Pundits on the Israeli, Hezbollah and UN Activity

I checked out some of the more intelligent commentators and they have some interesting views of the whole Israeli/Hezbollah/UN mess.

Let's start with Niall Ferguson.

IT'S FUNNY that the abbreviation for the United Nations is U.N. It always makes me think of negatives. Unhelpful. Unrealistic. Unproductive. Unhappy. This has been an especially bittersweet summer for the United Nations. I'm talking about not only its monthlong paralysis while war between Israel and Hezbollah has devastated Lebanese and Israeli cities, but also the manifest impotence of its peacekeeping force in Lebanon, four members of which were killed July 25 by Israeli forces. Despite all this, most people still tend to assume that the U.N. is the best place to look for a solution to this latest crisis in the Middle East. Indeed, on Friday, U.N. Security Council members agreed to a resolution aimed at stopping the fighting. But who seriously expects the United Nations to prevent Al Qaeda (or its latest imitator) from trying to blow up passenger planes in the air? Those who dreamed up the "Lockerbie-meets-9/11" bomb plot clearly did intend "mass murder on an unimaginable scale." All the U.N. has to offer in response is yada, yada, yada on an unimaginable scale.

He goes on to state that the UN has made the world more peaceful, though I'd say that the only reason for that is that it restricts justified actions by offended countries by bogging them down in diplomatic jousting. The world may appear more peaceful, but I'd wager that no fewer people have died.

Then there is George Will.

Five weeks have passed since the kidnapping of two Israeli soldiers provoked Israel to launch its most unsatisfactory military operation in 58 years. What problem has been solved, or even ameliorated?

Hezbollah, often using World War II-vintage rockets, has demonstrated the inadequacy of Israel's policy of unilateral disengagement -- from Lebanon, Gaza, much of the West Bank -- behind a fence. Hezbollah has willingly suffered (temporary) military diminution in exchange for enormous political enlargement. Hitherto Hezbollah in Lebanon was a "state within a state." Henceforth, the Lebanese state may be an appendage of Hezbollah, as the collapsing Palestinian Authority is an appendage of the terrorist organization Hamas. Hezbollah is an army that, having frustrated the regional superpower, suddenly embodies, as no Arab state ever has, Arab valor vindicated in combat with Israel.

I'm on board with the analysis that Lebanon will likely become an organ of Hezbollah. Especially considering the Lebanese strong resistance to disarming Hezbollah.

He goes on to discuss the London Plane bombing conspiracy:

The London plot against civil aviation confirmed a theme of an illuminating new book, Lawrence Wright's "The Looming Tower: Al-Qaeda and the Road to 9/11." The theme is that better law enforcement, which probably could have prevented Sept. 11, is central to combating terrorism. F-16s are not useful tools against terrorism that issues from places such as Hamburg (where Mohamed Atta lived before dying in the North Tower of the World Trade Center) and High Wycombe, England.

Cooperation between Pakistani and British law enforcement (the British draw upon useful experience combating IRA terrorism) has validated John Kerry's belief (as paraphrased by the New York Times Magazine of Oct. 10, 2004) that "many of the interdiction tactics that cripple drug lords, including governments working jointly to share intelligence, patrol borders and force banks to identify suspicious customers, can also be some of the most useful tools in the war on terror." In a candidates' debate in South Carolina (Jan. 29, 2004), Kerry said that although the war on terror will be "occasionally military," it is "primarily an intelligence and law enforcement operation that requires cooperation around the world."

There is a point. John Kerry isn't always wrong. Though I'd like to point out that there is no international police agency that can effectively fight terrorism. Interpol is a joke when it comes to terrorism. The point being missed here is that there are states that clearly support and shelter terrorists, and international policing will not have any effect on these havens. The contention that 9/11 could have been stopped by policing makes me demand an answer to who exactly would that police force been? Inside the US the forced separation of the intelligence networks of the FBI and CIA ensured that failure would occur. Not to mention the "it couldn't happen here" attitude that was entrenched in several previous administrations.

The war on terror will no doubt be primarily intelligence bound, but I doubt that the present administration is failing to understand that. Though I would say Kerry and the Dems on his side of the topic don't seem to agree since they are so very adamant in their objections to the NSA wiretapping or the Monetary intelligence systems that were so conveniently thrown into a political play as being violations of citizens rights.

Next there is Max Boot and his discussion on the results of the Israeli/Hezbollah fighting.

