After the Israel-Lebanon war is over...

"The first means the end of Hezbollah as we know it and is a suicide option;..."

How so? Due respect to Mr. Young, Hezbollah is popular among Lebanese Shiia not because of the military (OK maybe some of the guys) but because of the social services and polticial representation they provide. Why would disarming, by itself, put them out of business?

Hezbollah is popular among Lebanese Shiia not because of the military (OK maybe some of the guys) but because of the social services and polticial representation they provide.

A huge part of Hizballah's appeal is that it, alone, was able to fight Israel to at least a standstill. That's a huge notch on anyone's belt.

Again, if militarism has outlived its usefulness (I can't believe I just typed that) why doesn't a disarmed Hezbollah have a role to play in sectarian Lebanon?

Shep!!!

What are you saying, man?!?

Again, if militarism has outlived its usefulness (I can't believe I just typed that) why doesn't a disarmed Hezbollah have a role to play in sectarian Lebanon?

Not sure what you mean by "militarism." And I'm certainly not the guy who thinks that, whatever definition you use.

I've intimated that 4GW is what we're looking at in Lebanon (and Iraq). And that Israel's problem is that the IDF isn't fighting a 4GW war. I've also given a lot of thought and done a lot of reading on HOW you fight BACK against a 4GW enemy. So, maybe you're suggesting that 4GW isn't "militarism?"

I don't know.

Here's the bottom line for me: I am not a pacifist. I am a Zionist. And I want Israel to win this war.

Shep, I get the sense that you are not a pacifist, but maybe I'm wrong. I also get the sense that you do not want Israel to win this war, certainly not in the short-term. I'm not sure of anything else beyond that.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

Oh, and to answer your other question:"Why doesn't a disarmed Hezbollah have a role to play in sectarian Lebanon?"

If their humanitarian efforts are really as good as everyone says, then they most certainly would have a role.

But I'm a believer that Hezbollah has separate wings in the same way that a bird has separate wings -- eliminate one wing and the bird falls to earth.

Ara, you’re right that I’m not a pacifist (nobody’s perfect).

As far as Israel winning the war against Hezbollah, I’m all for it but I’m afraid that ship has sailed. Israel’s emotionally and ideologically driven approach has only strengthened it, military and non-military wing alike. I see no plausible scenario, going forward, that diminishes this strengthened Hezbollah without dramatic changes in the entire direction of Israeli and US foreign policy. Do you?

Mark, I'm saying that the political and social service "wing" of Hezbollah has played a fundamental role in bettering the lives of ordinary Shiite Lebanese (just as Hamas has for Palestinians). You know, hospitals, schools, feeding programs, etc. I see no reason to believe that the need for these essential services won't continue; quite the reverse. Israel has guaranteed that Hezbollah will fill that void, even if she (or someone else) can somehow manage to disarm the terrorists.

Oh, ok shep. I disagree in part. I believe that the need for such services wil continue, but they need not be obtained only at the price of loyalty to murdering scum. I agree that as long as there is a remnant of the Hezbollah organization they are in a position to fill that void if not undertaken by another entity.

And of course, therein lies the problem in Iraq repeated in Lebanon. You need to commit overwhelming manpower on the ground or don't go in at all. Doing this on the cheap (in terms of boots on the ground anyway) puts the side with the greater warmaking ability in an awkward position.

Realistically though, I don't see what alternatives the Israelis had. I'm still not pursuaded that the are going too far even though I admit they have disproportionate means of prosecuting war.

And I'm not buying that the loss of the propaganda war means spit. Hezbollah would not have the popular support it has without a lot of folks with them hating Israel and wanting it erased long before the current hostilities. They wouldn't have the funding or the support of other nations unless part of their agenda was militantly geared against Israel.

They've earned a recruitment tool. But that's a hell of a rush party. I don't believe for a minute that the purposeful position of the government of Israel is the elimination of the Shia as a people, or that civilians are fair game -- although certain commanders in the IDF's air wing do display a certain callous recklessness in their approach to the rules of engagement.

The same political restraint has not been expressed by Hezollah's leaders -- who have said in no uncertain terms that the Zionist state must perish. That position is simply unacceptable. And while they may have engendered a great deal of sympathy for their cause, they have also learned what happens if you even try to mess with Israel.

If they don't think twice next time, and there will be a next time, they're stupid. Now as long as Israel can avoid maintaining a prolonged occupation, or resists the attempt to "purple finger" the people of Lebanon, they will avoid the trap we're stuck with in Iraq.

I had a serious hole in my stomach when the news came out of Qana, and I'm not buying anyone's absolutist position on either side that the IDF's policy is to target civilians as a doctrine, or that Hezbollah thinks it can win support by using their people as bait and shields. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, it has. But when you unleash the dogs of war, those puppies tend to tear up your caged chickens as well as the foxes they're after. Targets of opportunity aren't something that political leadership, or even commanders, always have control over.

“Realistically though, I don't see what alternatives the Israelis had.”

Really, Mark. http://www.rubyan.com/politics/2006/07/kana_not_the_first_time_it_hap.html#comments
Clearly, I believe that Israel’s current troubles are the direct result of a profound lack of imagination.

“The same political restraint has not been expressed by Hezollah's leaders -- who have said in no uncertain terms that the Zionist state must perish. [snip] And while they may have engendered a great deal of sympathy for their cause...”

Play those comments back in your head in reverse and explain again why Israel’s approach makes sense. Hint: beating the sh*t out of people is only useful if it makes them afraid of you.

“Targets of opportunity aren't something that political leadership, or even commanders, always have control over.”

Now you’re just being naive. I’d expect better from a lawyer.

beating the sh*t out of people is only useful if it makes them afraid of you.

Correct, as always. And you don't see the rest of the Arab League jumping into the fray for precisely that reason.

Re: opportunistic targets and naivete. Shit flows downstream, I know. And they aren't all saints either in the Knesset or the IDF. Just the same, I'm not seeing a true scorched earth engagement here. We know Israel is capable of escalating far in excess of what they're doing now.

"And you don't see the rest of the Arab League jumping into the fray for precisely that reason."

Absolutely not. They are afraid of Iran not Israel.

I've haven't seen any saints lately, Mark. No devils, either. Just stupid, prideful humans at the watershed.

They are afraid of Iran not Israel.

Good.

Just stupid, prideful humans at the watershed.

Newsflash!

P.S. From a strictly military view, Amir Peretz, Defense Minister, is definitely a different kind of guy. Depending on how you think the war is going, you may (or may not) want to make him the goat.