Hizbullah wary of a new war

[SamurAchzar]

There were Four threads created to keep the issues categorized.

Please use them


Senior Anandtech Moderator
Common Courtesy


Text

Report: Hizbullah wary of another war with Israel

Source affiliated with Shiite group says its supporters reacted negatively to Thursday's rocket attack on north Israel, indicating they do not support fresh aggression against Jewish state

Roee Nahmias
Published: 01.09.09, 21:39 / Israel News

A source affiliated with Hizbullah told the London-based Arabic language newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat Friday that while the Shiite group has placed its forces on the highest alert level, it is not seeking another war with Israel.

Shiite Group
Nasrallah says Hizbullah ready to fight Israel / Roee Nahmias
'Lebanon war was just a walk in the park compared to what we have in store for you,' Hizbullah leader says in speech Wednesday. Nasrallah also slams Mubarak for refusing to open Rafah crossing
Full Story


According to the report, as part of its heightened alert measures Hizbullah has transferred its logistical and security headquarters from the Dahiya neighborhood in south Beirut to the southern part of the country. In addition, the group has ordered members of its technical units to return to Lebanon at once.


The source said that despite these measures, the reactions among the Shiite population in Lebanon following Thursday's rocket attack on northern Israel indicated that they do not support a new military campaign against the Jewish state.


Asharq Al-Awsat reported that Dahiya, a Hizbullah stronghold in Beirut that was heavily bombarded by the Israeli Air Force during the Second Lebanon War, is still in ruins. Only 20% of the structures that had been destroyed in the war were rebuilt, and 80% of the neighborhood's displaced residents have yet to return despite Hizbullah's promises, the newspaper added.


Therefore, a Hizbullah attack on Israel may be viewed by its supporters as a reckless move and hurt its popularity in Lebanon. A new war may also affect Iran's status in the country, which is of great importance to Hizbullah.


According to the source, Hizbullah would launch a war against Israel only if Iran decides to enter a regional war of its own. He said that in case fighting does erupt, it is likely to take place mainly in the Bekaa Valley, where most of the Shiite militia's forces are concentrated, and not in south Lebanon, where UNIFIL and Lebanese army forces are deployed.


The Asharq Al-Awsat report claimed that following the Second Lebanon War and the implementation of UN Resolution 1701, which has restricted the movement of Hizbullah terrorists in the area south of the Litani River, the group began transferring some of its forces and weaponry to the area north of the river and to the Bekaa Valley.

Well well. Apparently the war of 2006 left Hizbullah with a clear message in one and only language understandable for them - the language of force and senseless destruction. Before 2006, they would threaten Israel, now they prefer to threaten the Egyptians. Nassarallah is still hiding from the Israelis, deep underground.

After this round, hopefully Hamas will sound the same, and Israel will have some well deserved peace, for the few next years. Then hell will break loose again - but that's the Middle East.

 

[Aimster]

Hezbollah and Hamas are totally different.

 

[jpeyton]

Learn how to spell.

It also helps reduce forum clutter by providing accurate search results.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Learn how to spell.

It also helps reduce forum clutter by providing accurate search results.

learn that transliteration isn't precise

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Learn how to spell.

It also helps reduce forum clutter by providing accurate search results.

learn that transliteration isn't accurate

It isn't accurate, but there are versions far more commonly used than others.

 

[MovingTarget]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hezbollah and Hamas are totally different.

True, but the timing of this seems...convenient...

 

[SamurAchzar]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Learn how to spell.

It also helps reduce forum clutter by providing accurate search results.

learn that transliteration isn't accurate

It isn't accurate, but there are versions far more commonly used than others.

It's Hizb-Allah, actually, as Hizb is party and Allah is, well, god. I'd expect you, as their semi-formal apologist, to know better. At least you spell Obama right.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: jpeyton

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: jpeyton
Learn how to spell.

It also helps reduce forum clutter by providing accurate search results.

learn that transliteration isn't accurate

It isn't accurate, but there are versions far more commonly used than others.

Oh yeah, one version of english transliteration of ??? ???? is more accurate than others ... :roll:

 

[SamurAchzar]

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hezbollah and Hamas are totally different.

