HOME
Message Board
CURRENT COLUMNS
- Editor's Corner
- Blogfest 2005
- Commentary
- Commentary Too
- Down The Middle
- Faulking Around
- Global Warning
- This guy walks into a bar...
- Investing 101
- Faulking Opinions
- Off The Rail
- Words
ARCHIVES
LINKS
CONTACT US
 | |||
Commentary Too - Jul 15, 2006 - Printable Version
- Is the Road to Damascus Through Lebanon?
by Down the Middle
“Israeli jets attacked Islamic positions throughout Lebanon, with the Islamist resistance responding by rocket and artillery barrages into northern Israel. The Israeli cabinet immediately convened to approve the Defense Minister’s plan for a limited incursion of twenty-five miles into Lebanon, wiping out Islamist positions in southern Lebanon, thus protecting Israel's population in the north from the onslaught of Katuska rockets.” “The Defense Minister’s plan of sending ground troops into Lebanon was approved, with full consent of the opposition Labor Party…but it soon became apparent that the Minister and his Chief of Staff harbored a further-reaching goal, beyond the silencing of their enemy’s guns and creating a “security zone to displace the “aggressors” beyond range of their rocket and mortars.”
Sorry guys. I should have told you that the aforementioned news report wasn’t written about the recent events in northern Israel and Lebanon…but scribed, during 1982s “Operation Peace of the Galilee”, when Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon’s ordered the IDF across the Lebanese border.
My daughter was only two at the time…but I’ve never forgotten holding her in my lap while watching the invasion unfold on the evening news…and the sadness that overcame me, knowing I had brought this innocent little girl into such a terribly guilty world. A world seemingly bent on destroying itself.
Now, my daughter is twenty-six and once again, Israel’s back in Lebanon. This time, it was the kidnapping of IDF soldier. Last time, a botched assassination of the Israeli ambassador in London…but why should it really matter, after a lifetime of watching these men slaughter each other. Why should this time be any different from the others? Is it because this time, we already know the end game?
The Bush Administration has made no secret of it’s plans to topple the governments of Syria and Iran, installing friendly “democracies” in their place, while Bush himself has recently and very publicly declared that the US will do whatever it takes to defend Israel.
With this week’s round of violence escalating out of control, his administration, in unison with the Israeli government has consistently stated that Iran is behind Hezbollah’s actions and is now voicing his deep concern for the survival of Lebanon’s democracy, laying that responsibility at Syria’s door step.
Speaking in Germany, Bush described Hezbollah as a "group of terrorists who want to stop the advance of peace" but went on to say, “Israel had the right to defend itself, but its action should not weaken the Lebanese government.
"The best way to stop the violence”, Bush continued, “is for Hezbollah to lay down its arms and to stop attacking…and therefore, I call upon Syria to exert influence over Hezbollah."
The leader of Hezbollah, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah challenged the Israelis by warning, “If you want a greater war, you can have it…on all levels”.
Taking point for the Islamists, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying that an Israeli strike on Syria would be considered an attack on the whole Islamic world that would bring a "fierce response".
"If the Zionist regime commits another stupid move and attacks Syria, this will be considered like attacking the whole Islamic world and this regime will receive a very fierce response", Ahmadinejad was quoted as saying in a telephone conversation with Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, who’s palace was over-flown by Israeli jets, earlier in the week. Ahmadinejad also said the Organization of the Islamic Conference must become more active, regarding the new crisis created by the Zionist regime.
As both sides continue to volley rockets and rhetoric, instead of seeking a cease-fire and negotiations, one must question the true intent of this war.
On Aug. 8, 1982, before the Israeli National Defense College, Prime Minister Menachem Begin delivered a speech to defuse the mounting criticism of Israel's invasion of Lebanon, which had begun two months earlier on June 5 and was clearly one of Israel's “wars of choice."
Excerpts from Begin's speech:
"Operation Peace for Galilee is not a military operation resulting from the lack of an alternative. The terrorists did not threaten the existence of the state of Israel; they 'only' threatened the lives of Israel's citizens and members of the Jewish people. There are those who find fault with the second part of that sentence. If there was no danger to the existence of the state, why did you go to war?
