Israel Committed to Block Arms and Kill Nasrallah (NYT)

[laststeamtrain]

August 20, 2006
Israel Committed to Block Arms and Kill Nasrallah
By STEVEN ERLANGER

JERUSALEM, Aug. 19 — Despite a cease-fire agreement, Israel intends to do its best to keep Iran and Syria from rearming Hezbollah and to kill the militia’s leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, says a senior Israeli commander.

International commitments to exclude the Hezbollah militia from southern Lebanon and to disarm it already seem hollow, said the commander, who had a well-placed view of the war and its planning and has extensive experience in Lebanon.

The officer would only speak on the condition of anonymity in an interview on Friday. But, speaking one day before commandos carried out a raid that Israeli officials said was to disrupt arms shipments for Hezbollah from Syria and Iran, he was explicit that Israel would continue to seek out and block any such attempts. He also emphasized that, despite criticism from the Israeli public and even troops of the performance of the Army and government, he considered the threat and the fighting ability of Hezbollah to have been severely diminished.

Furthermore, he made it clear that Sheik Nasrallah remained a target as the leader of a group that Israel and the United States have labeled terrorist. “There’s only one solution for him,” he said. At another point, he said simply, “This man must die.”

<more>

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/world/middleeast/20mideast.html?ex=1313726400&en=5fea11ec71cbf439&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

[mike_c]

1. Israel's twisted version of a "cease-fire...."

They continue killing, everyone else continues dying.

[ShockediSay]

3. Attack, Raid, Invade & Call It Self Defense - that's Israel's policy since

1996, the so called "Clean Break" doctrine
put together by Perle and Feith with Netanyahu

http://www.google.com/search?as_q=New+Strategy+Securing+Realm&num=50&hl=en&btnG=Google+Search&as_epq=A+Clean+Break&as_oq=&as_eq=&lr=&as_ft=i&as_filetype=&as_qdr=all&as_nlo=&as_nhi=&as_occt=any&as_dt=i&as_sitesearch=&as_rights=&safe=images

AND more recently adopted as US policy (witness Iraq) by the NeoCons

[saigon68]

30. Feeding Frenzy

[BushOut06]

7. What about Hezbollah's twisted version of cease-fire?

Claim victory, then continue to re-arm and rebuild. Tell the UN and Lebanese gov't not to poke around too much, and goddamned it they better not mess with their arms caches. Then sometime in the future, they'll fire a couple of rockets into Israel, and wait for the inevitable retaliation and blame Israel for breaking the cease-fire. The 2nd part hasn't happened yet this time, but has before.

[IndianaGreen]

12. The only thing twisted in here is Israel itself!

A nation that has disregarded every UN resolution but one. Let's start by implementing UN Security Council Resolution 242, and return to pre-June 1967 borders.

[mike_c]

13. why shouldn't Hiz'bullah rearm and rebuild...?

Do you think Israel is disarming and leaving the rubble? What are you thinking? Hiz'bullah is one of the parties of belligerants in the recent conflict-- a cease fire does not prohibit their recovery from the conflict-- that's what a surrender generally does, and Hiz'bullah certainly did not surrender.

What Hiz'bullah is apparently NOT doing is invading Israel, assassinating Israeli leaders, and pursuing a policy of inflaming the conflict rather than disengaging. In short, they appear to be honoring the cease fire. Israel has announced that they have no intention of doing so.

[dionysus]

17. do you think they'd be stupid enough to disarm so israel

call roll in and kill them?

[Kailassa]

19. They claimed victory? ... How appalling !!!

I keep hearing this in the whines about Hezbollah.
Obviously by claiming victory they have really got
up the noses of those who support Israeli aggression.

Winning a war of words has never been easier.

And they might fire a couple of rockets into Israel
again in the future ...

Hello, Bushout06, have you slept right through all
the reports if Israel breaking the truce?
Not reports that they may break it sometime in the
future; reports of how they are breaking it.

But weasel words can find a way to support any kind
of murder if the speaker values supremacy of their
chosen nation over truth.

[Jim__]

2. Assasinate Nasrallah! That about as bright as bombing Lebanon to discredit

Hezbollah. These people are assholes!

[jaysunb]

4. Pre meditated murder ?????

Hmmmmmm :evilfrown:

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

5. Solutions, huh?

They are talking about "solutions"?

Hmmm. Interesting.

[Hardrada]

6. Not a felicitous choice of words.

[Joanne98]

8. Disarming Hezbollah and killing Nasrallah are poison pills in the

agreement. Israel is not serious apparently.

[acmavm]

9. Look at the bunch of lying criminal bastards who authored

A Clean Break:
*******************************************************************
A report prepared by The Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies’ "Study Group on a New Israeli Strategy Toward 2000," with ideas from: Richard Perle, Douglas Feith, and David Wurmser among others. Dowload PDF of report. A description of the delivery of the report to Israel can be found here: www.israeleconomy.org/report1.htm.

