Do you think Israel will take offensive against Lebanon?
WarMachine
Active member
They aren't going to, international pressure is going to stop this war very soon and an inland invasion would take too long.
Consider if they did invade, they wouldn't destroy hezbollah since they couldn't last time and it would be twice as hard now that hezbollah has better weapons and organization. Israel just wants to do as much damage as possible and then deal with the criticism later.
The likely outcome will probably a UN monitored border between lebanon and israel and the kidnapped soldiers will return as part of the cease fire terms.
Consider if they did invade, they wouldn't destroy hezbollah since they couldn't last time and it would be twice as hard now that hezbollah has better weapons and organization. Israel just wants to do as much damage as possible and then deal with the criticism later.
The likely outcome will probably a UN monitored border between lebanon and israel and the kidnapped soldiers will return as part of the cease fire terms.
WarMachine
Active member
Gee, don't you think that the UN would have to have troops there to be effective? They've done a good job with the golan heights and i see no reason why they can't do the same for southern lebanon's border.
Hizballah can be negotiated with to allow UN forces in the region since it would make it easier for them to carry on. Not an ideal situation, but if the lebanese army just had some more power they could play a part in disarming hizballah so that this doesn't happen again. If israel wants death and destruction then they don't need the UN, if they want peace, i'm sorry but they're going to have to negotiate, like they did before many times in past.
Italian Guy
Milforum Hitman
UN there is the worst idea.
UN means letting Hezbollah keep doing what they're doing and stopping Israel from doing anything to defend herself or attack Hezbollah which is what they should do here and now.
UN means letting Hezbollah keep doing what they're doing and stopping Israel from doing anything to defend herself or attack Hezbollah which is what they should do here and now.
WarMachine
Active member
You can't do that if none of the NATO members have been directly attacked, even the situation is Afghanistan is sketchy at best. If the countries in the region would agree to UN buffer zone then you can go about doing something about hezbollah domestically with more aid to Lebanon.
UN troops can succeed if they are provided with proper assistance of host nations and international cooperation is good. This is one of those cases where there might be enough diplomacy to get that done since lebanon would be one less place to worry about.
UN troops can succeed if they are provided with proper assistance of host nations and international cooperation is good. This is one of those cases where there might be enough diplomacy to get that done since lebanon would be one less place to worry about.
Italian Guy
Milforum Hitman
WarMachine said:
Wrong: Kosovo.
WarMachine said:
Dangerous Wishful Thinking.
WarMachine
Active member
Kosovo was one exception because the fighting was so close to NATO members and they were the only force that could stop the conflict with decent military force, they're an offensive not defensive organization.
It would not be in the NATO members interest to take care of things in the region not only because it has nothing to do with nato, but also because they're not supposed to be peace keepers. Afghanistan still has nato troopers fighting Taliban, imagine if they had hezbollah to contend with as well.
The UN is a much more rational force since it represents international and not just regional interests. Let canada and France monitor the lebanon border, they'll do a good job if the proper support is there from all parties. If it has thus far worked for syria and israel on the ground, then i don't see how seperated hezbollah from israel is a bad thing.
I say, fund the lebanese govt so that their army can become stronger than hezbollah and they can finally get rid of them as they awlays wanted to but couldn't since they were weak. Remember, the civilian govt is supported by the US and it would be in their best interests as well to see things improve unless they wish to see their image in the mid east continue to deteriorate.
It would not be in the NATO members interest to take care of things in the region not only because it has nothing to do with nato, but also because they're not supposed to be peace keepers. Afghanistan still has nato troopers fighting Taliban, imagine if they had hezbollah to contend with as well.
The UN is a much more rational force since it represents international and not just regional interests. Let canada and France monitor the lebanon border, they'll do a good job if the proper support is there from all parties. If it has thus far worked for syria and israel on the ground, then i don't see how seperated hezbollah from israel is a bad thing.