How's that? By Hamas not being Shiha? Other than that, they are quite similar: endorsed by Syria/Iran, declare to the Western world that territorial disputes is the reason they fight while saying to Arabs that they are looking at the destruction of Israel. Fundamental Muslims, Taliban-style. Don't hesitate killing other Arabs for their goals (Fatah in Gaza, Christians in Lebanon). Quite similar, IMHO. You want to point otherwise?

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: SamurAchzar

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hezbollah and Hamas are totally different.

How's that? By Hamas not being Shiha? Other than that, they are quite similar: endorsed by Syria/Iran, declare to the Western world that territorial disputes is the reason they fight while saying to Arabs that they are looking at the destruction of Israel. Fundamental Muslims, Taliban-style. Don't hesitate killing other Arabs for their goals (Fatah in Gaza, Christians in Lebanon). Quite similar, IMHO. You want to point otherwise?

Syria and Iran do not arm Hamas. They use it as a propaganda machine to gain support in the Arab world.

Why is Hezbollah and Iran not killing non-Muslims inside their own territories?
When you realize you can't answer that question then you will realize those two groups are not out to kill non-Muslims.

If you were a member of these rogue stations or group and you wanted to kill non-Muslims and they lived within walking distance from you, would you not kill them because the govt. said not to? NO. You'd kill them.

Hamas has a goal. Kill all non-Muslims.
A far different goal than Hezbollah or Iran.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Aimster


Hamas has a goal. Kill all non-Muslims.

Where'd you get this from?

 

[SamurAchzar]

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: SamurAchzar

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hezbollah and Hamas are totally different.

How's that? By Hamas not being Shiha? Other than that, they are quite similar: endorsed by Syria/Iran, declare to the Western world that territorial disputes is the reason they fight while saying to Arabs that they are looking at the destruction of Israel. Fundamental Muslims, Taliban-style. Don't hesitate killing other Arabs for their goals (Fatah in Gaza, Christians in Lebanon). Quite similar, IMHO. You want to point otherwise?

Syria and Iran do not arm Hamas. They use it as a propaganda machine to gain support in the Arab world.

Why is Hezbollah and Iran not killing non-Muslims inside their own territories?
When you realize you can't answer that question then you will realize those two groups are not out to kill non-Muslims.

If you were a member of these rogue stations or group and you wanted to kill non-Muslims and they lived within walking distance from you, would you not kill them because the govt. said not to? NO. You'd kill them.

Hamas has a goal. Kill all non-Muslims.
A far different goal than Hezbollah or Iran.

I think they are both Taliban style. The only reason Hizballah doesn't do in Lebanon what Hamas did in Gaza because the opposition (mostly Christians) can fight back. They don't want another civil war - and Syria is calling the shots anyway.

But Yes, Hamas is probably worse. Hizballah is army of some sort - Hamas is a gang.

 

[Lemon law]

This whole thread is living proof of a collective guilt mentality that sheds lots of heat and zero light. Even if Hamas is supposed to have 20-25 thousand active fighters that is still less than 1.7% of Gaza residents, a recent thread tried to blame a few missiles coming from Lebanon on Hezbollah, and now its turns out it was some rouge group.

Collective punishment by Israel is both against international law and is what keeps the conflict going, going, and going. And if Fatah can't get the job done, other groups will stand up, if Hamas can't get the job done, it too will be replaced. That is the one lesson in this 60 year conflict, the only way to resolve it will be for Israeli moderates and Palestinian moderates to agree on a fair settlement. And failing that, binding third party arbitration is long over due. If Israel wants it all, they will end up with nothing in the longer sweep of history.

 

[eleison]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
This whole thread is living proof of a collective guilt mentality that sheds lots of heat and zero light. Even if Hamas is supposed to have 20-25 thousand active fighters that is still less than 1.7% of Gaza residents, a recent thread tried to blame a few missiles coming from Lebanon on Hezbollah, and now its turns out it was some rouge group.

Collective punishment by Israel is both against international law and is what keeps the conflict going, going, and going. And if Fatah can't get the job done, other groups will stand up, if Hamas can't get the job done, it too will be replaced. That is the one lesson in this 60 year conflict, the only way to resolve it will be for Israeli moderates and Palestinian moderates to agree on a fair settlement. And failing that, binding third party arbitration is long over due. If Israel wants it all, they will end up with nothing in the longer sweep of history.

