Fatal Lebanon raid 'violates' truce

[Judi Lynn]

Last Update: Saturday, August 19, 2006. 10:55pm (AEST)
Fatal Lebanon raid 'violates' truce

Lebanon's Prime Minister says an Israeli raid, in which three Hezbollah militants and one Israeli soldier died earlier today, was a "naked violation" of a cease-fire between the warring sides.

The raid on a village near the town of Baalbek, a Hezbollah stronghold in eastern Lebanon, was the first major incident since a United Nations-brokered cease-fire began on Monday.

Lebanese Prime Minister Fouad Siniora says he has protested about the incident to visiting UN envoys, who will take up the matter with UN secretary-general Kofi Annan.

Hezbollah's main ally in Lebanon's Government, Parliamentary Speaker Nabih Berri, says he has also raised the incident with the envoys.

"If Lebanon had launched a similar act, wouldn't the Security Council have met to impose tough sanctions against it?" he said.
(snip/...)

http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200608/s1719157.htm

[Robbien]

1. The good thing about this is that the Israeli raid failed miserably

Israel probably thought it could come in and pick off anyone it wanted. Hopefully they got the message that such behavior is not allowed and will be fought.

And yes, if they plan to sanction Lebanon for acts of aggression during the truce, then the same treatment should be meted out to Israel.

[acmavm]

2. Israel thinks its fighting the same enemy that it fought in 1967. Foolish

thinking that.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Igel]

3. I already think Lebanon should be condemned

for its lack of actions. They seem to have a "don't ask/don't tell" policy, which will do nobody any favors in the long run.

I hear the sounds of a metal can hitting pavement. Kick the can was never my favorite game. But I'm not sure that the proper response is ear plugs.

I think the IDF's claims should be checked into. But Hezb isn't the proper group to do so, and Lebanon's shown itself to be ridiculously ineffective.

[Kagemusha]

4. Ridiculously ineffective at protecting Israel you mean?

That's the charge I hear leveled at the UN all the time too. Yeah, so our alternative is what, destroying Lebanon completely? And I'm not trying to be funny. I don't see anyone else willing to run Lebanon besides the Lebanese unless everyone wants the Syrians back. (Last I heard, no one did.) So our alternatives are even worse, as far as I can tell.

[Igel]

16. Ridiculously effective in maintaining its honor and not lying,

I mean.

Whatever the agreement, Lebanon could have said no. Instead, they said 'yes', meaning 'no'. They didn't even use the 'we had no choice, we were scared of further Israeli attacks' excuse. They just used the same excuse: 'we're too pathetically weak, and Nasrallah makes my knees go wobbly.' This hasn't changed in years, and Israeli bombs didn't suddenly make them go courageous. Just duplicitous.

They said yes. They intended no.

This is apparently an honorable practice that should be commended to all right thinking people. Nasrallah said what he meant; and yet lots of people here tried to say he couldn't possibly mean what he said. He could. It's the rest of the Lebanese government that neither means what it says or says what it means.

I personally think it should be decried. When Israel does it, when Lebanon does it, when * does it. Lying doesn't provide the basis of trust or dignity.

My 2 year old has no clue, but he's 2. La Signora should know this by now.

Then again, there's a long-standing, albeit obsolete view in many circles, that a husband can void any contract a wife enters into, and such a contract is only binding after the husband's approved. I guess that's Siniora's out.

[lumpy]

5. Israel is not the proper group

to be meddling in Lebanon's affairs. They have been the aggressor, occupier and disrupter of Lebanon's existence since 1978. It is no business of yours or Israels' how Lebanon handles their affairs. As Lebanese, Hezbollah has the right to defend against Israel's continual interference and aggression of Lebanon.

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lumpy]

11. Sorry, smarty pants.

I'm not Lebanese. Israel has treated Lebanon with bombs and brutality and I guess they don't want to take it anymore and I don't blame them. Apparently you do blame them. To post such garbage is an act of desperate argument on your part and juvenile at best. Can't you do better than that? I might have replied in such a terse manner "why aren't you over in Israel supporting the troops 'defending' Israel'..but I didn't and won't.

[Akim]

6. What Israel means by a truce: A time of relative peace when...

we can kill our enemies with impunity.

[MrPrax]

7. To answer your question Mr. Berri:

Yes, sanctions and military retaliation...without hesitation.

Might I also add Mr. Berri, you've done a piss poor job defending your country.