I say, fund the lebanese govt so that their army can become stronger than hezbollah and they can finally get rid of them as they awlays wanted to but couldn't since they were weak. Remember, the civilian govt is supported by the US and it would be in their best interests as well to see things improve unless they wish to see their image in the mid east continue to deteriorate.
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
Your poll question is incorrectly worded ... it should read "When will Israel take the offensive against Lebanon? (or) When will Israel decide it is time to invade Lebanon?
There is absolutely no question that Israel has decided that enough is enough ... there is no way that Israel is going to back down this time without establishing some kind of buffer between Israel and Hezbollah forces in Lebanon. Hamas can be negated by a scorched earth policy IF the Palestinians don't take them in hand. Hezbollah is a different story because of the weapons that have been supplied by Iran thru Syria. Survival and safety for Israel can NOT be obtained through a diplomatic agreement between Israel and Hezbollah ... Hezbollah has NEVER lived up to ANY agreement they participated in ... so why do the hand-wringers think they would this time?
There is absolutely no question that Israel has decided that enough is enough ... there is no way that Israel is going to back down this time without establishing some kind of buffer between Israel and Hezbollah forces in Lebanon. Hamas can be negated by a scorched earth policy IF the Palestinians don't take them in hand. Hezbollah is a different story because of the weapons that have been supplied by Iran thru Syria. Survival and safety for Israel can NOT be obtained through a diplomatic agreement between Israel and Hezbollah ... Hezbollah has NEVER lived up to ANY agreement they participated in ... so why do the hand-wringers think they would this time?
Ollie Garchy
Active member
Both the IDF and Hezbollah have made strategic blunders that promise greater Middle East instability.
Israeli Military Actions Cannot Create The Conditions for "Peace": The IDF invasion cannot control the asymetric conflict with non-state paramilitaries. Sealed borders cannot protect Israel against rockets. Military actions cannot destroy these rockets in sufficient numbers. Israel would need to control the entire West Bank and a large slice of Lebanon. In order to secure peace, Israel can only turn the Palestinians and the Lebanese against Hezbollah and Hamas. Impossible but so is the end game of invasion. The current actions of the Israeli military have only demonstrated how extraordinarily sensitive Tel Aviv has become. The military actions therefore increase and do not lessen the possibility of new kidnappings, more rockets, etc.
Hezbollah Terror Only Creates Misery for Lebanon and Others: What did the kidnappings accomplish? The paramilitaries will lose many men, some infrastructure and be dispersed over the shortterm. They will have to regroup and hope for increased weapons transfers from Iran and Syria. Support by the latter states could result in international actions aimed at further isolating both parties. In any case, both are becoming problem states for the other Islamic states -- states growing increasingly worried about the prospects of a Shi'ite-Sunni religious war. Economic instability in any case seems permanent.
Israeli Military Actions Cannot Create The Conditions for "Peace": The IDF invasion cannot control the asymetric conflict with non-state paramilitaries. Sealed borders cannot protect Israel against rockets. Military actions cannot destroy these rockets in sufficient numbers. Israel would need to control the entire West Bank and a large slice of Lebanon. In order to secure peace, Israel can only turn the Palestinians and the Lebanese against Hezbollah and Hamas. Impossible but so is the end game of invasion. The current actions of the Israeli military have only demonstrated how extraordinarily sensitive Tel Aviv has become. The military actions therefore increase and do not lessen the possibility of new kidnappings, more rockets, etc.
Hezbollah Terror Only Creates Misery for Lebanon and Others: What did the kidnappings accomplish? The paramilitaries will lose many men, some infrastructure and be dispersed over the shortterm. They will have to regroup and hope for increased weapons transfers from Iran and Syria. Support by the latter states could result in international actions aimed at further isolating both parties. In any case, both are becoming problem states for the other Islamic states -- states growing increasingly worried about the prospects of a Shi'ite-Sunni religious war. Economic instability in any case seems permanent.
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
O.G.
