Bombed again

According to a reader familiar with New Yorker magazine, Seymour Hersh and his nameless friends are at it again this month.

If what Hersh reports being told by “a Middle East expert with knowledge� is correct, we have further evidence (like we needed it) of the crowded confusion that occupies Bush Jr.’s oval cuckoo’s nest. According to this expert, the invasion of Lebanon was a plan cooked up collaboratively with the White House, and one of the goals was to make the Lebanese government stronger.

The best laugh, however, comes from a “U.S. consultant with close ties to Israel� who says “The Israelis told us it would be a cheap war with many benefits … It would be a demo for [an American strike on] Iran.�

Back in April Hersh wheeled the same anonymous cast on stage to assert that Cheney et al are forging ahead with plans bomb Iran back to the stone age, with nukes if at all possible. Hard to know what any of it’s worth when you don’t know who’s saying it, but a pleasant bit of echo-chamber reading for the pessimistic.

Hizbullah’s military prowess

Interesting story in the WaPo on Israeli soldiers’ perception of Hizbullah:

“You really can’t underestimate the Hezbollah,” said Tyler, 20, a member of the army’s Nahal Brigade. “They are the masters of the field. They know the area better than us. They know where to hide and when to move. They always know where we are.”

It’s shock-full of quotes like the one above that make Hizbullah soldiers sound like an army of Rambos. There’s a myth of invincibility being created that’s going to live way beyond this war and that probably gives an exaggerated view of what Hizbullah is capable of, which is really not that much — it’s just that the Israelis have not fought such a competent guerrilla group before.

Pentagon to train Lebanese army?

The interesting thing about this AP story about US military training for the Lebanese army, written by hardcore pro-Israel hack Barry Schweid, is that it makes absolutely no mention of the Lebanese reaction to the proposal — whether in the Lebanese government or Lebanese army. It’s clear what the idea is, though:

The administration is striving for a resolution that would end the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, now in its fourth week, and also establish conditions for a lasting cease-fire. Many other countries favor an immediate cease-fire.

I put this paragraph in just to show Barry Schweid’s work: no question of the administration’s definition of a “lasting ceasefire,” and a throwaway about what other countries want — the implication being they want an immediate, but not a lasting, ceasefire.

But I digress. It continues:

The military training would be designed to help the Lebanese armed forces “exercise control and sovereignty over all of Lebanese territory once we have an end to the fighting in such a way that is durable,” McCormack said.

So how are we to know that the White House or Pentagon has even discussed this with the Lebanese armed forces? And who exactly is going to disarm Hizbullah? A US-trained Lebanese army? Will they train them like they did many armies and security services across the region — SAVAK in Iran during the 1960s and 1970s for instance? Or just supply them with tools like tear gas (riot-control police in Egypt) and legcuffs or electric batons (Saudi Arabia and elsewhere, used for torture? Is US policy really encouraging the Lebanese army to take on Hizbullah — i.e. start another civil war? I’m not surprised we don’t see a Lebanese general confirming this.

Nasrallah calls for avoiding civilian targets

Hassan Nasrallah has called for avoiding civilian targets on both sides:

BEIRUT: Hizbullah’s leader offered Thursday to stop pounding Israel’s “northern settlements” if the Jewish state refrained from bombarding Lebanon’s “cities and civilians.” Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah also issued a warning, however, in a televised speech: “Let my words be clear, any attack on Lebanon’s capital, Beirut, will result in Hizbullah bombarding the Zionist entity’s capital, Tel Aviv.”

In an almost immediate response aired on Israeli public television, a senior military official said Israel would destroy all of Lebanon’s infrastructure if Tel Aviv were hit.

“We are ready to keep the whole thing restricted to a military fight with the Israeli Army,” Nasrallah said, “on the ground, fighters to fighters.”

