This is my take on the Israeli - Lebanese conflict and, hopefully, a place for me to answer as an Israeli, and as a soldier of the IDF, to questions of forum members concerning the conflict.
Browsing through some of the threads opened here concerning the conflict (there are so many, I will never get a chance to read them all), I see a lot of questions rising from people sympathizing with both sides.
To make things clear, in Israel I am considered a leftists, usually even extreme-left. For example, I am against the Israeli occupation of the west bank, the establishment of all settlements etcetera etcetera. My "idealistic" vision of the middle east in the future is a two state solution based on the 1967 cease fire lines.
One of the questions I noticed while reading here, was "How come Hizbullah is so popular in Lebanon?".
I guess the answer to this question is rather negative for Israel. The answer is that it is, mostly, Israel's fault. How come?
To make long things short, after various terror actions of Palestinian organizations residing in Lebanon, Israel decided to raise its military actions against those organizations and procede with something which could be referred to as a full-scale invasion of Lebanon. In Israel it is quite known that the invasion planned was very different from the invasion performed and mastered by minister Ariel Sharon. After the invasion and the mess it created for Israel, Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin indulged in deep depression and eventually died, bitter and alone, enclosed with himself.
As an Israeli who knows a few military men who took part in the war, I know that at least some part of the Lebanese civilians, some say even Hizbullah representatives, greeted the first entrance of Israeli troops to damage Palestinian terrorist organizations reigning Lebanon with candy and sweets. I do not know to what extent, if any, this statement is true - but if it is it shows you that things are always different but the same in the Middle East.
When Israel delayed its exit from southern Lebanon, the "Party of God", supported and established by members of the radical Iranian Islamists, decided to be the saviors of Lebanon and to act by terrorism inorder to free it from Israeli occupation. The lingering Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon, which in its full manner was of 18 years length, made the Hizbullah actions, whether terrorist or militia, seem legitimate and backed with support by the Lebanese citizens.
When Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, decided to keep his promise to the Israeli public, which was very war weary, and to evacuate the Israeli troops out of Lebanon within a night and with no long term thinking, either military or diplomaty wise, Hizbullah's stature as the savior of Lebanon, and Hassan Nasrallah's (The second leader IIRC of Hizbullah, and obviously the shrewest terrorist/statesman in the ME) stature as the only Arab leader to ever bend the Israeli army and make it flee, was given its final confirmation by all parties involved, whether it was the Lebanese civilians, the Arab governments or even the Israeli public itself, which even then laid much credibility in every statement made by him.
Apart from the effect on Hizbullah, the retreat - which was not coordinated seriously with any force which could take control of Lebanese sovereignity, granted Hizbullah southern Lebanon as a gift.
Without anyone to bother them, they expanded and rooted their military posture in southern Lebanon to enormous measures, supported by Iranian army men, Syrian & Iranian funds and weaponry.
Whilst expanding the arsenal, Hizbullah built a network of bunkers, tunnels, watchposts and storage places (the majority of which under civilian appearence), which would be very very hard for any army to confront.
The Hizbullah, knowing that Israel's, as any western country, weakness is the way it chooses its targets in a war, assimilated within the villages and cities of Lebanon. An organization with military bases almost nowhere to be found, but with the strength, motivation, organization and weaponry that would honor a small country.
Besides taking advantage of the civilians, Hizbullah took advantage of the natural environment and placed its bunkers deep within natural growth of trees and bushes, very hard to locate. Those bunkers were supplied with a large amount of weaponry, food and even security measures like cameras outside the bunkers, are small military bases hidden deep within the south-Lebanese environment. Hizbullah terrorists need, appearently, a few minutes outside to bunker to launch a rocket, a minute after the launch both them and the rocket launcher are already quite safe back inside the bunker.
That kind of organization is not set to beat Israel militarily in an all out war, but knowing that the rocket attacks paralyze the northern-Israeli life and economy, it is set to wear out Israel, just like it succesfully did during the 18 years of Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.
Another opinion I noticed is that Israel "Planned" this war for a long time.
