Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
August 14, 2006
WB: Who’s For Peace II

Billmon:

So, why not march back to the Blue Line, destroying as much of Hizbullah’s infrastructure as you can along the way? A glorified search-and-destroy mission, in other words.

Of course, the end of such an operation would return the situation on the ground pretty much to the status quo ante — which is where I would expect this war to end, given the scale of Israel’s military failures.

Who’s For Peace II

Comments

Our world is on the brink of another world war. It will originate August 22nd in the Middle East. The prediction was presented not by Vagna or Nostradamus but by an American political scientist Bernard Lewis in the acclaimed publication of Wall Street Journal. He is a man with close ties to the Bush administration as well as to the non-conservatives pushing for the radical solution of the “Iranian Threat.”
Lewis believes it will be precisely Teheran who will unleash the ultimate conflict by attacking Israel. Why August 22nd? Perhaps simply because Washington has set a deadline for the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and has demanded a complete wrap up of the nuclear program by that day. It is obvious that Teheran has no intention to comply. Curiously, this year the night of August 22nd happens to be night Muslims will celebrate the journey of their prophet Mohammed to Jerusalem and his ascension into heaven. According to Lewis the followers of Mohammed have a perfect opportunity to enrich their celebration by throwing an attack on Israel. An immediate retaliation will follow.
“Such a scenario does not seem too unrealistic to me,” comments Sergey Markov, a Russian political scientist, “These days anything is possible in the Middle East. People living there are crazy and they constantly keep playing with fire. Their situation has gone out of control and is ready to explode any minute. In fact, the new world war is already going in that place.”
The First Act
As the Israeli invasion of Lebanon continues it is becoming clearer that Tel-Aviv actually aims at much more than the elimination of Hezbollah. Israel could have long since used its omnipresent scouts to put an end to the resistance’s activity. Neither does the complete destruction of all Hezbollah’s rocket-launching sites present a problem for the Israeli army with its tremendous equipment and might.
So why the endless bombing of Lebanese cities and villages? And why the overwhelming U.S. support? All this is happening precisely during the time when Americans seem unable to force Iran to comply with their demands. Lebanese occupation under the excuse of defending against Hezbollah is itself an excuse for solving the Iranian problem.
The Second Act
Israel has already achieved the minimum solution by getting rid of “Hezbollah” across the border. What more do they need? UN has already offered to fill the occupied area with troops and peace-keepers but Tel-Aviv has still not given its consent. The U.S. is not in hurry to give the green light either. In all actuality it looks like the two countries are intentionally waiting until Iran gets involved in the conflict. The expecting parties might anticipate the attack in the face of fired Iranian rockets, which Tel-Aviv will intercept as they had often done previously with the rockets from Iraq. This time, however, Washington and Tel-Aviv will have acquired an official right to retaliate against Iran.
The Third Act
Israel will attack Iranian nuclear sites. The U.S. will provide its support through the Navy in the Persian Gulf and perhaps through the Air Force. Iran will not delay with its own full-scale attack against the Israeli sites and the U.S. ships.
At this point no one can guarantee that the rest of the Arab World is going to remain watching as an innocent and uninvolved bystander.
The Fourth Act
Very soon such participants as Turkey will inevitably get dragged into the funnel of war. In Iraq and Afghanistan anti-government militant groups will become very active. Finally the conflict will focus on the fighting for the control over the territories with major oil resources. That is exactly with the U.S. is after.
The eventual possession of the oil treasury by one of the conflicting sides will provoke harsh resistance from both Asia and Europe. Russia is also very likely to get provoked into becoming an active participant. In the end this might become the Ultimate Fifth Act, in which no one wishes to believe…
Political Scientist’s Opinion
Alexander Prohanov, the main editor of “Zavtra” Newspaper:“Apocalypse Tomorrow”
– The pulling of the trigger leading to the tragic chain of events has been done. Syria and Iran will be pulled into the war right after Lebanon. Israeli and American attacks on Iran will lead to the interruption of oil exports into Europe and China. Their economies will suffer. In the conclusion there will be chaos all across Asia.
The detonation device for the new apocalypse has been set off by Americans, obviously. They believe that they have the power and the authority to regulate the world’s chaos. But the U.S. cannot even gain control over its own minor chaos in Latin America. Let us only hope that Russia will remain neutral throughout this universal nightmare.
Military’s Opinion
Alexander Vladimirov, major general and vice-president of the Board of Military Experts of Russia:“Collision of Civilizations”
– This war is utterly futile for either one of the sides. And as the one lacking in logic it is all the more dangerous. The most dangerous aspect lies in the fact that Israel (and perhaps even Iran by now) possess nuclear weapons and are able to put them to use. This means the beginning of the global war because other countries will not be able to remain uninvolved in the collision of civilizations of this magnitude.
Israel has already achieved the minimum solution by getting rid of “Hezbollah” across the border. What more do they need? UN has already offered to fill the occupied area with troops and peace-keepers but Tel-Aviv has still not given its consent. The U.S. is not in hurry to give the green light either. In all actuality it looks like the two countries are intentionally waiting until Iran gets involved in the conflict. The expecting parties might anticipate the attack in the face of fired Iranian rockets, which Tel-Aviv will intercept as they had often done previously with the rockets from Iraq. This time, however, Washington and Tel-Aviv will have acquired an official right to retaliate against Iran.