I’m not sure how to interpret this except as an attempt to make Israel look bad and reinforce its image of an army that targets civilians, since Hizbullah would be in fact probably unwilling to fight a direct “battlefield” war rather than a guerrilla one, which it has proved relatively effective at doing. Anyway, the rest of the article is interesting — and I’m surprised to see the Daily Star describe Hizbullah as “the resistance.”

Hizbullah’s strategy

The always excellent Anthony Shadid writes of Hizbullah’s doctrine and tactics:

Three weeks into its war with Israel, Hezbollah has retained its presence in southern Lebanon, often the sole authority in devastated towns along the Israeli border. The militia is elusive, with few logistics, little hierarchy and less visibility. Even residents often say they don’t know how the militiamen operate or are organized. Communication is by walkie-talkie, always in code, and sometimes messages are delivered by motorcycle. Weapons seem to be already in place across a terrain that fighters say they know intimately.

“On the ground, face to face, we’re better fighters than the Israelis,” said Hajj Abu Mohammed, a bearded, 44-year-old militiaman in the small village of Srifa, whose walkie-talkie crackled and cellphone rang with a Hezbollah anthem.

Israel has claimed to have destroyed Hezbollah’s infrastructure in a 22-day campaign that has driven hundreds of thousands of civilians from their homes and wrecked village after village along valleys sometimes charred by fires.

Hezbollah admits to having suffered losses, but in the fighting so far, it has demonstrated its detailed planning since the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon in 2000, ending an 18-year occupation. Fighters appear to exercise a great deal of autonomy, a flexibility evident along the region’s back roads: ammunition loaded in cars, trucks in camouflage, rocket launchers tucked in banana plantations.

Analysts say the militia could probably hold out a month without serious resupply. Fighters and supporters suggest that time is their advantage in a war that most suspect won’t have a conclusive end. In conversations in southern Lebanon, the militia’s supporters seem most adamant in trying to deprive either Israel or the United States of political gains from the military campaign.

“We’ll never submit to oppression, whatever the force applied, whatever the time it takes,” one of the group gathered in Jwayya said Tuesday. “You won’t find any difference between 21 days and 121 days. The difference is solely a matter of time.”

Just the read the whole thing. Meanwhile in Israel (whose overwhelming power may have made it delusional as well as utterly amoral):

Despite the number of attacks yesterday, the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, said Hizbullah had been disarmed “to a large degree”. “The infrastructure of Hizbullah has been entirely destroyed,” he said.

I think I know who to believe. Besides, Hizbullah fighters would probably continue fighting Israeli occupiers with their bare hands if they have to.

Hiding among civilians… really?

One of Israel’s main justifications behind its aggressive bombing of civilian targets in Lebanon has been the claim that Hizbollah is “hiding among civilians.” The Israelis’ lies, as noted before, resembles the the US army’s rubbish about “VC communitiesâ€� during the Vietnam War–rubbish that was used to justify bombing entire villages back to the stone age, and the use of Agent Orange.
Kay sent me this article from Salon.com debunking this Israeli myth

The “hiding among civilians” myth
Israel claims it’s justified in bombing civilians because Hezbollah mingles with them. In fact, the militant group doesn’t trust its civilians and stays as far away from them as possible.
By Mitch Prothero

Continue reading Hiding among civilians… really?

Israeli psy-ops in Lebanon

The BBC ran a report on the current Israeli psyops in Southern Lebanon…

Israel steps up “psy-ops” in Lebanon
By Peter Feuilherade
BBC Monitoring

From mass targeting of mobile phones with voice and text messages to old-fashioned radio broadcasts warning of imminent attacks, Israel is deploying a range of old and new technologies in Lebanon as part of the psychological operations (“psyops”) campaign supplementing its military attacks.

According to US and UK media outlets, Israel has reactivated a radio station to broadcast messages urging residents of southern Lebanon to evacuate the region.

Some reports have named the station as the Voice of the South.

Continue reading Israeli psy-ops in Lebanon