I can honestly say this statement is completely false, and has no basis in reality. Of course, the Israeli military watched the Hizbullah grow its power and collect information of its infrastructure, just like any military who has a terrorist organization residing its border would do. But if the Israelis wanted this war, why did Israel retreat from Lebanon in first place? Why did it let Hizbullah grow its power? Why did it wait for Hizbullah to act?
If Israel would launch an immediate surprise attack on Hizbullah before the incident, it would be whilst none of the Hizbullah leaders/fighters knew of it and therefore would be much more successful killing those and damaging the Hizbullah.
A subject that is now very "hot" is the Israeli destruction of UN outpost killing 4 men. As a part of the "military system" in Israel, you have my word, if it means anything, that there is no chance in hell that Israel would purposely do such a thing. Apart from my word, you can also take into consideration the following facts:
1. Israel would gain nothing (and gained nothing) from such an attack.
2. Moreover, the more actions like these occur, the larger the pressure is on Israel to stop its actions, therefor damaging its interests and decreasing its breating space for military actions inside Lebanon.
3. Kofi Annan has already took back his words that "The action appaered deliberate", after a conversation with Ehud Olmert (the Israeli PM).
4. Israel is a member nation of the UN, and has an ambassador in the UN.
Are the Israeli actions proportionate? Is Israel over-reacting?
Probably such questions will always raise a debate, as they are not only questions of fact and logic but also questions of emotion, ideology and morals.
My opinion as an Israeli, who lives in Nahariya (one of towns most severely hit by the Hizbullah rocket attacks), the answer is no.
I do not think the actions of the IDF are perfect (there are always mistakes, both in the decision making process and both in the targeting/firing process), but Israel certainly does its best to minimize civilians casualties in this equation of Civilian damage versus Element of surprise and the ability to actually damage an organization which is so deeply assimilated and rooted into the civilian life and infrastructure like the Hizbullah.
It is known that there's terrorist infrastructure inside the cities and villages, and to protect its citizens the army must destroy this infrastructure, even in the cost of civilian lives. It is deeply unfortunate that civilians in both sides pay the price of this war, but usually that is the situation in wars.
Whilst watching the news one day I saw a British reporter amazed by the fact that Hizbullah activates its rocket launchers from within the concentration of civilians, IIRC it was in Sidon. It is known that Hizbullah prevents civilians from leaving the villages and cities in which it operates in order to prevent Israeli attacks, or portray them as slaughter.
Some say that launching a war after the kidnapping of "only" two soldiers is outragous. But remember that:
a) Israel struck a deal with the Hizbullah in the first kidnapping, in 2000. It only led to another one.
b) Hizbullah always tried to "ignite" the border, usually taking advantage of circumstances and events in the Palestinian territories.
c) Hizbullah is also tied to Palestinian terror organizations and supplies them with information and weaponry.
d) Hizbullah is a part of the Lebanese parliament.
e) For six years there have been no progress or effort to implement resolution 1559, whilst Israel's retreat was recognized by the UN as full and complete. Seems like there's no true effort to protect the lives of Israeli soldiers and civilians.
f) Aside from the two soldiers kidnapped, 8 were killed IIRC.
g) Hizbullah does pose a substantial threat, even if not existential (as it wishes it to be), to Israel. Allegedly they have rockets which can reach Tel Aviv, Israel's startegic facilities, its international airport etc.
Some wonder how come the Hizbullah militia men are so "motivated" to fight Israel.
Firstly, consider the armies of many empires and dictators which fought for no pure interest but the ones of their rulers. For example, the army of Japan during WWII. Is this case so different?
Secondly, Hizbullah is full of pride of the success of its raids in the last years. I think some Hizbullah men truly believe they can "teach" Israel a lesson once again, or even destroy it by provoking a full-scale war (with Syria, or Iran, or Both).
Another one of the popular questions is - why the Hizbullah, or Nasrallah, decided taking this action?