Wrong... not using enough force keeps it going. The enemy has to be "killed" and not allowed to grow. E.g.., Sherman's march to the sea. Dresden firebombing.. Atomic bomb on Nagasaki/Hiroshima ... The "extinction" of the Native Americans... Out of all these conflicts, a cycle of violence did not occur.. all these broke the will of the enemy "collectively" to fight.. or helped break the will of these people "collectively" to fight... Breaking the will of the enemy to fight is the key.. but there will be many "innocent" causalities and hence, I doubt it will happen.. because of this we will be stuck w/ this cycle of violence for a while.

 

[SamurAchzar]

Originally posted by: Lemon law
If Israel wants it all, they will end up with nothing in the longer sweep of history.

Weren't the Arabs those who rejected the partition plan, on the grounds of all-or-nothing?

Anyway, as you spell such a horrible doom for Israel, I'd be happy if you address my post to you from a different thread, as I'm genuinely interested in what you think -

I say Israel's position - international opinion included - has improved steadily from '48 to this day.

Why?
Few reasons:

There's the matter of religion: Although PLO were terrorists of the worst kind (like committing the Munich massacre against Israeli olympic sportsmen), you could, by a very large stretch, argue that they are "freedom fighters". They were relatively secular, and didn't wave the flag of Islam up high.
Today, Hamas signifies anything BUT freedom. It's in essence a Taliban like organization, nurtured by the Ayatollahs of Iran. They work towards implementing the Muslim law, the Sharia. That surely can't win them points in the international arena, can it?

The countless atrocities committed on behalf of Islam, helped the cause of Israel. People are now much less tolerant towards Muslims. When the first WMD goes off in some European city (because those are much easier targets than Israel) courtesy of AQ, how do you think the world will react?

Then, the matter of Europe: Due to massive Muslim immigration, more and more parts of Europe are now fighting to maintain their heritage. Europeans feel immensely threatened for their national identity. It reflects well in election results, and their negative sentiments towards their new immigrants will only grow with time. Today, the most commonly given birth name in Britain is Mohammad; how long do you think the British will let this go before feeling like their losing their homeland?

Then, Arab countries: Most of them long ago realized fighting Israel is foolish, and consequently stopped doing so. Israel is no longer threatened by organized military action.

Then, even if the world will somehow turn against it, I can't see Israel really suffering. It is the 4th largest manufacturer of military hardware, so it's not very dependent on foreign hardware. Israel is a technological center second only to the Silicon Valley for some American companies (the Intel Core processor was developed in Haifa, Israel), so in this case, I can't see corporate America turning its on Israel. Also, Israel has considerable nuclear power, and the world doesn't like nuclear rogue states, so I wouldn't count on a diplomatic embargo anyway. Israel doesn't need anything from the US to sustain itself economically (but it does need the option to purchase some military hardware - mostly aircrafts - as do most countries around the globe).

So if I were Israel, I wouldn't be worried even one bit. Just hang tight and let the world deal with the Muslims.

Thanks

 

[Aimster]

Originally posted by: SamurAchzar

Originally posted by: Aimster

Originally posted by: SamurAchzar

Originally posted by: Aimster
Hezbollah and Hamas are totally different.

How's that? By Hamas not being Shiha? Other than that, they are quite similar: endorsed by Syria/Iran, declare to the Western world that territorial disputes is the reason they fight while saying to Arabs that they are looking at the destruction of Israel. Fundamental Muslims, Taliban-style. Don't hesitate killing other Arabs for their goals (Fatah in Gaza, Christians in Lebanon). Quite similar, IMHO. You want to point otherwise?

Syria and Iran do not arm Hamas. They use it as a propaganda machine to gain support in the Arab world.

Why is Hezbollah and Iran not killing non-Muslims inside their own territories?
When you realize you can't answer that question then you will realize those two groups are not out to kill non-Muslims.

If you were a member of these rogue stations or group and you wanted to kill non-Muslims and they lived within walking distance from you, would you not kill them because the govt. said not to? NO. You'd kill them.

Hamas has a goal. Kill all non-Muslims.
A far different goal than Hezbollah or Iran.

I think they are both Taliban style. The only reason Hizballah doesn't do in Lebanon what Hamas did in Gaza because the opposition (mostly Christians) can fight back. They don't want another civil war - and Syria is calling the shots anyway.

