Anniversary of shame

Arab satellite networks are bombarding their viewers with documentaries on the "July war" between Hizbullah and Israel, which started on July 12, 2006. Emile Lahoud and Fouad Siniora both gave speeches on the occasion. The speeches were diametrically opposite. I won't bother quoting. Having covered that war extensively on this blog, I have not forgotten the psychological torture Nasrallah and Israel subjected us to. Torture that, naturally, pales in comparison to that lived by victims on both sides. Yes, both sides. This blogger believes in "moral equivalence shit".

Anyway, Hizbullah will undoubtedly be celebrating its "divine victory" against Israel's army. A "victory" that Hizbullah invested in turning the sympathy the war created towards Shias, into resentment by other sects and at times street warfare.

On July 12, Hassan Nasrallah kidnapped Israeli soldiers and dedicated the operation to "our brothers in Palestine", Israel took it out on Lebanon and missed their targets repeatedly, Hizbullah's rockets kept coming, and Siniora eventually managed to stop the war and send the army south, inadvertently saving Hizbullah, which had successfully linked the fate of the country to its own. Hizbullah declared victory and thanked Siniora by laying siege to the cabinet, and replenished its arsenal with the help of the Syrian "brothers" and the blind eye of the Lebanese army. Lebanese businesses that survived the July 2006 war were finished off by Hizbullah's occupation of downtown Beirut.

Nasrallah, who on July 12 said he will not accept any discussions on this "natural right" to kidnap Israeli soldiers, declared the terrorists hiding in a refugee camp a red line for the Lebanese army.

I say July 12 is when every politician in Lebanon should be forced to go into a room and watch footage of dismembered children for 24 straight hours. For that day is the anniversary of what happens when politicians fail to stand up for the sovereignty of their state over and over again.

Let us remember, shall we. This is Nasrallah speaking on August 27th, 2006. My post was titled "Nasrallah: our operation spared the country a worse devastation"

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.”

And don't forget this:

“Our weapons are directed at Israel. Can we stage a military coup d’etat? Sure we can."

Comments

[Bad Vilbel]

I have nothing to add except "Amen to that!" on everything you said.

[Rebecca]

I'm sitting here in Jerusalem right now listening to radio shows about the second Lebanon War (that's what Israelis call it), including memories of Israeli dead by their mothers and girlfriends. I think that Israeli politicians, including the prime minister, should also be forced to sit in a small room and watch footage of dead and dying children for the next 24 hours to understand the consequences of their actions. Unfortunately this won't happen on either side, and it already sounds like several sides are preparing for the next war.

[Jeha]

Now this "coup" is going to be far harder to start than Gaza... The trouble in Lebanon is that far too many people have yet to accept that "il ne faut pas peter plus haut que son cul"...

[ghassan karam]

Mahmood Darwish wrote a great poem last month after the events in Gaza. The following two lines might have been written about the "celebration" of the Lebanese "victory" over the Israelis last summer.

"Oh how we lied when we said we are exceptional,

It is a greater sin to believe your lies rather than to lie to others"

كم كَذَبنا حين قلنا: نحن استثناء!
***
أن تصدِّق نفسك أسوأُ من أن تكذب على غيرك!

[JoseyWales]

Nasrallah said, in the history of wars, no state had ever launched a war on another state because of two captured soldiers.

Is there a state in history, other than the exceptional joke that is Lebanon, that can sustain attack after attack on its army without one day retaliating? Especially after they warned you 162 times that their response would be terrible and would include all of Lebanon?

Or maybe Nasrallah is spending too much time with Syrians and other Arabs who never make good on their threats, except of course against poor joke Lebanon.

Gus, I am not familiar with Darwish, nor do I want to be. Quick q: isn't he like the rest (Kabbani etc) ever criticizing while continuing to support the wrong ideas and the wrong people?

[ghassan karam]

JW,
You are right,ideologically Darwish is just like Nizzar Qabbani and Adonis. Yet each of them does criticize and rather harshly at times. They have demonstrated that their support for an idea does not imply that everything goes.

[Solomon2]

Siniora eventually managed to stop the war and send the army south, inadvertently saving Hizbullah, which had successfully linked the fate of the country to its own.

AK, do you have any ideas now what Siniora should have done differently, if anything?

[JoseyWales]

Gus,

It's that very idea (obsession): romantic Palestine/Uruba that needs to be dropped.

These guys are at the top of the list of the idiots who got us here, and they can't even see it. Plus they keep being hailed (by you?) as poets and intellectuals etc.