You are NOT wrong with your posts ... but ... Hezbollah and Hamas's intransigence against Israel and the Israeli people left Israel's government and military little choice ... active military intervention was the ONLY plan that even offered better than a fifty percent chance of succeeding ... just what could Israel have done 'better' that would have resulted in the protection of the Israeli people against Hezbollah and Hamas???
I'd like to hear someone REALLY address that one ... remember, Hezbollah and Hamas DON'T want peace. This IS the fly in the ointment.
You are NOT wrong with your posts ... but ... Hezbollah and Hamas's intransigence against Israel and the Israeli people left Israel's government and military little choice ... active military intervention was the ONLY plan that even offered better than a fifty percent chance of succeeding ... just what could Israel have done 'better' that would have resulted in the protection of the Israeli people against Hezbollah and Hamas???
I'd like to hear someone REALLY address that one ... remember, Hezbollah and Hamas DON'T want peace. This IS the fly in the ointment.
Ollie Garchy
Active member
Chief Bones said:
This is the ball-breaker. I find it hard to deny the necessity of military action. If you think about what the IDF can accomplish, however, an improved position is not on the horizon. Israel is just returning to the old occupation doctrine that made everything worse in the first place. I wish that we could find and destroy Hezbollah and Hamas. Or at least convince them to find real employment. But invasion or surgical strikes are not the answer. They have been tried before...on numerous occasions.
I am thinking something that I probably should not write. It could well be that the neutralization of Iran and Syria promises the best prospects for peace. But an escalation of Middle East tensions is certainly a dangerous road to travel. It could well be, however, that Israel has already decided to start a major war. I hope not. Maybe the US should stop giving Tel Aviv blank cheques and start real negotiations by forcing Israel to step back. Think about what Iran or Syrian involvement would mean for US forces in Iraq.
Remember, I am only going through the scenarios in my head.
LeEnfield
Active member
Israeli troops are already well over the border, and who knows what will happen next.
As far as NATO Troops go every one wants to get involved once it has become safe to do so. So once a cease fire has been agreed and every stops shooting then you might get a few countries getting involved.
As far as NATO Troops go every one wants to get involved once it has become safe to do so. So once a cease fire has been agreed and every stops shooting then you might get a few countries getting involved.
Rob Henderson
Banned
I can now safely answer the poll question with a resounding,"YES!"
Chief Bones
Forums Grumpy Old Man
A Jihadist World War .....
OG
In this case I am in COMPLETE agreement with your assessment of the situation ... I too am afraid that Israel could very well trigger a confrontation with Syria and Iran. I realise that a confrontation against their support of terrorists is way past due ... but ... an outright confrontation at this time could very well create another world war with the Middle East facing off against western forces. Israel's insistence on creating a buffer zone between Hezbollah strongholds and Israel's borders will create the necessity of stationing troops in the zone to ensure Israeli security ... it didn't work before and it won't work now. The ONLY real difference now, is the fact that most of the anti-Israel forces are tied together by their belief of a holy Jihad.
This is an explosive situation that COULD very well result in other countries being drawn into this conflict and creating a Jihadist World War.
Ollie Garchy said:
OG
In this case I am in COMPLETE agreement with your assessment of the situation ... I too am afraid that Israel could very well trigger a confrontation with Syria and Iran. I realise that a confrontation against their support of terrorists is way past due ... but ... an outright confrontation at this time could very well create another world war with the Middle East facing off against western forces. Israel's insistence on creating a buffer zone between Hezbollah strongholds and Israel's borders will create the necessity of stationing troops in the zone to ensure Israeli security ... it didn't work before and it won't work now. The ONLY real difference now, is the fact that most of the anti-Israel forces are tied together by their belief of a holy Jihad.
This is an explosive situation that COULD very well result in other countries being drawn into this conflict and creating a Jihadist World War.
Maytime
Active member
AQ's #2 Zawahiri is preaching for an expanded conflict, hoping to get more recruits. IMO, I think AQ is desperate, and a united front against the West+Israel would rally thousands of jihadis to AQ's twisted cause, possibly creating World War III. It may take years, but I think it will eventually happen.