But Yes, Hamas is probably worse. Hizballah is army of some sort - Hamas is a gang.

You think the members of Hezbollah are not going around killing Christians because they are afraid of them fighting back? Christians inside Lebanon are not walking the streets with AK-47s around them.

If a member of Hezbollah really believes in the deaths of Christians and Jews then he or she will carry out that belief inside Lebanon.

If the world worked in fear then there would be no murders. People wouldn't commit murders because they would be afraid of the consequences.

 

[dainthomas]

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: Lemon law
This whole thread is living proof of a collective guilt mentality that sheds lots of heat and zero light. Even if Hamas is supposed to have 20-25 thousand active fighters that is still less than 1.7% of Gaza residents, a recent thread tried to blame a few missiles coming from Lebanon on Hezbollah, and now its turns out it was some rouge group.

Collective punishment by Israel is both against international law and is what keeps the conflict going, going, and going. And if Fatah can't get the job done, other groups will stand up, if Hamas can't get the job done, it too will be replaced. That is the one lesson in this 60 year conflict, the only way to resolve it will be for Israeli moderates and Palestinian moderates to agree on a fair settlement. And failing that, binding third party arbitration is long over due. If Israel wants it all, they will end up with nothing in the longer sweep of history.

Wrong... not using enough force keeps it going. The enemy has to be "killed" and not allowed to grow. E.g.., Sherman's march to the sea. Dresden firebombing.. Atomic bomb on Nagasaki/Hiroshima ... The "extinction" of the Native Americans... Out of all these conflicts, a cycle of violence did not occur.. all these broke the will of the enemy "collectively" to fight.. or helped break the will of these people "collectively" to fight... Breaking the will of the enemy to fight is the key.. but there will be many "innocent" causalities and hence, I doubt it will happen.. because of this we will be stuck w/ this cycle of violence for a while.

Finally a voice of reason. Thank goodness the leaders of Israel don't ascribe to the strategy of fighting "fair" wars that that the latte-sipping crowd here keeps going on about. Wars suck, and they're horrible, messy, bloody things. It seems cruel, but the harder you hit, the sooner it's over. If the US had followed Israel's strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq the vast majority of our troops would have been home a long time ago and those countries would almost certainly be more peaceful now.

You don't win wars by wounding your enemy just enough to tick them off.

 

[SamurAchzar]

Originally posted by: dainthomas

Originally posted by: eleison

Originally posted by: Lemon law
This whole thread is living proof of a collective guilt mentality that sheds lots of heat and zero light. Even if Hamas is supposed to have 20-25 thousand active fighters that is still less than 1.7% of Gaza residents, a recent thread tried to blame a few missiles coming from Lebanon on Hezbollah, and now its turns out it was some rouge group.

Collective punishment by Israel is both against international law and is what keeps the conflict going, going, and going. And if Fatah can't get the job done, other groups will stand up, if Hamas can't get the job done, it too will be replaced. That is the one lesson in this 60 year conflict, the only way to resolve it will be for Israeli moderates and Palestinian moderates to agree on a fair settlement. And failing that, binding third party arbitration is long over due. If Israel wants it all, they will end up with nothing in the longer sweep of history.

Wrong... not using enough force keeps it going. The enemy has to be "killed" and not allowed to grow. E.g.., Sherman's march to the sea. Dresden firebombing.. Atomic bomb on Nagasaki/Hiroshima ... The "extinction" of the Native Americans... Out of all these conflicts, a cycle of violence did not occur.. all these broke the will of the enemy "collectively" to fight.. or helped break the will of these people "collectively" to fight... Breaking the will of the enemy to fight is the key.. but there will be many "innocent" causalities and hence, I doubt it will happen.. because of this we will be stuck w/ this cycle of violence for a while.

Finally a voice of reason. Thank goodness the leaders of Israel don't ascribe to the strategy of fighting "fair" wars that that the latte-sipping crowd here keeps going on about. Wars suck, and they're horrible, messy, bloody things. It seems cruel, but the harder you hit, the sooner it's over. If the US had followed Israel's strategy in Afghanistan and Iraq the vast majority of our troops would have been home a long time ago and those countries would almost certainly be more peaceful now.

You don't win wars by wounding your enemy just enough to tick them off.

Ding-ding-ding, we have a winner :beer: