26 August 2006
Israel Win Or Lose Redux
Bloggers and their ilk are revisiting the question of whether Israel or Hezbollah won their recent little war. The conventional wisdom is shifting at least a little towards Israel in the blogosphere, although not, apparently, in Israel. I'll stand pat for now at a tactical win for Israel but a strategic win for Hezbollah. If, however, the Euros can really insert a 15,000 man international force into south Lebanon, Hezbollah's strategic victory will become a huge defeat.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
Why would a Euro-force be an advantage for Israel? It would simply give Hizb'allah a shield and new set of hostages so that if Israel responded to future provocations it would end up killing European soldiers as well.
SH: 15,000 troops is a lot of troops, basically an occupation. If Hezbollah's strategic victory is that they were able to hold off Israel for a month, I think that is lessened if a bunch of Euros show up. I'm also assuming that the Euros won't show up unless some progress has been made towards disarming Hezbollah.
Peter: I'll try.
Why would the Euros make any more difference to Hizb'allah than UNIFIL did? In fact, it might well boost Hizb'allah for the locals to see them lording it over the Euros, flying the Hizb'allah flag there, using their bases as launch sites, etc. It's not an occupation if the troops just sit in their barracks, except to spend money on the local prostitutes.
UNIFIL was a force of about 2000 whose job was to watch Hezbollah attack Israel. If UNIFIL II actually gets to 15,000 troops and does what it is supposed to do, it will be a much different animal.
"does what it is supposed to do"
I rest my case.
P.S. If you actually know what the proposed force is supposed to do, you might want to ring up PM Chirac and let him know, as apparently he doesn't.
Post a Comment