Aug 15 2006

What Is With Israel?

Published by at 9:16 am under All General Discussions,Hezbollah

There have been some strong and rightful complaints about Olmert’s leadership. He has truly been weak and indecisive.

THE AMERICANS have lost faith in Israel as an ally. After he gave Israel every opportunity to win this war, even signaling clearly that Israel should feel free to go as far as Beirut if necessary, President Bush was convinced that Olmert simply didn’t want to fight. The Americans were shocked by Israel’s performance. They know that we can win when we set our mind to it and were flummoxed when presented with an Israeli leadership that refused to even try.

But this last bit of news has me totally stumped:

Hizbullah will not hand over its weapons to the Lebanese government but rather refrain from exhibiting them publicly, according to a new compromise that is reportedly brewing between Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Seniora and Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

The UN cease-fire resolution specifically demands the demilitarization of the area south of the Litani river. The resolution was approved by the Lebanese cabinet.

Well, Hezbollah hasn’t been exhibiting their weapons in public for the last month of fighting (unless you count placing them inside civilain enclaves an ‘exhibition’). Olmert has a chance to redeem himself by not allowing this charade to go unchallenged. Bush better not allow this to go unchallenged. This would be the victory Nasrallah claimed yesterdat.

27 responses so far

27 Responses to “What Is With Israel?”

  1. Terrye says:

    Ivehardt:

    Glick is very passionate and believes in what she says. I don’t think there is anything wrong with her. I just do not always agree with her.She is just a Likudnik.

  2. Terrye says:

    Enforcement:

    I am wrong about something every damn day of my life. But saying that the US forced Israel to lose a war is ridiculous. Really it is.

    I just think that the Right ran with this, just like they did Dubai and now they are too invested to admit that maybe it would be better to wait a few days before they decide that Israel lost and Condi screwed up and it all sucks all the time and we are all going to die.

    I remember when this all started that Jennifer from Fox made the point that Hezbellah was popular in Lebanon because they were thought to be incorruptable and because they had stood up to Israel in the decades long conflict that did not end until the occupation of southern Lebanon ended in 2000. This is not about fighting an army. If it was there would be no contest. This is about a very old grudge and whatever happens here today, this will go on.

  3. Terrye says:

    BTW Enforcement what is the point in having a man like Bolton at the UN if we are not going to let him do his job and come up with Resolutions that actually are in our favor or the the favor of our allies?

  4. The Macker says:

    Terrye,
    You reflect my thoughts. Too many conservatives are bellowing “sell out” as they did with the Dubai Ports deal. They didn’t think that one through and are guessing here.

    Israel is in a safer position now and both Bush and Olmert have brought clarity to the interference of Syria and Iran.
    A prolonged guerrilla war in Lebanon was not in anyone’s interest.

    Bush and Rice likely pulled a brilliant tactical move by focusing world attention on the disarming of Hezbollah, leaving Israel with all its options.

  5. For Enforcement says:

    Terrye, you are right on Bolton, I think he does a great job. He feels about the same about the UN as I do. That it’s not worth a damn and is a waste of time and is only a place for despots to posture. If they have EVER accomplished anything worth the time of day, I don’t recall it.
    Bolton does feel like the UN needs to be restructured, as I do, and maybe it can become effective.

    “BTW Enforcement what is the point in having a man like Bolton at the UN if we are not going to let him do his job”

    Macker,, you may be right, but I don’t see it now. Maybe it will be.

    “Bush and Rice likely pulled a brilliant tactical move by focusing world attention on the disarming of Hezbollah, leaving Israel with all its options.

    So now as a result, Hezbollah is gonna disarm (they say they’re not, and Lebanon says it was Israel’s place to disarm them)
    And Israel’s options are? Duck and say a prayer? what are some of the others. Surely if they fire now, they’ll be blamed for starting it.
    you also said:
    “Too many conservatives are bellowing “sell out” as they did with the Dubai Ports deal. ”
    I agree with you on that and I certainly wasn’t one of them. I believed the Dubai deal should have stood. I see them as long standing allies.
    I’d rather run the Chinese out of all the ports they are running here in the US, but the Dems let that happen so they can’t blame Bush, so they’re keeping their mouths shut.

  6. For Enforcement says:

    and what is a “Likudnik” Urban dictionary didn’t define it.

  7. MerryJ1 says:

    TerryE, I think you made excellent points. And, one thing Bush and Rice brought to the surface that can no longer be denied, is that it is Iran, facilitated by Syria, pulling the Hezbollah strings.

    That may be something that everyone on this site, Macs’ and Thinker, etc., all of us political junkies, already knew. But it is not something that most casual news readers were aware of.

    When — not if, when we go in to flatten Syria and/or Iran, the reasons and the necessity will be understood and integrated into the collective American psyche (excluding the usual suspects like Dean, Kos, NYT and the rest of the true subversives).

    A hot game of Texas Hold’em, anyone?