ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

Has Syria threatened Israel?

For your reading pleasure.

Yes, and the two countries are in a state of war. Moreover, Syria funds Hezbollah, and has made unprovoked attacks on Israel in three wars. That is why the examples given above by the Israel haters are not applicable.

Re: Israel, hamas,hezbolha,syria, world war lll?


Oh I see. Racist screeds such as this one are OK because in this case their object truly is inhuman scum.

The truly dangerous element in all this is that the United States is hostage to this sort of ill-informed, intemperate and contemptable rhetoric on the part of extermists in Israel and among their self-styled "brothers" here.

Well said, George. Good man.

Re: Israel, hamas,hezbolha,syria, world war lll?


I only objected to your attempt to Godwin the thread. Comparing anything Israel does to what Nazi Germany did is an automatic loss. There are better ways to say what you want then bringing up the Nazi's.

Suggesting the extermination of a people in order to protect a superior culture invites the comparison.

Re: Israel, hamas,hezbolha,syria, world war lll?


Nobody did compare something Israel does to what Nazi Germany did.


People commented on a poster who argued that Syria and "its pawns" should be wiped off the map, and that "that arab scum, in Damascus,Beirut, and Tehran" has to be "hit".

If you think that advocating genocide is permissible, that's certainly your prerogative. However, arguing along those lines clearly invites the comparison to the propaganda or intentions of Nazi Germany - pretty much as Ahmadinejad's comments did. I don't remember you commenting that a comparison to Nazi Germany was inappropriate back then.


Then again, you might hold the position that advocating genocide can't be allowed if directed against Israelis or Jews, but is quite okay as long as the intended target are Lebanese, Syrians or Iranians......

McG and ican are made from the same "blood type." They both see extermination as the solution.

OMFG, you guys are so ridiculous.

I didn't advocate for anything and I certainly didn't say I approved of anyone's post. I can't believe how pompous you guys are. How about taking a break from that high horse you guys sit on?

When you guys get done with your circle jerk, let me know.

We'll get off the high horse when you get off the jackass.

too easy.

No, but you decided to jump into the discussion when people criticised AbandonAllHope's post. If you found it necessary to comment, you can't blame other people when they comment on your posts in turn.

(Well, you can, but it'd sound a wee bit hypocritical...)

PolicyWatch #1276
Hizballah's 'Big Surprise' and the Litani Line

By Andrew Exum
August 21, 2007

On August 14, the anniversary of the end of last summer's Lebanon war, Hizballah secretary-general Hassan Nasrallah warned Israel of a "big surprise" if it initiated a new conflict in the South. Analysts immediately began speculating over the nature of the promised surprise. But what is most important to note is that Hizballah, a year after its last war, is making serious preparations for the next one.
The Litani Line

The most significant development in southern Lebanon since the end of the 2006 war is Hizballah's construction of a defensive line north of the Litani River. Whereas all territory south of the Litani falls under the jurisdiction of the UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), territory north of the river is off-limits to UNIFIL.

As soon as the war with Israel ended, wealthy Hizballah sympathizers began buying up land north of the Litani -- in historically Christian and Druze areas -- at prices well above the market rate. Much of the Christian village of Chbail, for example, has been bought by the Shiite businessman Ali Tajeddine and repopulated with poor Shiites from the south. Another village just south of the Litani has been built entirely from scratch. Such developments have alarmed other Lebanese communities for purely sectarian reasons. But the construction and repopulation of these villages is almost certainly intended to link the traditionally Shiite villages of the western Bekaa Valley with those of southern Lebanon.

Most of this construction is along a new, Iranian-funded road being built along the Litani's northern edge. Constructed by the "Iranian Organization for Sharing in the Building of Lebanon," the road is as large as any in southern Lebanon and features signs every few hundred meters with slogans such as "In the service of the people of Lebanon."

To be sure, there is nothing implicitly wrong with either the resettlement of impoverished Shiites or the development of large public works projects. But these moves mask a static defensive line that Hizballah intends to use in what it sees as the inevitable sequel to last summer's fight against Israel. Using friendly Shiite-dominated villages as fighting bases was key to Hizballah's successes last summer. The Litani River valley offers Hizballah an opportunity to link these villages with other Shiite villages in the Bekaa Valley.

Why the Litani?

From the perspective of a Hizballah military planner, it is difficult to surmise what strategic objectives Israel might seek to accomplish in the event of another war. Hizballah is left in the awkward position of trying to answer the question of how Israel might fight without knowing why it would fight.

