Posted on 08/14/2006 12:37:21 PM PDT by DannyTN
So this assessment is very welcome.
"many Israeli supporters seem to have adopted a negative definition...So this assessment is very welcome."
Both are right. Debka is correct, this was far more costly for Iran and Syria financially than it was for Israel. The reason I still see it as a defeat is that Olmert (inexplicably) did not apply ground pressure until the cease-fire was already called. Because of this, Israel is now in a position to crush billions of dollars of Iranian/Syrian funded military infrastructure, but can do nothing because it did not take this position until after the ceasefire was called.
It took Israel 30 days to destroy 75% of them.
The existence of an even better outcome does not make this a defeat. That's a crazy way of defining victory and one that gives aid and comfort to the enemy.
You must remember the source. DEBKA does get it right about 50% of the time.
I think they get it right far more often than that, but most of their reports are not neither confirmable nor debunkable. Just like this article, confirmation of internal Iranian assessments and current strategy will not likely be confirmed or debunked by other sources.
This war was only the beginning anyway.
Tehran hopes to pre-empt the American move by torpedoing the Lebanon ceasefire and preventing the termination of hostilities at all costs.
So then more Iranian/syrian funded infrastructure will be destroyed and more Hezbollah and Iranian revolutionary guards killed. I'm sure that the IDF is going to start exploring around Southern Lebannon and start finding all the weapons stashes & bunkers and destroy it. I've heard that christian and other non-shiite villages in the south have been informing the IDF on where Hezbollah has been hiding and where their infrastructure is located.
This is what happens when you appoint mullahs and morons like Iamjihadmadman to run a country.
I think of Debka as a live feed. It lacks editing and is sometimes later proved to be wrong when the truth comes out...but IMO they serve a valuable purpose.
The points made in this article are valid and good to hear, though, as said upthread, the serious degrading of Hezzie missiles and manpower still doesn't make up for Olmert's obvious failures.
Olmert held the IDF back from doing its job and as a result Hizbullah still exists. Shameful. Bring back Bibi!
Maybe it is a setback for Iran's program. Too bad DEBKA is alone telling this story.
"The MSM is spouting Muslim propaganda of a Hezbullah win. And many Israeli supporters seem to have adopted a negative definition of winning so that any win for Israel short of a perfect outcome is not a win, thus buying into Hezbullah's definition of a win, despite 530+ dead Hezbullah.
So this assessment is very welcome."
It is welcome and perhaps part of the grander plan which may have worked. However, I still believe Israel should have went in on the ground from day 1.
Questions like "since the enemy specifically targets our civilians, why should we be so concerned about theirs?", and "why, when the enemy hides among a "civilian" population which gives them aid and comfort and lets them store their rockets in the basement be a matter of concern to a civilized nation when it comes to collateral damage?"
Israel should have given warning for the Lebanese civilians to flee, and then destroyed every village and bunker south of the Litani with fuel-air explosives, the kind that reach right down into the bunkers and burn up the air in the terrorists lungs. In short, a genocidal action against Hezbollah.
The time has come to take off our self-imposed gloves and destroy these beasts.
"their compilers were concerned that Iran had been manipulatively robbed of its primary deterrent asset ahead of a probable nuclear confrontation with the United States and Israel."
No question that Iran is going to confront the US with the nuclear bomb.
Olmert should have done the end run around South lebanon to cut it off. Then pound the crap out of it from the air.
I agree there does need to be public debate and awareness about some of these issues.
"should the Geneva convention be scrapped, since we're the only ones who abide by it?"
The Geneva convention shouldn't be scrapped because they have protected our POW's in some cases, but only western countries seem to abide by them. The convention should stand, but our response and the world's response to a combatant failing to heed the convention needs to be examined. The world should really ban together against anyone failing to heed the convention, because that's an automatic uncivilized behavior.
"since the enemy specifically targets our civilians, why should we be so concerned about theirs?",
This one needs more care. You could make the case that Hezbullah wasn't hiding behind their own civilization but rather Lebanon's. Is the civilian population willing supporters of terrorists such as the Palestinians or are they a people held hostage like Iraq and Lebanon?
"why, when the enemy hides among a "civilian" population which gives them aid and comfort and lets them store their rockets in the basement be a matter of concern to a civilized nation when it comes to collateral damage?"
Valid point. So far, Israel and the U.S. don't seem to be too concerned about bombing civilian houses when they are used for the military. However we have precision munitions. But again the world outrage at such tactics of hiding behind civilians is not what it should be.
"In short, a genocidal action against Hezbollah."
You are drifting to the dark side. Against Hezbullah fighters or all populations whose leadership supports Hezbullah?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.