[Bad Vilbel]

JW,

Of course, I agree with you 100%. I don't know what kind of crack Nasrallah and his ilk smoke, but it seems to be a common malady of the Arab world: Living in a fantasy world with no basis in reality whatsoever. It's a mentality issue, I think. These people still live in that fantasy world of "Arabism" and "Zionist this or the other" and "American project" and of course the "Palestinian cause" and let's not forget the "brothers and sisters" left and right. The list goes on. I can probably list 20 such slogans and empty words devoid of any actual meaning that we hear on a daily basis, in any political discourse (if you can call it that) in Lebanon. It's a vernacular very much reminescent of the old pseudo-communist intellectual mentality: "Comrade" and "bourgeoisie", "imperialist pigs", "class revolution" and all those fun words that used to be thrown around in the 60s and 70s by countless "revolutionary" groups and intellectuals.

There is a gigantic disconnect between that romanticized fantasy world the Arabs live in and the way politics and history operate in the rest of the world.

[JAS]

"moral equivalence shit"?

Incidents either abide by the Geneva Conventions or else not. Acts of war frequently prompt further escalation...duh.

Failure to follow humane guidelines both with a sovereign state and beyond those borders should equal shame, but that is not the case for hypocrites, independent armed militias and the like. Individuals often ignore relevant facts in order to claim "moral equivalence" and its brother, self-righteousness.

[Bad Vilbel]

Uhm....Both sides violated the Geneva convention. So AK is correct.

Whatever, man.

[Craig]

Uhm....Both sides violated the Geneva convention. So AK is correct.

I don't agree. I haven't seen any evidence Israel violated the Geneva Conventions last year. I have heard the claim made quite a few times, though. But that claim gets made about Israel every single day. Treaty violations, human rights abuses, blah blah blah.

What is it that you think Israel did that violated the laws of war, Bad Vilbel?

[Umm Kais]

And what exactly are the "laws of war" Craig? Kill but kill nicely? I am by NO MEANS a Hizbullah supporter but I have a serious problem with these millions of cluster bombs that Israel left littered in towns and villages. I suppose by Israel not beheading their enemies like "barbarians" then they are playing war nicely and cluster bombs left behind in the millions are "just" in war. Before you get testy with me, I have a problem with rockets being shot at civilians too but Israel has plenty of defenders, while Lebanon has few. I don't want to get into an argument about Israel and right and wrong, but I find the phrase "laws of war" really funny and useless.

[Bad Vilbel]

Craig: Cluster bombs. Targetting civilian infrastructure that were nowhere near Hezbollah positions (Milk factories, bridges, etc.)

Mind you, I'm not saying that when it's war, you do what you have to. So i know WHY Israel would bomb bridges (resupply routes, etc.) I still don't get the Milk factories, but who knows. That's not important. The fact of the matter is that technically speaking, Israel did defy the Geneva convention.
As did Hebzollah (using human shields, not giving access to the Red Cross to the prisoners, etc.)

[Solomon2]

Before you get testy with me, I have a problem with rockets being shot at civilians too but Israel has plenty of defenders, while Lebanon has few.

Though this is only my idea, as near as I can tell the purpose of the cluster bombings was to prevent resupply of Hezbollah's firing positions. Although some firing positions were concealed from homes and schools, other firing points were so cunningly concealed that their location wasn't known precisely and their operation could not be suppressed. However, by cluster-bombing the area the Israelis could effectively prevent delivery of additional rockets from their inventory to the concealed firing postions. Once Hezbollah's offensive weaponry was thus immobilized they naturally agreed to a cease-fire.

Forcing the aggressor to stop making war, that's how Lebanon got protection. So who, exactly, counts as Lebanon's protector?

[JAS]

Umm Kais:

The problem of daily Undeclared wars--independent militant groups vs civilians--with seeming endless numbers of events, frequently cause more civilian deaths than Declared military vs military wars on any given day. Some examples of cluster killing: http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/index.html#Attacks

[Bad Vilbel]

Solomon, we all understand the reason for cluster bombs, burning bridges or whatever...You don't have to explain WHY it was done. That still does not justify it. It's still a break of the Geneva convention (regardless of whether there was a good reason for it or not).

[Ken]

Lebanon can never worry about war with Israel again if it wants to. Trouble is, it doesn't want to, does it? It wants to continue being the little poodle which yips and yaps at the big dog from behind the fence, convinced it is safe until that big dog jumps the fence and bites a chunk out of it.

