non satisfaction at least) to UN but i dont think it will just send the airplanes to bombard everything,wihtout a clear provocation as you call it,and as i can see no gifts will be given to "israel" to start its angry destruction.

[e]

Someone,
I hope you are right. You are basically saying that for several years HA will keep very low key and not do anything provocative. I am not as optimistic as you because then Syria won't have any leverage whatsoever on Israel to get back the Golan. If both the Syrian and Lebanese fronts are quiet, Asad has an extermely weak negotiating position vis a vis Israel. Israel is just fine with things staying like that for a long time.

Second, the Iranians would like to use HA in their fight against the US. That fight is coming in the next 2 years. After all their investment in HA, will the Iranians let them stay quiet while the US attacks Iran? I don't know, but am not overly optimistic.
To summarize, I really hope you are right but I am worried about Syrian and Iranian influences that would force HA to do things that are not in Lebanon's interests.
e

[someone]

e,

I think Syria´s goal is not to get back the Golan (at least now) ,the more important is to have a bigger role in the region and fight against the american presence.So even if the Golan is back now,Syria is not satisfied ,it will continue its way to have a stronger role,especially in Lebanon.

A strategic alliance with Iran is needed because both countries have the same goal:a bigger role in the region.

Both support the lebanese militia ,to prevent a direct american influence on lebanese politics,but not as a military card (in the war on Iran) ,the more important is that the militia still exist to prevent such american influence ,and this is secured until now.

US on the other side put pressure on Syria to weaken its influence or to isolate it,and to have direct influence on lebanese politics,it tried in the last war to weaken the milita as a step to isolate Syria,and secure Lebanon as pro-american.

So now, Lebanon will still be calm for the near future no need for another war for the moment.
US now has given up the idea of isolating Syria by attacking Lebanon,the focus now is directly on Iran not even Syria,and Syria is pleased with what is achieved and happy with its current position,the worse has gone for Syria, the Golan can wait,no problem.

[e]

Someone,
Again I hope you are right, but Asad's speeches specifically talk about freeing the Golan either by peace or war and he was talking about copying the HA tactics in the Golan (how he would do it I don't know because except for Jews there are only Druze in the Golan and he won't dare now to violate a ceasefire line). In addition, Syria is still isolated internationally and if there is quiet, there is no incentive for anyone to engage Syria.
Regarding Iran, they have been saying themselves that HA rockets are part of their startegy of deterence so we shall see.
When you say Lebanon will be calm for the near future, how long do you have in mind? 3 years? 5years? 10 years?
e

[someone]

e,

Assad´s speech was adressed to syrian public. Of course he then should talk about the Golan,and if not get it back with peace then by war,all this is obvious ,this is what people like to hear from a state chief.

The strategy of defence doesnt mean that these rockets will be launched ,but rather a strategic pressure and afterall it still a strategy of defense.Iran had the chance to do a demostration of rocket launch in the last war,because Olmert gave it this chance ,but these rockets couldnt be launched otherwise.Olmert by going to war gave this chance to Iran,to make a rocket show,and gave the militia a stronger position in Lebanon,thats why we say he lose the war he began.

Lebanese militia just cant obey Irans orders outside lebanese interests (prisoners,shabaa farms),and Iran know this is important and encourage it,because otherwise it will cause internal problems for the resistance movement,it should stay within lebanese borders and have lebanese identity,and still defend lebanese rights,to still be legal among lebaneses.

I think Lebanon will be calm ,until UNIFIL forces leave,and a new government is established,and until the re-building has been finished,i.e a new situation in Lebanon ,and maybe additonally a more equiped militia in the south,i dont know how much time all this needs.

Obs: All these are my own visions, i represent just my own opinions.

[Abi Lama]

Une brève analyse des relations France - Hezbollah
23 septembre 2006

Les armes se sont donc tues au Liban. Provisoirement, peut-être, tant l’issue militaire du conflit semble incertaine, et la résolution 1701 de l’ONU inapplicable en l’état. Certes, les derniers développements suggèrent fortement que le retrait israélien sera bel et bien assuré. Par ailleurs, le déploiement rapide de l’armée libanaise - 5000 soldats au 22 août - pourrait être interprété comme un signe positif. Toutefois, il reste une question en suspens : les intentions réelles du Hezbollah.

Lire sur : http://www.afidora.com/