ISRAEL'S OLMERT: NO CEASE-FIRE IN LEBANON

YAHOOOO via AP ^ | 7/31/06

[areafiftyone]

QANA, Lebanon - Israeli warplanes carried out strikes in southern Lebanon on Monday, hours after agreeing to temporarily halt air raids while investigating a bombing that killed at least 56 Lebanese civilians, mostly women and children seeking shelter. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said there will be no cease-fire, adding that "Israel is continuing to fight."

[pissant]

utter nonsense.

[paul51]

or if the military completed its inquiry

Inquiry complete. The finding is we blew the place up. Now looking for more terrorist hideouts and launching pads.

[TexasCajun]

[garbageseeker]

Olmert and the IDF cannot stop the aerial bombardment on Hezbollah positions. They must not be given time to regroup. A cease fire would have allowed time to regroup. Personally, I think that he should expand the attacks into Syria attacking the munitions depots that supply Hezbollah.

[af_vet_rr]

utter nonsense.

Couldn't agree more - the US needs to step back and allow Israel to do it's thing, rather than dreaming up all kinds of cease-fire proposals and the like with the UN.

It bothers me that the UN feels that it deserves to have a role in this, when they've just sat on their thumbers for the last 20 years, and it bothers me even more than the US is a party to this.

The only way the US and UN have any right to pressure Israel into stopping, is if they do something about Hezbollah's supply chain from Syria/Iran, and the US/UN will not do so.

Israel cannot afford to fight an in-deph war, end of story. They have to fight it forward of their borders, especially against an enemy that is as fluid as hebollah, because if they don't, then Hezbollah puts large portions of the Israeli population under the gun.

[meandog]

I get you don't like Bush. Fine by me. And you bought into the myth of Katrina being the feds fault I see. Oh well, must suck to agree with libs on a worldview.

Well, at least you're consistent with others on this board...I'm constantly being compared to liberals because I believe Bush to be less than my ideal president (Reagan). So be it. But you should know that I actually voted for him twice (after all, look whom (Gore and Kerry) were running against him. That doesn't mean I don't find him lacking in presidential medle(so far he's right up there with Chester A. Arthur, Benjamin Harrison and James Garfield, IMHO--a lot lower than Lincoln, Washington, et al great ones, but certainly higher than Carter and Clinton). And my fear is that his lasting legacy will take the Republican party with it, and that we will again be stuck with 50 years of libertine Democrats.

[kesg]

Rice said, speaking as the delegate of the US government, that they were working with the UN towards some kind of three-way deal - a ceasefire, Israel pulls back, and UN troops help Lebanon gain control of the South.

A birdie tells me that this is a head-fake. We know that the UN takes weeks to do anything and that either the US or France/Russia/China will block any resolution. So nothing gets done. This gives Israel the additional time it needs to do the job the right way: with the IDF.

This diplomatic "strategery" is becoming so obvious that the media is now blurting it out openly in news reports. And you know what? I bet most other countries privately approve, while making various contrary public statements for domestic consumption. No one really wants Hezbollah around for much longer except Syria and Iran.

[af_vet_rr]

A birdie tells me that this is a head-fake.

Maybe, maybe not, however I don't think it help's Israel's cause to hear Ms. Rice talking about such solutions on TV, because it legitimizes Hezbollah, it gives them power, it says to the world "we have to negotiate with these people (hezbollah), and therefore they must have some power", which helps with their recruiting efforts as well.

We have to provide 100% unconditional support to Israel - the very people arming Hezbollah are the exact same people talking about "bringing down the American empire", and are the exact same people helping the insurgency in Iraq kill or would American troops. Rushing munitions to them is not enough. Providing true verbal support on the world stage is more in line with said support.

You cannot negotiate with terrorists committed to the downfall of your nation or religion - anything else is delaying the inevitable conflict that will start up again in the future.

[pissant]

Please go back and read what Bush has said since this thing started.

1) He regrets the loss of innocent life
2) Israel has every right to defend itself
3) Israel should be careful to avoid civilian casualties
4) Hezbollah is responsible, not Israel for the current conflict
5) A ceasefire will only be of value if the threat to israel from lebanese territory is removed
6) Any ceasefire must include the dismantling of Hezbollah and Syrian and Iranian support for it.
7) He does not want an agreement that returns things to the status quo.