At the moment, the group seems to think that despite Israel's heavy reliance on airpower in the last war -- with ground forces deployed in only a limited fashion -- the next war would begin with a much larger Israeli ground assault. Any attempt to defend the area south of the Litani would therefore be suicidal. Moreover, the deployment of 12,000 UN peacekeepers and several thousand Lebanese Armed Forces (LAF) personnel has made the construction of static defensive lines in southern Lebanon much more difficult than it was before summer 2006. Accordingly, even as Hizballah continues to train village units south of the Litani in the hope that they could slow an Israeli ground invasion, the group has constructed its main defensive positions to the north, where the terrain favors the defender and where Hizballah could deny Israeli armor columns easy access to the Bekaa Valley.

Although Hizballah had ample time to prepare for the last war -- which the group initiated with its decision to kidnap two Israeli soldiers on July 12, 2006 -- the next clash could result from either a wider regional conflict or an Israeli decision to finish the job begun in 2006. Whether or not there is a real danger of a war initiated by either Israel or Syria matters little for the purpose of understanding Hizballah's strategy -- at the moment, the group seems convinced that another war is likely.

Another good reason for Hizballah to build positions north of the Litani is that this approach allows for entrenched positions that can house medium- and long-range missiles. Hizballah successfully launched large numbers of short-range and largely ineffective katyusha rockets into Israel in 2006, but the Israeli air force had knocked out its longer-range and more potent arsenal just a few days into the fighting.

Israeli planners, for their part, have never understood why Hizballah felt the need to launch rockets from such advanced positions in the first place. Launching them from the other side of the Litani -- over the heads of UNIFIL and the LAF -- has the advantage of leaving Hizballah positions unharassed by the initial stages of an Israeli ground invasion. From positions north of the Litani, Hizballah katyushas could comfortably reach major Israeli population centers vulnerable from firing positions along the border (e.g., the 16,000 people in the town of Kiryat Shimona), while its longer-range missiles could reach more distant potential targets such as Haifa and even Tel Aviv.

All along the Iranian-built route north of the Litani, new roads and trails are springing up where once there were only trees and rocks. Where do these roads go, and what is taking place there? It is difficult to tell because many of them have been designated closed "military areas," patrolled by Hizballah gunmen. To longtime Lebanon observers, these areas evoke memories of border zones similarly off-limits between 2000 and 2006, used to great effect by Hizballah as reinforced fighting positions during the summer war.

Nasrallah's Surprise?

Although Hizballah positions north of the Litani might be the "big surprise" Hassan Nasrallah referred to in his August 14 speech, that hardly seems likely. Observers have been taken aback by how overt much of the construction has been -- very unlike Hizballah, an organization famous for its secrecy. Perhaps these positions are being constructed as decoys in the same way that others were constructed for this purpose between 2000 and 2006. Or, as some have argued, maybe these construction projects are just a way to keep Hizballah's gunmen busy while the real fight -- the political one -- takes place to the north, in Beirut. Most likely, though, Hizballah -- which remains a disciplined fighting force -- is motivated by a genuine sense of urgency, unsure when the next round of fighting will begin and concerned that its pre-2006 defenses would be insufficient against a massed Israeli ground invasion (and too difficult to reconstruct with UNIFIL in the way).

There is speculation that Nasrallah's "surprise" would be the inclusion of antiaircraft capabilities in the next round of fighting, a move Hizballah hopes would break Israel's air superiority and enable it to fight on a more fluid battlefield. For U.S. observers, however, the source of continued fascination remains Hizballah's transformation from the world's finest guerrilla army into a force that, in 2006 and today, seems quite comfortable in conventional fighting as well.

Andrew Exum, a Washington Institute Soref fellow, recently returned from a trip to southern Lebanon.

--washingtoninstitute.org

One of the reasons why Israel will never have peace in their country.


Israeli strike at rocket launchers leaves 3 Palestinian kids deadIsrael has only accomplished creating more hatred and suicide bombers.

CI, can you provide a link to that piece. In any event, it is silly for you to post it with your one-sided comments.

There is no doubt, like any military in the world, attacks will produce collateral human damage. The big difference in the ME is that the Pals TARGET Israeli children, women, and men, including the elderly. I am amazed that this genocide doesn't engender more hatred of the Muslims by the world.

Advocate, Are you telling us you provide two-sided comments? ROFL

As for not posting the link, that's a very bad habit of mine, and I'll take responsibility. However when asked, I will dig it up and post it. Give me a minute or two.


From the BBC:
Webpage Title

Here is a testiment of how Jews and other minorities are treated by Muslims in the ME.


Iraq's Endangered Minorities

By Nina Shea
Monday, August 27, 2007; Page A13

Recent bombings in Iraq's Kurdish area nearly annihilated two Yazidi villages, killing hundreds of this ancient angel-revering, Indo-European religious group. The single deadliest atrocity of the Iraq conflict, it was also the latest demonstration that Iraq's non-Muslims are in danger of extinction.

Sixty years ago, Iraq's flourishing Jewish population, a third of Baghdad, fled in the wake of coordinated bombings and violence against them. Today, a handful of Jews remain. Unless Washington acts, the same fate awaits Iraq's million or so Christians and other minorities. They are not simply caught in the crossfire of a Muslim power struggle; they are being targeted in a ruthless cleansing campaign by Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish militants.


