*Official* Israel/Lebanon thread (politics)

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The war on Iraq has shattered the myth of American Military and invincibility in the World

[/ QUOTE ]Regardless of what one thinks of whether we should have fought in Iraq, this is 100% pure silliness for the following reasons:

1) The US could turn parts or the whole of Iraq into a giant parking lot. The enemy does not have this capability to do to the U.S.
2) The US death toll is extremely low for a war of this magnitude and length.
3) Many of the US deaths are a tradeoff between killing masses of civilians versus several US soldier deaths
4) The enemy is capturing zero ground
5) The enemy is winning no real battles. At best they win some very low grade ambushes.
6) The US military operates at will in Iraq
7) The US miliary sliced through the Iraq army like it wasnt even there.
8) There is zero chance of an enemy military overall win

Now, I think you could argue that the military is vulnerable to a propoganda war, but that is a much different thing.

2. To the Israeli army. I can't say much because I dont know anything about them. However, I would be cautous of the journalist class that proclaims who is winning and who is losing. The conflict is only a couple of days old and the deaths are extremely light on I believe both sides. I remember how the media potrayed the US as being in a quagmire in Afghanistan because it took more than 24 hours to win.

I am not saying that the Israeli army is up to the task. I am simply saying you cant draw any conclusions yet.

[/ QUOTE ]

The ultimate objectives, IMO, are political. The military is a tool. The question being posed is whether the military has met the political objectives.

The second point is has it damaged the image of superiority as the world power amongst, not us, but the rest of the world.

Without a doubt we can wipe out the planet.

Regarding Israel -- if the Hez comes out of this strengthened as some are saying it will, if Israel comes out of this looking like an ineffective bully then its image of regional superiority may be shattered.

I dont know how the world is viewing the ability of the Israeli and the Americans, not to deploy immense firepower, but to achieve real objectives.

[Mickey Brausch]

This is not about the ability of the United States military. Everyone -who is not a keno fanatic- knows that the U.S. is militarily invincible.

What the world realizes and perhaps some folks in the States realize as well, is that the kind of war where America could truly flex its muscle is gone forever! The Cold War was the last confrontation where the U.S. was justified (at least, in theory) to act --or to posture-- with extreme belligerence. But the cold War is over.

Somalia, Iraq, etc, will all be won "on the ground" and enemy territory will be conquered but the U.S. faces the same dilemma: Go in and win decisively which means massive, massive slaughter of civilians? Or hold back the horses, as in Iraq?

Same applies to Israel, which despite what some might say about its leaders' ruthlessness, it can wipe out the Palestinians and it can wipe out the Lebanese in the same day and almost entirely (i.e. massive, massive slaughter) -- but it doesn't!

There are constraints in today's military endeavors. If you don't accept that they are imposed by the morality of the respective countries' leaders, you gotta accept that "the world" won't allow extremity.

Therefore, a different approach is clearly necessary. (Perhaps only slightly different. Certainly the exact same strategy has shown its limits.)

Micky Brausch

[Sniper]

US and France agree on a UN ceasefire proposal to be submitted later Friday. Rice calls Olmert after he and Peretz gave the Israeli army the go-ahead to launch an expanded offensive up the Litani River...

The US secretary of state asked if there is any room left for diplomacy. The Israeli prime minister replied that he gave the go-ahead for the expanded military ground offensive because the diplomatic effort was not reaching its goals. Israel is now reviewing the agreed final text which has not been released.

The expanded offensive was approved by Israel’s inner cabinet Wednesday, Aug. 9, and put on hold for 48 hours to give diplomacy a chance. In the interim, army elements advanced up to the Litani River’s southern bank while hundreds of Hizballah rockets continued to ravage northern Israel. Friday, Haifa and Galilee took more than 120 rockets.

The go-ahead for the full Israeli offensive to advance was given Friday after Hizballah forced the Lebanese government to veto the deployment of an expanded UNIFIL force empowered by UN Charter Chapter 7 to use force to implement the Security Council resolution.

This removed from the text Israel’s key demand for an effective multinational force to take over before its troops were withdrawn from South Lebanon. This force was to help the Lebanese government disarm Hizballah and push it out of the south. The case of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers was also dropped in the bargaining over the final text. These elements were embodied in the original US-French draft which Israel accepted, but shunted aside under pressure from the Lebanese government aka Hizballah, backed by the Arab League and France.