"I will explain why: We had three wars which we fought without an alternative. The first, the war of independence, which began on Nov. 30, 1947 and lasted until January 1949. What happened in that war, which we went off to fight with no alternative? Six thousand of our fighters were killed. We were then 650,000 Jews in Eretz Israel, and the number fallen amounted to about 1 percent of the Jewish population.
"The second war of no alternative was the Yom Kippur War and the war of attrition that preceded it. Our total casualties in that war of no alternative were 2,297 killed, 6,067 wounded. Together with the war of attrition—which was also a war of no alternative—2,659 killed, 7,251 wounded. The terrible total: almost 10,000 casualties.
"Our other wars were not without an alternative. In November 1956 we had a choice. The reason for going to war then was the need to destroy the fedayeen, who did not represent a danger to the existence of the state. Thus we went off to the Sinai campaign. At that time we conquered most of the Sinai Peninsula and reached Sharm el Sheikh. Actually, we accepted and submitted to an American dictate, mainly regarding the Gaza Strip (which Ben-Gurion called 'the liberated portion of the homeland'). John Foster Dulles, the then-secretary of state, promised Ben-Gurion that an Egyptian army would not return to Gaza. The Egyptian army did enter Gaza .... After 1957, Israel had to wait 10 full years for its flag to fly again over that liberated portion of the homeland.
"In June 1967, we again had a choice. The Egyptian army concentrations in the Sinai approaches do not prove that Nasser was really about to attack us. We must be honest with ourselves. We decided to attack him. This was a war of self-defense in the noblest sense of the term. The Government of National Unity then established decided unanimously: we will take the initiative and attack the enemy, drive him back, and thus assure the security of Israel and the future of the nation.
"As for the Operation Peace for Galilee [the invasion of Lebanon], it does not really belong to the category of wars of no alternative. We could have gone on seeing our civilians injured in Metulla or Qiryat Shimona or Nahariya. We could have gone on countering those killed by explosive charges left in a Jerusalem supermarket, or a Petah Tikvah bus stop. All the orders to carry out these acts of murder and sabotage came from Beirut .... True, such actions were not a threat to the existence of the state. But they did threaten the lives of civilians. whose numbers we cannot estimate, day after day, week after week, month after month....
"I…we…can already look beyond the fighting. It will soon be over, we hope, and then I believe, indeed I know, we will have a long period of peace. There is no other country around us that is capable of attacking us.
___
As Israeli jets fired rockets at a Lebanese/Syrian border crossing, this morning, putting at risk the lives of Syrian soldiers, I have to call into question Israel’s…and indeed, the United States’ motive. Is this really just another war to silence the Katuska rockets and drive Israel’s enemies from the frontier…or is this the beginning of Bush’s democratization plan for the “Axis of Evil”.
The reality is, these air strikes are not of a strictly punitive nature against Hezbollah…nor are they spent, solely to weigh pressure on the Lebanese government. In strategic terms, the nature of these strikes is defined to destroy Lebanese infrastructure preventing 25,000 Americans and thousands of other nationalities from escaping}, in preparation of a general advance into the country.
The risks we take are both immense and innumerable. With anti-American/Israeli demonstrations erupting from Baghdad to the Gaza, we may soon be witnessing a united front of Hezbollah, Hamas and the PLO. Syria is now offering “assistance” to Lebanon…but with the first Syrian casualties, Iran may attack Israel and then, the US will attack Iran. The opportunity for peace will be gone, forever.
Before we find ourselves embroiled in full-blown regional war that could easily lead to a greater, global conflict, I would like to remind Mr. Bush and all the other parties involved of a few poetic words, penned long ago by the Scotsman, Robert Burns “To a Mouse”.
But, Mousie, thou art no thy lane,
In proving foresight may be vain;
The best-laid schemes o' mice an'men
Gang aft agley,
An'lea'e us nought but grief an' pain,
For promis'd joy!
Voice your opinion on our message board (you don't have to sign up to post).