View Story | 152 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
Just been reading the latest War Nerd, where he talks about Hezbollah, Sadr, and what the heck's going on in that part of the world. Interesting reading so far.
Sell a man a fish, he eats for a day, teach a man how to fish, you ruin a wonderful business opportunity.
by Hannibal on Fri May 16, 2008 at 10:49:45 PM PDT
but some of the stuff he says is more snark than analysis. like about the "experts" and hezbollah, everyone knew the other militias had disarmed and that the army would almost certainly never confront hezbollah or risk fracturing. also admiring hezbollah is vile. also how hezbollah "isnt suppose to be part of the equation" in lebanon, I mean wtf?
by bobisbob on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:02:26 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
In both Iraq and Lebanon, how much did those in charge factor in the Shia militias into their equations? Everybody seems to have a big case of underestimating the Shia, for reasons I'll never understand.
by Hannibal on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:08:17 PM PDT
I think some of this is from the "we're america we are always in the superior position" meme that gets peddled around. america is not in a terribly good position in lebanon, and has never really been in a good one. that there is some set of levers we could pull to get rid of hezbollah is frankly just false. we don't have a large ruthless mobilized militia to counter them, the best we have is to tacitly support and bribe a hodgepodge of kleptocrats. we do have some things to hold out hope for, like I mentioned elsewhere a devastating electoral loss for hezbollah is something that could damage them. but beyond that our levers are kind of limited, even if we "support" one side, we're supporting the vastly weaker side militarily.
by bobisbob on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:12:17 PM PDT
Hezbollah's power doesn't seem to come from elections, or having an official seat at the table. They've got the violent side of the equation, but also the popular support of the Shia population, which counts for a lot.
by Hannibal on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:18:33 PM PDT
would have to remove the shia support, some breakaway shia party or new party or something. which is pretty hard with the propaganda network hezbollah has setup. hezbollah did at one time promise to never "turn their weapons against lebanese" not sure this will dissuade shia from voting for them though, maybe it will remove their christian support. there is also the distinct possibility that down the line hezbollah will have to repay their masters in damascus and tehran. either by warring israel again or something else that might in general be against internal political calculations. it doesn't look good now though.
by bobisbob on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:24:15 PM PDT
My theory on the last time Hezbollah took on the IDF, it was a message from Tehran, to us.
by Hannibal on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:29:39 PM PDT
and there's syria who is bat shit about the hariri tribunal.
by bobisbob on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:32:23 PM PDT
far as the big picture is concerned!
by humphrey on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:36:17 PM PDT
if lebanon didn't have the bizarre outdated sectarian quotas as part of its democracy, hezbollah would be the ruling party. it's only because they have disproportionally small quotas for shiia, and disproportionally larger for christian and sunni, that hezbollah is relegated to a minoroty player in a perpetually collapsing government.
surf putah, your friendly neighborhood central valley samizdat
by wu ming on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:41:14 PM PDT
but there is a reason they are there, the lebanese hate each other. there's probably a good question to be made of how it can be expected on a longterm basis for lebanon to remain a state.
PS. belgium has the same fucked system. only its the dutch that are screwed for the sake of the french.
by bobisbob on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:04:23 AM PDT
from utterly collapsing is the dedicated support of the US to the Siniora government.
We're creating these puppet shells all over the Middle East -- we've got one in Iraq, one in Lebanon, we're pretty damn close to one on the West Bank...
As Nguyen Van Thieu eventually learned, the political, military and financial support of an outside power can never permanently replace the legitimacy conferred by the governed themselves.
Yes, We Can
by litho on Sat May 17, 2008 at 04:23:03 AM PDT
Lebanon needs Hezbellah to counter Isreal as they are the only ones that can fight Israel. Without Hezbollah, Lebanon would very quickly become a simple satellite of either Israel or Syria.
A nation in today's ME without a fighting force is simply fast food for those willing to use force for conquest including the US.
by Jagger on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:43:56 PM PDT
so I not sure how hezbollah rebuffs syria. during the recent takeover hezbollah's allies put up pictures of assad. also I don't think israel has any stomach for bothering w/ lebanon again. they went in the first place to control the expansion and merry making of the PLO. even the last war they had no desire to even try to stick around, nor pretended that they would.
by bobisbob on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:50:25 PM PDT
Wait a second. Neither in the war against Israel or against the government did Hezbollah initiate the war.
It is fairly obvious that Israel wanted the war and used the capture of their troops as an excuse. Many reports have indicated that the Israel's were prepped to go before the capture.
And the government tried to remove Hezbollah's communications system. Hezbollah could not accept the loss of that crucial defensive capability.
It seems to me a coordinated effort by the US and Israel to crush Hezbollah as an Iranian ally. Of course, both Israel and our western Lebanese government have failed in their particular missions up to this point.
by Jagger on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:51:31 PM PDT
also I don't think israel has any stomach for bothering w/ lebanon again. they went in the first place to control the expansion and merry making of the PLO.
True enough. Although without Hezbollah, Israel can simply threaten military action to ensure Lebanon complies with Israeli demands.
by Jagger on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:53:23 PM PDT
hezbollah can't stop a military threat from israel. israel bombed the crap out of whichever part of lebanon they chose to. infact if anything hezbollah is a convenient excuse to bomb lebanon. afterall you gotta get the baddies right! not that I think israel thinks like that, but if we're going to go down the rabbit hole...
by bobisbob on Fri May 16, 2008 at 11:56:22 PM PDT
Hezbollah prevents physical long term incursions into Lebanon by Israel. Israeli bombing of the sort in the last war produces a backlash from civilized nations.
Without Hezbollah, Israel would launch incursions into Lebanon at any time they felt the urge.
by Jagger on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:03:53 AM PDT
and israeli's world opinion is radicalizing, meaning military action is more viable, not less. ie. the ppl who hate israel and like israel have mostly picked their corners, the swing vote is less. so long as hezbollah was doing something to israel I think israel could in theory bomb them back.
by bobisbob on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:05:55 AM PDT
IMO, it is very possible Israel will attack Hezbollah/Lebanon again regardless of what Hezbollah does.
There appears to be coordinated action by both the US and Israel to destroy Iran and its allies. Best to take out the little allies first, such as Hezbollah and Sadr, before starting the main show against Iran.
Hopefully, Bush/Cheney will not be able to pull off their end of the deal before Bush leaves office.
I suspect the chance of war against Iran goes way, way down once Obama gets into office. There is very little time left for action by Israel and Bush if they intend to act before Bush leaves office.
by Jagger on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:16:41 AM PDT
one, I doubt israel is military capable of taking out hezbollah. you could launch military strikes and knock hezbollah down 20-30% lets say, or form an occupation and knock them down 50-70%, but otherwise they ain't going anywhere.
note: madeup %'s.
by bobisbob on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:19:07 AM PDT
I think Israel could push Hezbollah out of the south if they were willing to put in the manpower and take the casualties. The Isreali army, like the US army, has huge firepower. If they are willing to do an all out Falluja, Hezbollah could not stand for long.
But the Israeli army couldn't keep Hezbollah out without long term occupation which I doubt the Israeli people would accept. Although I do think the Israeli leadership would like access to the river...a new boundary. Just a little slice of Lebanon to protect Israel proper.
Time will tell. The American people do not want another war. Bush is lame duck. But he could still get us into another war. He and Cheney both have the psyche to do so regardless of the wishes of the American people.
by Jagger on Sat May 17, 2008 at 12:30:25 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 152 comments