Posted by: Edmund Teller | Aug 14 2006 5:38 utc | 1

couldn’t find the link in billmon’s post, maybe it’s just late and i’m tired. here it is again
clearing out hizbollah

Israel believes it will be entitled to use force to prevent Hizbollah from rearming and to clear guerrilla positions out of southern Lebanon after a U.N. truce takes effect, Israeli officials said on Sunday.
Israeli officials said such operations are “defensive” in nature and therefore permissible under a U.N. Security Council resolution which calls for Israel to halt “all offensive military operations.”

Posted by: annie | Aug 14 2006 5:58 utc | 2

I don’t know who this “edward teller” clown is, but you might be interested to know that the stuff he just used up bandwidth for was cut & pasted from pravda. (link)
Except he omitted the headline & first paragraph, which are:
Nuclear war starting in 10 days?
Such was the conclusion reached in the U.S. Russian generals and political scientists disagree only about its exact starting date.

Posted by: jj | Aug 14 2006 6:08 utc | 3

Nice try, except for the little-noticed fact that the IDF is getting his ass served on a plate in S Lebanon and Hezbollah is nowhere close to being cleared. And that means that Iran is just happy to let the both of them dug it out in the mud, as long as Hezbollah’s survival isn’t threatened.

Posted by: CluelessJoe | Aug 14 2006 7:58 utc | 4

The prawda piece even starts from the wrong facts.
Why August 22nd? Perhaps simply because Washington has set a deadline for the Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and has demanded a complete wrap up of the nuclear program by that day.
The Iranians have set that date for an asnwer to the “wests” offer. It is simply the end of the current month in their calender. So they said: “You will get an answer by the end of the month.” Sounds quite usual to me.
The rest of the piece is equal bullshit. Hizbullah’s has not been reduced much. Nasrallah didn´t even use the long range stuff he has and I bet there are more suprises in his arsenal. The UN force is not even under UN chapter 7 so it can not use force except for self defense. It will be useful to clean up the rubble and rebuild some bridges though.

Posted by: b | Aug 14 2006 9:09 utc | 5

Fisk As the 6am ceasefire takes effect… the real war begins

From this morning, Hizbollah’s operations will be directed solely against the invasion force. And the Israelis cannot afford to lose 40 men a day. Unable to shoot down the Israeli F-16 aircraft that have laid waste to much of Lebanon, the Hizbollah have, for years, prayed and longed and waited for the moment when they could attack the Israeli army on the ground.
Now they are set to put their long-planned campaign into operation. Thousands of their members remain alive and armed in the ruined hill villages of southern Lebanon for just this moment and, only hours after their leader, Sayed Hassan Nasrallah, warned Israel on Saturday that his men were waiting for them on the banks of the Litani river, the Hizbollah sprang their trap, killing more than 20 Israeli soldiers in less than three hours.
Israel itself, according to reports from Washington and New York, had long planned its current campaign against Lebanon – provoked by Hizbollah’s crossing of the Israeli frontier, its killing of three soldiers and seizure of two others on 12 July – but the Israelis appear to have taken no account of the guerrilla army’s most obvious operational plan: that if they could endure days of air attacks, they would eventually force Israel’s army to re-enter Lebanon on the ground and fight them on equal terms.

At this fatal juncture in Middle East history – and no one should underestimate this moment’s importance in the region – the Israeli army appears as impotent to protect its country as the Hizbollah clearly is to protect Lebanon.
But if the ceasefire collapses, as seems certain, neither the Israelis nor the Americans appear to have any plans to escape the consequences. The US saw this war as an opportunity to humble Hizbollah’s Iranian and Syrian sponsors but already it seems as if the tables have been turned. The Israeli military appears to be efficient at destroying bridges, power stations, gas stations and apartment blocks – but signally inefficient in crushing the “terrorist” army they swore to liquidate.
“The Lebanese government is our address for every problem or violation of the [ceasefire] agreement,” Israel’s Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert, said yesterday, as if realising the truce would not hold.
And that, of course, provides yet another excuse for Israel to attack the civilian infrastructure of Lebanon.

