Wednesday, August 02, 2006

Hezbollah's Status

Yeah, I know this was on Instapundit, but I think the website and story is informative.
Amid the relentless images of the dead extracted from a building in Qana, amid the fiery anger those images generated - from Lebanon to Europe and from Egypt to Indonesia - and amid deafening global cries for an immediate ceasefire, a curiously contradictory picture is emerging from the battlefields of Hizballistan: Hizballah is on the ropes, running short of resources and desperate for a ceasefire for its very survival.

While the world has held itself aghast at "Israeli aggression," Israel has been relentless in pursuit of what has been described as the fiercest Arab fighting force in the region. Undeterred by global outcry as over two thousand rockets and missiles have rained down upon Israeli cities with relatively little note, Israel has made good on their Prime Minister's declaration of "Enough."

Israel is providing a lesson on fighting the war on terror.

I'm skeptical that Hezbollah is really on the ropes. Being a terrorist organization, I'm quite certain that they'll regrow fighters like heads on a hydra. I wouldn't be overly surprised if a lot of their munitions haven't moved across the Syrian border and further north in Lebanon. Another reason why Israel's tactical bombing of roads and bridges was justified. If you can't move those big missile/rocket launchers up the road then Israel has a better chance of destroying them. Of course, Syria is attempting to resupply:
While sustaining these enormous losses, Hizballah is having difficulty re-supplying across the Syrian border. Convoys from Syria are struck by F-16's and drones once they are within Lebanese borders, often with the massive secondary explosions that indicate arms shipments. The Israelis believe that Bashar Assad is "directly involved" in the attempts to smuggle rockets, other arms and ammunition to Hizballah, and the release of the results of "defense establishment" intelligence is Israel's way of sending a message to the Syrian president.
Which leads us to another article that links to Jemma Carter's pontificating on the Israeli/Hezbollah situation.
I have to say, Jemma is either showing signs of dementia or stupidity. I'm uncertain which. I find his analysis of what started the whole situation questionable, and then he really seems to be missing the point as to who is fighting in an abnormal manner.
It is inarguable that Israel has a right to defend itself against attacks on its citizens, but it is inhumane and counterproductive to punish civilian populations in the illogical hope that somehow they will blame Hamas and Hezbollah for provoking the devastating response. The result instead has been that broad Arab and worldwide support has been rallied for these groups, while condemnation of both Israel and the United States has intensified.
Sorry Jemma, Hezbollah is launching attacks from within civilian areas and the Israelis are attacking them. The collateral damage is not the intended target that you wish the world to see. Though the press and many EU ministers can't seem to come to that conclusion. Though that more proves the utter lack of logic more than anything else.

Jemma goes on about the UN's response being a band-aid approach to the situation, and a failure to make any actual motion to solving the problem in Lebanon. That is fairly accurate. Though I find it unlikely that the use of UN forces to solve the present issue would be a farce of biblical proportions. You can read the rest of Jemma's little OpEd if you have time to waste.


1 comment:

Granted said...

All this points out one thing and brings to mind another. The thing that this clearly defines is that in anything approaching a stand-up fight, terrorist organizations stink on toast. It sort of reminds me of what happened to the Viet Cong during Tet.
The question it raises, is terrorism a part of the Western way of war? Thinking about Hanson & Keegan, especially Keegan, and the comparisons between Greeks & Persians, etc., are we seeing the Western Way yet again shown to be superior or is terrorism an extension of some kind of the Western Way.
Actually, another question, does that fact that terrorism can work mean that the Western way is failing, or is it just a temporary bump in the road? I mean, so many of the "successful" terrorist campaigns were operational and tactical losses that were turned into strategic victories by the press and good propoganda.