*********************************************************************

Jeez, that line up immediately say "this plan is friggin' stupid, illegal, and written by ignorant thugs"

[IndianaGreen]

10. Israel should be committed to making peace with her neighbors

by withdrawing from Occupied Palestine and returning lands taken from Syria and Lebanon. Failure to do so will condemn Israel to the same fate of the white Rhodesians and Afrikaaners.

[ShockediSay]

15. sounds good to me nt

[treestar]

11. Surely Hezbollah has a #2 man

Those in charge of Israel now are as stupid as the Bush Administration.

[HuffleClaw]

20. if they are anything like al qaeda they have scores of '#2' guys!

hehehehehe

[gula]

14. In the meantime nobody talks about the continuing killing of

Palestinians and the arrest of their elected gouvernment officials.

[Rex]

16. Wow, that will cause another war.

Whois running things in Israel? Dick Cheney?

[David__77]

18. Best of luck to Lebanon and all its resistance forces.

They are on the front line confronting an aggressive and dangerous power - but one that can be checked and limited in power.

[msmcghee]

21. In almost every post in this thread, there is . .

. . an implied moral equivalency between Hizbollah and Isreal.

Let's forget that Hizbullah was the aggressor who intitiated the recent violence against Israel - and do a little make believe test.

Imagine that somehow all the Hamas and Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad and armies that threaten Israel could be completely disarmed so that there was no way that further attacks could possibly be initated toward Israel and also that there was no way Israel's enemies could defend against an attack from Israel - but that Israel was allowed to keep all her weapons and armaments and military capability intact.

What would happen? Do you imagine that Israel would over-run her neighbors and kill them or kick them out of their lands and occupy them? Or, do you think Israel would breath a sigh of relief and cautiously start demilitarizing her own armies? OK that's the first scenario.

Now, imagine that somehow all the Israeli military could be completely disarmed so that there was no way that further attacks could possibly be initated against any nation by Israel and also that there was no way Israel could defend against an attack from any of her eneimes - but that Hamas and Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad and all Israel's enemies were allowed to keep all their weapons and armaments and military capability intact.

What would happen? Do you think Israel would last a week, a month? How quickly would the various Arab factions start a Sunni / Shia war to divide up the spoils and prevent the Palestinians from having their own state?

If you answer that question honestly then it will be obvious to you who the aggressors in the ME are and what drives them.

If you agree that Israel would not last a week - but that is justified because Israel sits on Arab land, then you are a partisan who condones violent attacks for your side but condemns violent defense for your enemy, Israel. You have no right to pretend to be even-handed or to be looking for a peaceful solution. You have no right to complain when Israel participates in the war that you condone - and especially when your side suffers Israel's retaliation.

People who believe their desires justify military aggression are the cause of war and suffering in the world - not the people who simply defend their citizens from terrorist attacks. Even if you don't carry a weapon yourself, you are just as much the problem and the cause of the deaths of all who die in the wars you condone - as those with the weapons whom you cheer on.

Try a little intellectual honesty for a change.

[IndianaGreen]

22. Israel is the aggressor by occupying Lebanese, Syrian, and Palestinian

territory. Give up the lands taken in 1967, and then we can discuss other issues, but until then, Israel is and remains the aggressor.

[msmcghee]

23. As I suspected, intellectual honesty is not in the cards.

You are clouding the issue by bringing up lands that are under dispute as the result of previous wars of aggression against Israel and which Israel needs in order to maintain security - while surrounded by neighbors out to destroy Israel. Israel has already indicated that in exchange for peace she would gladly accept the pre'67 borders - with some minor adjustments. That's a non-issue - otherwise known as a red herring. And of course, you completely avoided the point of my post.

[IndianaGreen]

24. Israel must leave the lands taken in 1967 just as Iraq did Kuwait

a total and unconditional withdrawal, no "minor adjustments" which translates in keeping East Jerusalem.

Enough of this ME bullshit!

[msmcghee]

25. Still, you avoid dealing with my premise . .

. . and continue to bring up distractions. Why? Is it because your moral and legal position is empty and without merit?

[zreosumgame]

28. youre 'premis' is flawed

by your ASSumption that if 'everyone else' in the area would just disarm all would be wqell in the area, that Israel's har-liners would not invade pre-emptivly AGAIN, and that suddenly Israel would no longer not steal more lands and waterways.

Sorry to tell you this, but nobody believes that. In particular after this recent killing spree of theirs. The fact is that somehow 2 IDF warriors were captured, inside Lebannon or inside Israel, depending on who you talk to. And AS HAS HAPPENED BEFORE in these situations Hiz'bullah asked Israel if they wanted to trade, Israel told them to fuck-off.

So, in other woirds, Israel HAD a peaceful way out of this and decided to invade instead. Yeah, real peace loving neighbors there.