This crime against humanity has gone unnoticed by the Bush administration and Congress. Iraq's Catholic Chaldean; Syriac Orthodox, Assyrian, Armenian and Protestant Christians; and smaller Yazidi and Mandean communities are seen as inconsequential. They don't sponsor terrorism, hold political power or have strong regional allies. Because they do not cause trouble, they are ignored.

The United States has no policies designed to protect or rescue them. Worse, it has carried out policies heedless of their effect on Iraq's most vulnerable. When the U.S. Agency for International Development provided for reconstruction projects, it did so without regard for whether regional authorities withheld benefits from minorities. When the U.S. Embassy sought translators and skilled workers, it hired heavily from among minority groups without considering their ability to obtain asylum if threatened. To win Shiite support for Kurdish and Sunni demands, American constitutional advisers accepted provisions for Islamic law that severely weakened the rights of non-Muslims.

Canon Andrew White, the Anglican vicar of a Baghdad church who organized an interfaith reconciliation effort sponsored by the Pentagon, left Iraq after receiving death threats. In July, he testified unequivocally at a hearing on "Threats to Iraq's Communities of Antiquity" held by the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom: "Coalition policies have failed the Christians and non-Muslims."

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice argues that reducing violence will help all Iraqis, but non-Muslims may have been purged from Iraq by the time the dust settles. It could already be too late for the Mandeans, followers of John the Baptist who have roots in ancient Babylon. A spokesman of the sect told the commission that only 5,000 Mandeans remain.

Priests have been beheaded; churches bombed; unveiled women burned with acid; men killed for operating theaters and barbershops; children murdered for wearing jeans, for mingling with the opposite sex or simply for being seen as symbolizing the infidels in some way. Criminals find members of religious minorities to be easy prey. During the buildup of U.S. forces this spring, a Sunni mosque in Baghdad's Dora neighborhood issued a fatwa demanding that local Christians convert to Islam or pay an Islamic tax; thousands fled.

Many Christians have left Iraq since 2003. The U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees reports that Christians, now less than 4 percent of Iraq's population, make up 40 percent of its refugees. Thousands more Christians, Yazidis and others are moving north, mainly to the rural Nineveh plain. This is their last hope for staying. Nineveh is the traditional home of the Assyrian Christians, who trace their civilization to Nimrod, Noah's great-grandson, and their faith to the prophet Jonah and the apostle Thomas, both of whom preached there.

Pascale Warda, a Chaldean Christian who survived four assassination attempts, one of which killed her four bodyguards, while serving as Iraq's interim migration minister, told the Commission on International Religious Freedom of the "desperate" plight of Iraq's internally displaced people and the sense of abandonment they feel. Shortly afterward, the Senate went into recess without acting on a House humanitarian aid measure.

At a House hearing in May, the State Department's inspector general for Iraq, Stuart Bowen, was asked what the administration was doing to help small minority groups. Bowen said he had heard of "progress" in "creating a Nineveh province" for them. But there has been no progress, and U.S. policy in fact runs counter to the initiative. When asked about such a haven, the State Department's Iraq policy coordinator, David Satterfield, told me it is "against U.S. policy to further sectarianism." The administration has not even brought together elected and civic leaders of Iraq's non-Muslim minorities to discuss solutions.

Lebanese Maronite scholar Habib Malik has written that the Middle East's Christians and other minorities have historically served as moderating influences. Their very presence highlights pluralism, and they are a bridge to the West and its values of individual rights. These communities sponsor schools with modern curriculums benefiting all; a prime example was Baghdad's Jesuit College, whose past students include three Muslim presidential candidates in Iraq's last election.

It is in America's national and moral interests to help Iraq's Christians and other non-Muslims. The most vulnerable must be given asylum. We must also help those determined to stay. It is not favoritism to acknowledge that they face specific threats that require specific policy remedies apart from the military surge -- such as aid and protection to resettle in their traditional Nineveh homelands.

The writer is director of the Hudson Institute's Center for Religious Freedom and a commissioner on the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, an independent government agency.

Advocate, The title of your article tells us you don't expect equal treatment of citizens even in a "democracy," because Jews are treated differently in Muslim countries.

Can you provide any more ridiculous comparisons?

Muslims not giving equal treatment to minorities is quite an understatement. It is about expulsion, torture, and murder by the Muslims. Moreover, Christians are probably victimized more than anyone else.

Gee, I've traveled to several Muslim countries, and was treated very well by their citizens. I was stationed in Morocco for one year in the US Air Force too. I'm also going to Tunisia in October, and learned from my readings that Europeans visit that country on holiday all the time.

Exactly which Muslim countries are you talking about?