9 Responses to “Miscalculating Hezbollah?”

1. jdyer Says:
   July 25th, 2006 at 3:05 pm

   Here we go again!

   Whoever said that Israeli strategists

   “The most gross miscalculation Israeli strategists are making is based on the assumption that Hezbollah is a) not a legitimate political entity in this country, b) its base is made up of extremists and c) its “eliminationâ€? would leave the Lebanese construct unscathed.”

   I am also sure they knew that Lebanon would suffer damage. However, they also knew that Israel would also suffer damage and that the damage would be more severe had they waited to deal with hezbollah till it armed itself with stronger and deadlier missiles.

   As to hezbollah’s relation to Lebanon, the people there need to decide if they will let that totalitarian islamic organziation speak for them as the Nazis did for Germany or they will speak against it as best they can.

   Puting all the blame on Israel will not lesten Hezbollah’s hold on Lebanon.

2. jdyer Says:
   July 25th, 2006 at 5:26 pm

   I wonder who is doing the miscalculating:

   http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1153291996655&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter

   “Hizbullah: IDF onslaught was unexpected

   Associated Press

   A senior Hizbullah official said Tuesday the guerrillas did not expect Israel to react so strongly to its capture of two IDF soldiers this month.

   Mahmoud Komati, the deputy chief of the Hezbollah politburo, also said that his group would not lay down arms.

   His comments were the first time that a leader from the Islamic militant group has suggested it miscalculated the consequences of the July 12 cross-border raid that seized the two.
   “The truth is – let me say this clearly – we didn’t even expect (this) response…. that (Israel) would exploit this operation for this big war against us,” said Komati.

   He said Hizbullah had expected “the usual, limited response” from Israel….”

3. plnelson Says:
   July 25th, 2006 at 5:42 pm

   Rasha says: “but I do not question their legitimacy as a political actor on the Lebanese scene”

   Exactly. This supports what I’ve been saying on the other discussions here. Hezbollah is PART of Lebanon. Others have beeen suggesting the Hezbollah is some outside entity that Lebanon has been forced by Syria and their own peculiar history and world-view to accept. I’ve said that if that’s true we would have seen more objection to their presence from other Lebanese. Hezbollah is integral to Lebanon, a major party and actor in Lebanese society, and by that token Israel has been attacked by the Lebanese.

   Just as the Americans are responsible for the mess that they started in Iraq, the Lebanese are responsible for the mess in their country right now. Both nations’ citizens made a series of irrational decisions that they should be very sorry for now – often taking the form of NOT objecting to something they should have objected to, or believing leraders they should NOT have believed. US children are dying in Iraq right now, and Lebanese children are dying in Lebanon, both as a result of bad thinking and too little skepticism by the people there.

4. huck finn Says:
   July 25th, 2006 at 11:14 pm

   Hezbollah was strengthened in 1980 – October Surprise _ that brought us Reagan and Bush.
   Hezbollah and Hamas are serving masters with greater corporate agendas – Pakistan, China, France, US in addition to Syria and Iran (supposedly, Would you like to buy some Made in Iran stickers?)
   The observer must remain open-minded and retain a good memory for the players. Keep a score card.

5. huck finn Says:
   July 25th, 2006 at 11:40 pm

   The Associated Press story cited above also suggests that Germany was involved in previous prisoner exchanges between Israel and Hezbollah and that 3 for 2 had been successful in the past. The Israelis initiated their attacks on any premise, The planning for this had been in development for many years. THERE IS A CLEAR RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS AND THE RECORD HIGH PRICES OF OIL – NUFF SAID ! ! !

6. jdyer Says:
   July 25th, 2006 at 11:56 pm

   Hezbolah’s media campaign and CNN:

   http://newsbusters.org/node/6552

   “Challenged by Reliable Sources host (and Washington Post media writer) Howard Kurtz on Sunday, Robertson suggested Hezbollah has “very, very sophisticated and slick media operations,â€? that the terrorist group “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,â€? and he even contradicted Hezbollah’s self-serving spin: “There’s no doubt that the [Israeli] bombs there are hitting Hezbollah facilities.â€?

   But the closest Robertson came to making any of these points in the taped package that aired last week was admitting that “we [he and his CNN crew] didn’t go burrowing into all the houses,â€? after pointing out (for the second time) that “we didn’t see any military type of equipmentâ€? in the area Hezbollah chose to let them tour.”

7. huck finn Says:
   July 26th, 2006 at 12:17 am

   JDYER-

   Not sure of your point …

   CNN is decidely pro-Israel in most situations. For example, Wolf Blitzer is supposedly on the payroll of an Israeli PR firm. My observations of CNN are that they are scripted, just like FOX.

   Despite the destruction and loss of innocent life, Hezbollah and Hamas serve a populist function. And give Israel a convenient target, just as “terrorism” is a handy scapegoat that conveniently permits greater control of contraband: currency, drugs, arms, technology, pharma, immigrants, sex slaves, etc at the expense of smaller economies and individual rights.

8. jdyer Says:
   July 26th, 2006 at 1:25 am

   “CNN is decidely pro-Israel in most situations. For example, Wolf Blitzer is supposedly on the payroll of an Israeli PR firm. My observations of CNN are that they are scripted, just like FOX.”

   I am not sure why you call yourself Huck Finn, but any way you are totally wrong about CNN being pro Israel.

   You seem to have a conspiratorial cast of mind and it would be useless to argue the point with you, though.

   Above, I was posting what a CNN reporter said.

9. urig Says:
   July 26th, 2006 at 4:45 am

   “This extreme form of Habermas-mania, that assumes that deep conflicts can be “talked throughâ€? is the sumum of hubris.”

   So, Rasha, are we to understand that you prefer resolving this conflict through violence?

   As an Israeli I am indeed surprised to see how hateful you are towards Israelis. I can relate to the Israelis wrote you. They jumped to the conclusion that being liberal and pro-democratic, you will opt for moderation and be against Hizbullah and its terrorism. You might be someone on the “other side” that they can talk to and not shoot at.

   Indeed it is easy for me to forget that you are under fire from my country’s army.
   For me that is in still no excuse for your view of Hizbullah as a legitimate force in your country’s politics. No matter how well supported Hiznullah is in your country, nor how well a service it does to its supporters, it is still a murderous terrorist organization intent on war and death. As such, it should be vehemently rejected by you.

Write a Reply