[msmcghee]

29. Your account has no relation to reality. Zero.

Israel has not requested that her neighbors disarm - only that they don't attack. Jordan and Egypt both have large well-armed militaries. Neither have been attacked by Israel since signing peace treaties. No-one has ever suggested that Israel even plans to attack them.

Israel did not attack Hizbullah pre-emtively. Again, since few here are interested in the factual truth, I'll post it:

Official UNIFIL Report to the UN:

New Crisis Erupts

New hostilities on the Israeli-Lebanese border started on 12 July 2006 when Hizbollah launched several rockets from Lebanese territory across the Blue Line towards IDF positions near the coast and in the area of the Israeli town of Zarit. In parallel, Hizbollah fighters crossed the Blue Line into Israel, attacked an Israeli patrol and captured two Israeli soldiers, killed three others and wounded two more. The captured soldiers were taken into Lebanon.

Subsequent to the attack on the patrol, a heavy exchange of fire ensued across the Blue Line between Hizbollah and the IDF. While the exchange of fire stretched over the entire length of the Line, it was heaviest in the areas west of Bint Jubayl and in the Shabaa farms area. Hizbollah targeted IDF positions and Israeli towns south of the Blue Line. Israel retaliated by ground, air and sea attacks. In addition to air strikes on Hizbollah positions, the IDF targeted numerous roads and bridges in southern Lebanon, within and outside the UNIFIL area of operations.

********************************************

You have no more excuses to lie about this.

[breakaleg]

26. The problem is, as long as one person holds one gun, Israel will use that

for the excuse to attack them and keep on attacking them. As there is no possible way to get rid of every single weapon, your premise is flawed.

Let's talk about reality. And that reality is Israel is invading and occupying other countries' lands and torturing their people. To say that that is not relevant is being in denial of the facts.

[msmcghee]

27. Your premise is utterly false and dishonest.

Israel has never demanded disarmament of her neighbors - only that her citizens and borders not be attacked.

Re: Hizbullah. It was the UN that demanded that Hizbullah be disarmed. Lebanon agreed to that demand but failed to enforce it.

The absurdity of your statement is proven by the well-armed existence of Jordan and Egypt - neither of which has been attacked since signing peace treaties with Israel.

Have any more fanciful justifications for your terrorists?

[breakaleg]

31. I was responding you something you said...

specifically that all armies that threaten Israel be completely disarmed.

"Imagine that somehow all the Hamas and Hizbullah and Islamic Jihad and armies that threaten Israel could be completely disarmed so that there was no way that further attacks could possibly be initated toward Israel and also that there was no way Israel's enemies could defend against an attack from Israel - but that Israel was allowed to keep all her weapons and armaments and military capability intact."

[msmcghee]

33. This is your original post . . .

***** The problem is, as long as one person holds one gun, Israel will use that
for the excuse to attack them and keep on attacking them. As there is no possible way to get rid of every single weapon, your premise is flawed.

Let's talk about reality. And that reality is Israel is invading and occupying other countries' lands and torturing their people. To say that that is not relevant is being in denial of the facts. *****

I used facts to show that to be utterly wrong and dishonest.

Now, you say you were responding to something that I said.

The quote you provide is a section from a hypothetical scenario. Only a person who can not comprehend English or someone who is being dishonest would suggest that I was calling for " . . all armies that threaten Israel be completely disarmed."

So, which is it? Are you unable to comprehend English - or just dishonest?

[Junkdrawer]

32. That's as nonsensical as saying the US would disarm if only...

the rest of the world would disarm.

Military might is sold as a defensive necessity, but used to gain economic advantage. Always.

[Karenina]

36. And Israel is an EXPERT at it.

Israel has seized water, land, imprisoned duly elected officials from the "other side," forced their "niggers" into ghettos, denied them the basics, shot their children in the head for stone throwing, destroyed their homes and livelihoods, all while screeching as loudly as possible "WE ARE THE ONLY VICTIMS HERE AND ANYONE WHO DARE QUESTION THAT IS AN ANTI-SEMITE!!!"

[Rex]

34. You don't live in reality.

Israel has committed a large number of UN violations; if they had all the weapons and the Arab nations had none, Israel would divide and conquer. Get real and stop blaming other posters for your ignorance of the Middle East.

[msmcghee]

35. In my ignorance of Middle East, why is it that . .

. . Israel has not killed everyone in Gaza or all Palestinians on the West Bank?

The inhabitants of those places have no real arms or military capability against Israel's might. And they are arguably the groups most committed to Israel's destruction.

So, there's your perfect test case. Why has Israel not "divided and conquered" the militarily insignificant militants of Gaza and the West Bank. Wait, Israel has done the opposite. It has actually vacated Gaza and much of the West Bank - and wants to get out of the rest but can't for security reasons.

Now, tell me again how Israel would "divide and conquer" if Israel only " . . had all the weapons and her enemies had none".

What a joke.