Solution...rather than bitching about Syria and Iran, which seem far more interested in protecting you than your allies, might I suggest Lebanon clear it's house of traitors, and go on a military spending spree and actually purchase arms from these countries and anyone else that might fully equip an independent Lebanon.

When you have done, two things will occur:

1) Hezbullah can be legitmately disarmed and integrated into your countries security as is their right.

2) You can punch back at foreign terrorist aggressor.

Ask yourself, Mr. Berri, if you were able to cause even half the damage to Israel that Israel did to your country, whose political system do you think will collapse first?

[lumpy]

8. Israel's political system is superior

because they did the most damage to Lebanon? That is the same as saying that the US is superior, some how, because they caused the death of thousands of Iraqis and left the country in shreds. You don't appear to realize that Lebanon is trying to recover from Israel's occupation (until the year 2000) after 18 years under Israel's boot. There has been little opportunity for Lebanon to advance from the continual invasions Israel has inflicted on that country since 1978. Given a chance they might succeed as a viable democracy if Israel will give up their obsession with land/water grabbing.

[MrPrax]

10. You missed the point...

in an evenly matched battle where the killing and damage is more or less equal...Israel would blink first for exactly the things you cite.

Lebanon has 'been there, done that' and has formally divided it political system between the various factions, which makes them more resilent to a political and social breakdown. Israel, I don't believe, has that luxury...they are fractured society that is simply held together by the eternal logic of 'victimization'...if Israel gets it nose bloodied enough, the concensus there would break.

In response, Israel's leadership will clampdown and go 'dictator' in order to co-ordinate such a war and cause even greater fracturing as the 'exiles' would leave in droves. Let's face it, a lot of folks in Israel can easily slip out of the country and back to wherever, leaving only those without that option. to leave...essentially the real people of Palestine.

Personally I would love to see Israel live up to it's reputation as a free and democratic country and export some of it's ideas and ways to their brothers and sisters in the ME, instead of demonize them as 'terrorists'. In the long run, having moderate forward looking ME regimes would only go to enhance Israel's survival and prestige. They have a lot to offer actually.

But unfortunately US interests ultimately lie in supporting and abbeting filthy theocratic regimes and extremist elements that are just as used to killing Arabs as they are killing jews.

There has to be a regional solution that goes to change not only Lebanon, but the raft of US-client states that are no more interested in their own people than they are Israel. If you note, the only regimes the US/Israel hates are those that are NOT under it's control, namely Iran and Syria that have been more than forceful in it's self-determination.

That's why we are suppose to hate them, just as we are suppose to hate Cuba, Bolivia, Venezuela, and whoever else runs afoul of the international arrangement that generally doesn't include the lives of the majority of planet's increasingly poor and desparate.

[lumpy]

12. I guess I did miss the point.

I fail to see why you can accuse Berri of doing a piss poor job and indicate that military power is the answer to any aggression. I guess that theory has been disproved this time. I know the reality is the necessity of haveing a strong military, unfortunatly for the world. I'll stick to my reasons why the Lebanes government hasn't really had a chance to run smoothly in the short time they have seen freedom. Sorry if I misinterpreted your post but I am on the warpath myself lately.

[allemand]

13. Olmert Tells Annan IDF Acted in Self-Defense

(IsraelNN.com) Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan Saturday evening that Israel's raid on a Hizbullah terrorist group in eastern Lebanon was an action of self defense. The Prime Minister explained that Hizbullah had received weapons from Syria, an action prohibited under the United Nations Security ceasefire resolution.

Annan transmitted to Prime Minister Olmert the complaint of the Lebanese government that the IDF operation was "a naked violation" of the U.N. resolution.

http://www.israelnn.com/news.php3?id=110361

The kidnapping of two Hezbollah fighers was also in "self-defense", I assume?

Report: IDF commandos snatched Hezbollah prisoners in Baalbek raid
By Israel Insider staff and partners August 19, 2006

Ynet reports that the commando unit of the super-elite Sayeret Matkal completed its mission and returned from the Baalbek area with two Hezbollah prisoners. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert gave a green light for the mission, despite the risk of causing a violation of the UN ceasefire.

While the real purpose of the mission remains shrouded in secrecy, it apparently was not a simple interdiction of weapons from Syria as was publicly claimed by Israeli officials, including its Defense Minister Amir Peretz.

http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Diplomacy/9218.htm

[daleo]

14. It sounds like they wanted trade bait

For the capture of the two Israeli solders, way back at the start.