In today's Jerusalem Post, Caroline Glick describes the UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which sets the terms for a cease-fire, and which the Israeli government has been forced to accept, as a near-total victory for Hizbullah and its state sponsors Iran and Syria, and an unprecedented defeat for Israel and its ally the United States. The content of the resolution naturally is a reflection of what took place on the battlefield.

Any cease-fire Resolution of course is a victory to the suffering people of Lebanon and northern Israel. However, should the UN cease-fire Resolution be interpreted as an Israeli defeat and a Hezbollah victory, as Caroline Glick asserts?

Here's some of the comments made by Caroline Glick:

I think if Israel accepts this peice of crap it will be. And will sound the bell of the end of centrist governance in Israel. Anything that does not disarm Hezi's is a failure.....Remember the green flags of the Hezi's flying directly next to UNFIL's flag.


j-mac

__________________
"War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things. The decayed and degraded state of moral and patriotic feeling, which thinks that nothing is worth war, is much worse. The person who has nothing for which he is willing to fight, nothing which is more important than his own personal safety, is a miserable creature and has no chance of being free unless made and kept so by the exertions of better men than himself.


- John Stuart Mill

FYI, Israel has been compelled to accept "this piece of crap", to use your expression.

BTW, Hezbollah's flag is yellow, AFAIK. And I'm sure Hezbollah flags soon will be flying everywhere in the Shaba Farms and Mount Dov ("a vast area on the Golan Heights that separates the Syrian Golan from the Upper Galilee and is disputed between Israel and Syria") - not hoisted by Hezbollah themselves, but by the presently occupied inhabitants of those regions, who will be justified in looking upon Hezbollah as their liberators from Israeli occupation. I'm afraid this war will go down into Lebanese history as "the war of liberation".

Yes, I'm sure this military adventure will sound the bell of the end of the present regime in Israel. Let's hope it will not be replaced by an even more chauvinist regime, but that the people of Israel will instead understand that chauvinism has reached road's end.

Iran started this for two reasons:

1) Hoping for a conflict to last several months, to take the UN's eyes off of it's Nuclear project.
2) To further it's influence in the M.E. by creating chaos and death. Iran knew that civilian death was going to happen, and could count on the world media to make a spectacle out of the citizen death and thus anger the world against Isreal and increase support in the M.E.

So...#1 scenario - Hezbollah (Iran) failed. The U.N. is still very much paying attention to their nuke hopes.
#2 - A shining success. Iran knew Isreal did not want a long drawn out occupancy, and with it's very successfull ploy to use Lebanese citizens as targets for Isreali response to missle sights - the media made a great partner to anger the world at Isreal, but more importantly to drum up support for Hezbollah and groups like them throughout the M.E.
The more chaotic Iran can make Iraq and Lebanon...the more support it has to turn the M.E. into a hardline anti-western fanatical regime.

I vote no, it is not a defaet for Israel.

The Resolution calls for the disarmament of Hezbollah. Also the wording allows Israel to wipe out the rest of the Hezbollah forces in Southern Lebanon.


Hezbollah has met their unofficial short term mission of destroying the Lebanese economy, but they are no closer to their stated objective of destroying Israel.

Basically Glick is full of shit and uninformed. For instance she says....

....However, she is way off the mark here. There is no dispute over who owns Shebaa farms between Israel and Syria. Granted, it is occupied by Israel, but Israel makes no claim that Sheeba farms is part of Israel.

The dispute about this territory is contrived by Hezbollah and Syria to make it a no-mans-land. It is used politically by Hezbollah and Lebanon as an excuse for actions against Israel. It is used politically to claim that Israel is occupying Lebanon.

Just a stupid game that makes international borders unclear and in effect lets Israel's enemies have their cake and eat it too.

Border disputes are common causes of international war and the job of the Security Council is to prevent that. Therfore there is a need for a formal demarcation of the border between Syria and Lebanon that both countries formally accept and is regonized by the UN. It is Israels best interests to have them stop playing this game because Hezbollah uses the obviously contrived border dispute to gain political support, to foster popular support in southern Lebenon, and to claim moral high ground in the eyes of the Lebonese populace.

I don't think Glick understands the military, political or legal ramifications of this border dispute. In fact she seems to have a very simplistic and flawed understanding of the conflict in the region.

Actually Maxture, the border in dispute in the Shebaa Farms region mentioned is between Syria and Lebanon, not Israel and Syria. The UN claims it is part of Syria. Glick is just flat out wrong. And you obviously bought her misinformation and let it influence your opinion.

__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -- Rummy

Wise words from a wise man.

excellent post and i am saddened by the fact that americans would want this

__________________
[B]Let Valor Not Fail[/B]

Israel has already suffered a defeat. They further erased the propaganda line between themselves and those they call terrorists. The world has seen one month of civilian bombing on a democratic country, which had no field army fighting against Israel. If there's any defeat for Israel, that's where it was, in the minds of people around the world.

WRT the actual resolution itself. I don't think it's a defeat for Israel at all. Israel entered into this war knowing exactly what it was doing. I would imagine that Israeli generals jumped up and clicked their heals during the Hezbollah attack that precipitated this. That was their opportunity to crush Hezbollah and whittle them down.

We have to wonder if they did succeed in this or perhaps they will make Hezbollah as popular in Lebanon as Hamas now is in the West Bank.


WEB

du Bois;


Nasrallah even enjoys popularity in Washington.

__________________
[I]668.....the neighbour of the beast.[/I]

The fat lady has yet to sing.

__________________
A mugawump is a bird who sits on a fence with his mug on one side and his wump on the other--[COLOR="red"][B]
A fence sitter-upon[/B][/COLOR] IE: a moderate/independent:

[COLOR="Blue"]Any fool can find fault, but it takes a thinking person to find the appropriate solution[/COLOR]

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Im..._Hezbollah.svg


It's not just yellow. It has the symbol of the soviet revolution and international communism (raised fist) grasping an AK-47.

This explains why the commie/pinkos of the forum tend to be Hezbollah/Hussein apologists. Could they be pissed because the attempt to consolidate a nexus of divine right and Marxism in Iraq and and the rest of the Mid-east is failing? They are being defeated as the M-E dominoes fall. what is thre gain of replacing the divine right of the crown with the divine right of Mullahs? Would that be any better than the days of British colonialism?

They worship Marx, Lenin, Kim, Khomeni and Nasrallah. Cults of personality. And hold the images of their cult high in their rallies of greedy hate. Their armies march under bannars of faces and facades of divine right, not freedom and truth.

It's got nothing to do with Islam nor Islamic fundimentalism, obviously.

The wisdom of centuries revealed in Islamic doctrine warns against worshipping graven images and idols.

__________________
There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know. -- Rummy

Wise words from a wise man.