Posted by: b | Aug 14 2006 9:14 utc | 6

Also, about the date, it is the two days before Ramadan “Ramadan is the ninth month of the Muslim calendar. It is during this month that Muslims observe the Fast of Ramadan. Dates for Ramadan 2006 / 1427 are 24 September thru 23 October.”
So it could be he said “we’ll let you know before Ramadan. Then you can leave us alone because it’s the fasting holiday.”
End of the summer, is it harvest time? No eating all day until the sun goes down but from my statistically insignificant sample (one family in Brookyn), life simply goes on.
I thought it was worth pointing out.

Posted by: jonku | Aug 14 2006 9:31 utc | 7

Oops. August 22nd is a month and two days before Ramadan, not two days before — no wonder no one was pointing that out. <wipes egg from face>

Posted by: jonku | Aug 14 2006 9:37 utc | 8

Lewis believes it will be precisely Teheran who will unleash the ultimate conflict by attacking Israel. Why August 22nd?
its very very hard to believe that Iran would attack Israel anytime soon except in clear self-defence.

Posted by: jony_b_cool | Aug 14 2006 10:30 utc | 9

its very very hard to believe that Iran would attack Israel anytime soon except in clear self-defence.
In the past 500 years or more, Iran has not attacked any other country and has only fought in self-defense when attacked themselves.

Posted by: Ensley | Aug 14 2006 13:47 utc | 10

Uh, and Iran has precious few Arabs in it, as almost everyone here knows.
So much for “the rest of the Arab world”.

Posted by: Colman | Aug 14 2006 14:02 utc | 11

Uh, and Iran has precious few Arabs in it, as almost everyone here knows.
So much for “the rest of the Arab world”.

Posted by: Colman | Aug 14 2006 14:03 utc | 12

Yeah, I saw the article several days ago, but chose not to link to it. Apparently the guy who wrote it is some sort of a Russian version of a neo-con nut. Nevertheless, it does begin to spell out what a worst case scenario could look like.

Posted by: Malooga | Aug 14 2006 14:46 utc | 13

And I doubt the IDF intends to remain in southern Lebanon very long if the Lebanese army (or, as Col. Pat Lang calls them, the “asphalt soldiers,”) and the proposed UNIFIL-on-steroids fail to deploy, or deploy in a way that leaves Hizbullah still in control south of the Litani.
b just linked to the hideous atlas shrugs (OT thread) interview w/bolton. i found this segment to be quite revealing
The next critical point, is that the resolution seeks to protect Israel in two major respects. First, it says that there has to be created in southern Lebanon a security zone, which is free of Hezbollah. Now that security zone has to be protected by the Lebanese armed forces assisted by the international force that will go in there, and although it will be called UNIFIL, as Secretary Rice said yesterday, it won’t be the same UNIFIL, at least if it works.
…..
The resolution makes it clear that the deployment of the Lebanese armed forces and the enhanced UNIFIL, and the withdrawal of the Israeli forces are to be in parallel, and in coordination, which meas that the Israeli defense forces have to agree. They don’t have to withdraw by a set timetable. There was a lot of pressure to set a specific date. There was a lot of pressure to have an immediate withdrawal or a withdrawal within a short period, and we rejected that. We said that when the withdrawal takes place, it will be under conditions that create that security zone and that do not permit Hezbollah to reinfiltrate.
is this security zone going to be permanent?? how will this new UNIFIL operate?

Now this is a very important point, and it is not created by the resolution alone. The resolution is the paper that sets it up. Now we’re entering into a very difficult and important phase in the creation of the enhanced UNIFIL. To carry through on what Secretary Rice said, it may be the same name, but it will be a different force. There’s lot of activity on that score that’s going on now. There’s another aspect of this resolution that’s important as well. The government of Israel made it very plain that they were worried not just about southern Lebanon, which is near enough to Israel that Katyusha rockets and other rockets can be fired into Israel and hit civilian targets. Obviously they’re worried about southern Lebanon, but they’re also worried about the resupply of Hezbollah.
….
Now in a way this is an elaboration of 1559 which was intended to allow the government of Lebanon to take full control of its territory, but there’s an addition here because the resolution requires all UN member governments to comply with the requirement that they not ship arms into Lebanon without the government’s permission. Now once again, this is a piece of paper, and nobody’s under any illusions that the piece of paper alone will make it happen, but the new enhanced UNIFIL is also charged to work with the government of Lebanon at its borders and all entry points, to enforce that arms embargo. And then of course the resolution talks about the political elements that have to be present for a lasting solution.

there is no end

Posted by: annie | Aug 14 2006 19:58 utc | 14

sorry, kind of screwed up w/the italics. bolten makes it sound as tho this ‘security zone’ may be a permanent occupying “new enhanced UNIFIL ”
so lebanon may be permanently occupied, just not by israel?

Posted by: annie | Aug 14 2006 20:06 utc | 15