[Sniper]

[ QUOTE ]
Last night driving to my room from Bay 101 I heard a talk show argue:

1. The war on Iraq has shattered the myth of American Military and invincibility in the World
2. The war on Lebanon has shattered the myth of Israeli Military superiority and invincibility in the Middle East.

Essentially saying that both the operations failed to fulfill the ultimate objectives of the two aggressor parties despite thousands dead, millions uprooted and billions spent.

Comments?

[/ QUOTE ]

AC, neither operation is over yet... In both cases Iraq & Lebanon. neither country is capable of taking control of what is happening within its own borders.

Here's something else for you to think about... where would we be today, if there had been a UN during WW2 saying that the US was using excessive disproportional force in landing on the beaches of Europe, since the Germans did not land on American beaches?

People who care about civilians or using them as an excuse to end fighting are far too high, when compared to the number of people that are truly interested in peace... and that at the end of the day, is what stops the military from dotting the i's and crossing the t's in these conflicts today.

[Utah]

[ QUOTE ]
you gotta accept that "the world" won't allow extremity.

[/ QUOTE ]

Somalia
Rwanda
Kosovo
Bosnia
Chechnya
Iraq
Afghanistan
Hama
Darfur
Bangledesh
Sudan
Israel

When has the world really stepped up to the plate to stop a damn thing? What major slaughters have ever been prevent through global pressure?

The world was supposedly united against the Iraq invasion. Who lifted a finger to try and stop us? Who sanctioned us or threatened us to stop? All anyone ever does is wag their fingers.

Honestly, what do you think the world would do if the US decided to flatten a town in Iraq? The answer is absolutely nothing other than a bunch of angry speeches.

Sadly, your statement is completely untrue.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
There is simply no way to eliminate civilian causulties from the results of war in a populated area, where people are warned to not stay and they decide to stick around a war zone.

Seriously, how much more civilian friendly can a war get beyond telling people... war is coming to your neighborhood, get out of the way...

I'm sure the 9/11 causulties would have appreciated such a warning...

[/ QUOTE ]

That's unfair, sniper.

Yes, they've had plenty of warning, and yes, they've decided to stick around anyway.

But Israelis consider Israel to be their homeland, and you can't expect them to leave just because it's a war zone, no matter how many times they've been told to go.

[Sniper]

Linus,

In Israel they build bomb shelters under buildings, in Lebanon they stockpile rockets...

During this engagement, Israeli civilians were moved from the North to the South... in Lebanon, they don't want them to move out of the way...

If Hezbollah continues to stockpile weapons after what seems now to be a likely agreement on a ceasefire... it is a virtual guarantee that the diplomatic track will be much less effective next time around...

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
Here's something else for you to think about... where would we be today, if there had been a UN during WW2 saying that the US was using excessive disproportional force in landing on the beaches of Europe,...


[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Nomination for the worst attempt at analogy ever on a 2+2 forum.

Yeah, Americans landing at the heavily fortified Normandy beaches against an enemy with similar weapons, infrastructure, capabilities, etc. is JUST like fighting rag tag terrorists who hide amongst civilian populations. LOL.

[Sniper]

JHC... You obviously misunderstood the question... as you clearly misquoted it... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[J. Henry Christ]

[ QUOTE ]
JHC... You obviously misunderstood the question... as you clearly misquoted it... [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

Let me quote you... again:

[ QUOTE ]
People who care about civilians or using them as an excuse to end fighting are far too high, when compared to the number of people that are truly interested in peace... and that at the end of the day, is what stops the military from dotting the i's and crossing the t's in these conflicts today.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, blame the protestors or nay sayers for the fact that the military cannot achieve its *political* objectives. This same line was used repeatedly in Vietnam and was as equally invalid then as now. Naysayers aren't preventing field commanders from getting what they need to prosecute the war. The fact is, trying to a subdue an insurgency through the use of external military force has repeatedly been shown to be a colossal failure in almost every attempt ever made. Blaming naysayers oe people who care about civilian lives is scapegoatism and irresponsibly negligent.