A weeklong visit to Israel, sponsored by the American Jewish Committee, revealed a catalog of defects that analysts attribute to the fact that Olmert (a former mayor), Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni (a lawyer) and Defense Minister Amir Peretz (a trade union leader) are national security neophytes.

Olmert's inexperience showed when he ordered military action against Lebanon on July 12 within hours of a Hezbollah raid that kidnapped two Israeli soldiers and killed eight others - without even bothering to hold a Cabinet meeting to explore various options. In his haste, the prime minister apparently accepted the assurances of Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz, the first air force general ever to lead the Israel Defense Forces, that air power alone could cripple Hezbollah.

The air force did have remarkable and unappreciated success in destroying most of Hezbollah's medium- and long-range rocket launchers - the Fajrs and Zilzals capable of hitting major cities such as Haifa and Tel Aviv. But there was little that aircraft could do against short-range Katyusha rockets, so small that they cannot readily be detected from the air. In their attempts to knock out Katyushas fired from residential areas, the fliers wound up inflicting substantial civilian casualties that, as Hezbollah intended, hurt Israel in the court of international opinion.

When it became evident that air attacks weren't enough, Olmert ordered small-scale ground forays that met strong resistance from dug-in, determined Hezbollah fighters equipped with sophisticated antitank missiles. It took a long time, at least by Israeli standards, to mobilize enough reserves to mount a full-scale invasion. The offensive finally began just two days before irresistible international pressure imposed a cease-fire, leaving Hezbollah bloodied but unbowed.

Unfortunately, the MSM in general has missed diagnosed the air campaigns intent and effectiveness. I almost read this as the original air attacks were to bash Hezbollah around and destroy some of their nastier toys. I think the politics of the issue turned it into an incursion that probably wasn't the original intent. That's just guessing using the assumption that Olmert isn't as much of a dolt as the press would lead you to believe.

Now will come the political reckoning. Some might see this fractiousness as a sign of weakness. Just the opposite is true. Arab societies tend to attribute their shortcomings to outsiders, a failing apparent in a meeting in Jerusalem last week with Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat, who blamed the prevalence of autocracy and theocracy in the Middle East on (who else?) the West. Israelis, by contrast, look within for the source of their misfortune. That allows them to correct what went wrong and get stronger in the future. This process is now underway, and IsraelÂ’s enemies would be well advised not to underestimate that nation's fighting capacity, no matter how wrenching the debate.

Seems no one likes to accept the blame for their own actions. Only problem is that they go from blaming the west to killing westeners. The Salafi Jihad and other like minded groups seem to see the "far war" as being that which will benefit Islam the most. This contention isn't fixing anything at home, or making progress toward better lives for the citizens of the middle-east. But then, I don't know if they have any real desire to reform their own countries.

Lastly there is VDHanson on the MSM's activities.

The reactions and media coverage coming out of the West regarding this latest war in the Middle East are as bewildering as they are instructive.

Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., for example, recently said, "I don't take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel ."

Meanwhile, the Western news agency Reuters, responding to scrutiny by bloggers, withdrew wire photos taken by a freelance photographer of a smoky and burning Beirut . Reuters had failed to catch the freelancer's doctoring of the photos to emphasize unduly the damage from Israeli bombs.

And the Associated Press notes that initially reported Lebanese claims of 40 "civilians" killed by Israeli air strikes at Houla, Lebanon, in fact, were mistaken - and that the latest reports have lowered the death toll to one.

In Qana, where the Israeli military had hit an apartment building (and were quickly censured by European statesmen), the number of civilian fatalities reported also kept decreasing as reports were scrutinized. Plus, we have learned that several hours lapsed between the dropping of the bombs and the fatal collapse of the building, raising further questions about the relationship between the bombing and the fatalities that followed. Finally, based on photographs from the scene, the onsite rescue appeared staged for reporters.

These discrepancies suggest we have little idea what actually happened on the ground there other than that Qana has been a favored missile-launching site against Israel , as a recent deadly aerial assault from there on Haifa attests.

I'd like to know what the average-joe thinks really happened in Lebanon. I've asked co-workers how many people died in Qana and in Houla, and I've only heard the numbers as originally reported. (56 and 40) No one ever finds out what the actual numbers were, primarily due to the MSM not following up on their reports. Of course, saying that the numbers weren't nearly as spectacular as originally reported isn't going to sell more commercial time, so why expect responsible journalism?

Well, there you go.

Now I have to figure out why my supervisor slept in the office overnight. (bloody loser.)