That support of Israel is only coming from one gov't on this planet. Ours.

[Soul Seeker]

Good.

No ceasefire until they are destroyed.

[pissant]

Well, since we have chatted little, I could only go on your statements I have read.

My favorite president of the last 100 years is Reagan as well. And I consider him an icon, who pulled us out of economic malaise and foreign policy defeatism. That said, the ME was not one of his great success stories. He was too busy with the Soviet Bear, but nonetheless, his inattention (and pullout from Lebanon) only emboldened the islamofacists who were brewing their hatred long before slick Willie came into office. So Bush has been dealt the hand to stomp out the islamo scum. It is an ideology that will fight everybit as hard as the communists, maybe harder, to hold onto whatever power they have. And though I disagree with GWB on a host of issues, his handling of the ME is not one. It is ONLY because of him that Afghanistan and Iraq, two of the 6 major players in the terror-sponsoring state cadre, are toast. And Libya threw in the towel because it saw the writing on the wall.

He has a spine of steel, which only a handful of presidents before him have had.

[Piranha]

I agree with this post.

I do think that President Bush has been trying to redefine an appropriate response to terrorist attacks that come from within the midst of civilian populations, and he has been giving Israel plenty of time to fight vigorously.

At the same time, he does get spooked by alleged civilian casualties, and the short-lived cease-fire announced yesterday was a prime example of it.

In short, Israel's mandate seems to be, "Beat Hezbollah to a pulp, but don't hurt anyone else. No collateral damage. Oh, and do it fast."

Nevertheless, I was stunned to see that the very next day after the 48-hour halt on air attacks was announced, President Bush restated his overarching strategic objectives and Olmert felt free to resume air attacks.

I don't think that in the history of the US we have had a president who is more on Israel's side than George W. Bush, and that includes Richard Nixon in the 1973 war.

I don't have a military background, and I can't say whether Israel is using enough force to do the job quickly. I am quite concerned, though, that both Olmert and Peretz, his defense minister, come from the peace camp (Peretz overtly, Olmert in that he advocated Israel's surrender of its Gaza communities and has said -- as recently as last week -- that he intends to do the same in the West Bank). I hope that their heavy reliance on an air campaign is sound military strategy and not because they are afraid to acknowledge the failure of their ideology.

[kesg]

I agree 100% with everything you said. If I was running this show, I would not negotiate at all. We don't negotiate with Al Queada, either -- for the same reasons. When it comes to Hezbollah, nothing less than 100% unconditional surrender will do.

I understand why we are going through this diplomatic Kabuki dance. But that's different from saying that I agree with it.

[uncbob]

I feel that her lack of understanding of the Islamics disqualifies her as an able peacemaker in the Middle East.

What does it take to UNDERSTAND them

Does she live in some alternate universe like the lefties in this country

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

Did the Israelis ever announce this (alleged) ceasefire, or was it just the U.S. St. Dept.?

Israel announced a cessation of air strikes to allow civilians an opportunity to flee the strike zones.

The "cease fire" announcement was either a misquote or brain fart from the State Dept (= Condi Rice).

[uncbob]

"Mission Accomplished!" from the chip off the old block.

Been explained many times that that sign was referring to THE CARRIER RETURNING HOME AFTER ACCOMPLISHING ITS MISSION not for George Bush

[uncbob]

and that we will again be stuck with 50 years of libertine Democrats.

Country won't survive 5 years with the dems at this point let alone 50

[af_vet_rr]

All of that is worth nothing if he backs UN constraints/talks - you know in your heart of hearts that the UN will not be able to enforce the dismantling of Hezbollah, nor will the UN do anything about Syrian and Iranian support. The only thing they've done about Hezbollah is give them more human shields, and as far as Iran, the UN is, dare I say, impotent when it comes to them.

Perhaps Israel's fairly massive use of force against Hezbollah caught Bush off-guard, in addition to the Hezbollah themselves, but still some things have been said by President Bush and Ms. Rice and I think would have been better left unsaid.

[uncbob]

hat said, the ME was not one of his great success stories.

And he should have ended Nixon's disasterous policy of opening this country up to China
Just look where that got us
I'll never understand why he didn't

[pissant]

How can it be worth nothing if it is giving Israel the cover it needs to get the job done? I ask, who else in the world is giving cover for Israel to avoid a ceasefire? There is only one man, and he sits in the oval office.