Lebanon gambled on Hezbollah and lost; oh wait, I meant won....which is why no one is whining about it all because you don't whine when you win do you?

So, if the little dog wants to yip and yap, it needs to turn into a bigger dog than the big dog. Alternatively, it can stop yipping and yapping and the big dog will leave it alone.

[Umm Kais]

Soloman--I believe Lebanon has no physical protetors. If I can at least defend it with words, I will.

Fine about cluster bombs: we can go around and around, and I don't give a shit the strategic reasoning, I will never agree with anyone's arguments about them, particularly when a child dies from one months after the war.

BUT, when it comes to Liban Lait and right or wrong, that was WRONG. There are no justifications for destroying it and I will never feel that Israel was entitled to itentional destruction like that, period.

[Umm Kais]

Ken--who here is saying anyone won? Who are you lecturing?

[Bad Vilbel]

Ken. Lebanon doesn't want to continue being a poodle or starting war. Hezbollah does. The 2 are not the same. Look it up.

[Craig]

Hmmmm.... well, I apologize for stirring up a bunch of stuff with my comment. That wasn't my intention. I was required to study the "Laws or War" when I was in infantry training school (specifically a subset, the International Laws of Land Warfare) and I think of the subject in legal terms, not in moral terms. So keep that in mind as I reply, please :)

Umm Kais,

And what exactly are the "laws of war" Craig? Kill but kill nicely?

No. The Geneva Conventions and the Hague Conventions are the Laws of War. Generally speaking, the Geneva conventions apply to non-combatants, and the Hague conventions to combatants. There is some overlap between the two treaties... usually when it comes to people who are in a gray area, possibly combatants or possibly non-combatants, depending on circumstances. That's where it gets messy.

I am by NO MEANS a Hizbullah supporter but I have a serious problem with these millions of cluster bombs that Israel left littered in towns and villages.

I do too. But that's not illegal. Cluster bombs are not defined as banned weapons, and are therefore as legal to use as any other sort of munitions.

I suppose by Israel not beheading their enemies like "barbarians" then they are playing war nicely and cluster bombs left behind in the millions are "just" in war.

I didn't say that. There is no concept of playing nice or behaving justly, in combat. There is only legal and illegal.

Before you get testy with me, I have a problem with rockets being shot at civilians too but Israel has plenty of defenders, while Lebanon has few. I don't want to get into an argument about Israel and right and wrong, but I find the phrase "laws of war" really funny and useless.

I consider them pretty useless too. The reason I find them useless is that historically it's pretty rare for anyone to even make a token effort to comply with them.

Israel is one of the few countries that does try to comply with them. And I give them credit for that. They do a better job of it than the US does.

[Craig]

BV,

Craig: Cluster bombs. Targetting civilian infrastructure that were nowhere near Hezbollah positions (Milk factories, bridges, etc.)

I answered the cluster bombs in the previous comment. As far as civilian INFRASTRUCTURE, targeting such is not ever illegal. Destroying your enemy's ability to continue fighting is a basic requirement of war. And it always has been.

Targeting non-combatant civilians themselves is illegal, unless they are in close proximity to combatant forces, or... and this is important... if they are considered "enemy hostiles" by virtue of their association with enemy combatants. For instance, civilians driving a supply convoy to replenish a combatant force would be legitimate targets of a military strike. They are part of the enemies war effort.

Mind you, I'm not saying that when it's war, you do what you have to. So i know WHY Israel would bomb bridges (resupply routes, etc.) I still don't get the Milk factories, but who knows. That's not important. The fact of the matter is that technically speaking, Israel did defy the Geneva convention.

Maybe they did, but you haven't presented an accusation of it, BV. The things you mentioned are not in violation of either the Geneva or the Hague conventions.

As did Hebzollah (using human shields, not giving access to the Red Cross to the prisoners, etc.)

Hezbollah doesn't even need to do anything in order to be in violation of the laws of war. They are a militia that wages war without the sanction of any state, which makes them criminal combatants.

OK, I hope I didn't annoy anybody. That's honestly not my intention :)

PS-Solomon2, your description of Israel's use of cluster bombs makes it sound like Israel was exploiting a known flaw with them. The bomblets are supposed to explode on contact with a hard surface. That some of them always don't is the thing that makes their use sketchy. I think the US currently has a moratorium on using cluster bombs until that problem can be resolved.

[Umm Kais]

No worries Craig--I appreciate your responses. I'm just very anti the "July war" since being pregnant with my half Lebanese son during that time was too stressful--that, and I'm extra feisty :) I'm also extra defensive of Lebanon and the Lebanese (NOT Hizbullah of course).

[Ken]

Bad Vibel....yes, I kind of know that about Lebanon in general except that you have your head of the Army who would be President saying his "guns are pointed at Israel." Hell, his guns should be pointed at Hezbollah to fulfill the ceasefire agreements from last summer. His guns should be pointed at the Syrian incursions.

But no, he yaps at Israel.

[Bad Vilbel]

The head of the army is a tool. He was appointed by the Syrians. He's pro-Syrian and he's engaging for what passes as rhetoric in Lebanon (barely) when he talks about pointing the guns at Israel.

Not that's an excuse mind you. I can't stand that empty rhetoric that all our politicians spew (and trust me, the head of the army is now a politician due to his presidential aspirations).

You have to understand (again, not excuse) that in the Arab world, blaming Israel and pointing at Israel is just boilerplate empty sloganeering. It's the exact same as the way the US politicians who use "They hate us for our freedom" type comments.

He yaps indeed. As you said. And if you've read this blog for the past month, you'd see that many of us have been critcizing that very point. The head of the army is not elligible to be president (according to the constitution) and has certainly NO business talking politics. In my mind, in any normal country, he should be fired or would have resigned under pressure for making such comments. But Lebanon is apparently a wormhole where laws, constitution and the such are ignored.

[ali bm]

Craig, please explain to me how israel tries to abide by the Geneva and Hague conventions? have u ever heard of the Sabra and Shatila massacres started by Sayeret Matkal? didn't u see the footage of that girl crying over the corpses of her family on the Gaza beach? did u see the footage on u tube of the journalist crying wounded for help after he was shot by israeli soldiers? have u heard of the Khiyam prison camp where both innocents and resistance fighters were tortured? have u seen footage of dahyeh before and after the war? or of any of the southern villages and towns? have u heard of the other israeli massacres of palestinians and lebanese civilians or of egyptian pows?
yet they try to abide by the international conventions. yeah like bush is abiding with them in Guantanamo bay.

[Ken]

Bad Vibel....excellent points, and I have only just found this blog so I am probably fairly unaware of the "mood," here but it seems that most of you are pretty on the money.

I see Lebanon as a potential beacon of light in a crazy region. Would that it could find a charismatic leader who was not sectarian. But I do really fear that Hezb will revisit tremendous destruction on Lebanon once again in conjunction with its puppet masters. Lebanon's people are in my prayers.

[Craig]

ali bm,

You are a hypocrite and I'm not going to discuss international law with you. There is no Arab and/or Muslim country that has ever done anything but spit on International Laws and Treaties, including showing contempt for the Universal Declaration of human rights. You don't have any input on the issue that is worth listening to. Listening to your whining is absurd... like listening to a rapist and murderer complain about somebody else's shoplifting.

[Craig]

PS, the reason why I don't think you have any input, ali bm, is because you mix truth with fiction and throw out a bunch of propagandist claims to make your case. You aren't interested in discussing, you are interested in smearing and slandering.

[ali bm]

damn what a response, mind-bogling! where did i ever claim that any arab or islamic state abided by any international law or treaty? where did i raise that issue? i am simply questioning ur statement that israel has done so.
where do i mix fiction with lies or whatever? if u have any doubts about any of the claims, then check my claims. check all sources and then come back with a well balanced answer, otherwise at least have the decency to reply politely. i have been living in Lebanon all my life and i know of what i speak either firsthand or through relaible sources like Robert Fisk and Alain Menargues.
check any of the million sites on the internet, for example this one: http://www.jewwatch.com/jew-atrocities-lebanon.html

[Bad Vilbel]

Robert Fisk is a reliable source?

That about sums it up, doesn't it?

[ali bm]

considering that he was here in lebanon during much of the incidents i talked about, that makes him a reliable source for my purposes.
where was he ever discredited?

[Bad Vilbel]

Just being in Lebanon is not enough to claim someone is credible. There are tons of people in Lebanon (and elsewhere) who don't know what they're talking about.

He was discredited left and right, countless of times. No one takes Robert Fisk seriously anymore except for the people who intentionally want to buy into the stuff he peddles. I don't have the time or desire to go back and find the countless write-ups that demonstrate, using rational thinking, logic, and actual proven facts, that half of what Mr. Fisk postulates is based on hearsay, rumors, and his own spin.