I guess Nasrallah will never honestly answer such a question so all we can do is guess, but one of the more popular interpretations in Israel is that he gambled. He thought that Israel once again, would choose the diplomatic way and the weak military response, with a prisoner deal, like last time. He perhaps did not expect such a strong Israeli response (one Hizbullah leader even admitted Hizbullah was "surprised" by the strength and area of Israel's response).
Another explanation, which I don't think is true, is that Hizbullah was used by Iran to divert attention from its nuclear program.
Firstly, I don't think its true because I dont believe anyone knew Israel's actions would be of these proportions. Secondly, I think if Hizbullah is really such a pawn of Iran, they would probably want to keep its power in case a conflict would arise between Israel and Iran concerning the abovementioned nuclear program, and not let Israel weaken Hizbullah so deeply without any true diplomatical or military achievements. That takes Iran after a few weeks / months (in which I do not think it would make such an impressive advancement in its nuclear program), back to square 1 only this time Hizbullah is weakened, perhaps almost nonexistent, and the International community is deeply involved in Lebenon and the ties between Hizbullah, Syria and Iran.
Anyway, it's late here and I'm tired after a long week in the army, I'll be happy to answer questions and have a true debate, but please do not "flame" or "troll" in this thread.
Good night
Browsing through some of the threads opened here concerning the conflict (there are so many, I will never get a chance to read them all), I see a lot of questions rising from people sympathizing with both sides.
To make things clear, in Israel I am considered a leftists, usually even extreme-left. For example, I am against the Israeli occupation of the west bank, the establishment of all settlements etcetera etcetera. My "idealistic" vision of the middle east in the future is a two state solution based on the 1967 cease fire lines.
One of the questions I noticed while reading here, was "How come Hizbullah is so popular in Lebanon?".
I guess the answer to this question is rather negative for Israel. The answer is that it is, mostly, Israel's fault. How come?
To make long things short, after various terror actions of Palestinian organizations residing in Lebanon, Israel decided to raise its military actions against those organizations and procede with something which could be referred to as a full-scale invasion of Lebanon. In Israel it is quite known that the invasion planned was very different from the invasion performed and mastered by minister Ariel Sharon. After the invasion and the mess it created for Israel, Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin indulged in deep depression and eventually died, bitter and alone, enclosed with himself.
As an Israeli who knows a few military men who took part in the war, I know that at least some part of the Lebanese civilians, some say even Hizbullah representatives, greeted the first entrance of Israeli troops to damage Palestinian terrorist organizations reigning Lebanon with candy and sweets. I do not know to what extent, if any, this statement is true - but if it is it shows you that things are always different but the same in the Middle East.
When Israel delayed its exit from southern Lebanon, the "Party of God", supported and established by members of the radical Iranian Islamists, decided to be the saviors of Lebanon and to act by terrorism inorder to free it from Israeli occupation. The lingering Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon, which in its full manner was of 18 years length, made the Hizbullah actions, whether terrorist or militia, seem legitimate and backed with support by the Lebanese citizens.
When Israeli prime minister Ehud Barak, decided to keep his promise to the Israeli public, which was very war weary, and to evacuate the Israeli troops out of Lebanon within a night and with no long term thinking, either military or diplomaty wise, Hizbullah's stature as the savior of Lebanon, and Hassan Nasrallah's (The second leader IIRC of Hizbullah, and obviously the shrewest terrorist/statesman in the ME) stature as the only Arab leader to ever bend the Israeli army and make it flee, was given its final confirmation by all parties involved, whether it was the Lebanese civilians, the Arab governments or even the Israeli public itself, which even then laid much credibility in every statement made by him.
Apart from the effect on Hizbullah, the retreat - which was not coordinated seriously with any force which could take control of Lebanese sovereignity, granted Hizbullah southern Lebanon as a gift.
Without anyone to bother them, they expanded and rooted their military posture in southern Lebanon to enormous measures, supported by Iranian army men, Syrian & Iranian funds and weaponry.
Whilst expanding the arsenal, Hizbullah built a network of bunkers, tunnels, watchposts and storage places (the majority of which under civilian appearence), which would be very very hard for any army to confront.
The Hizbullah, knowing that Israel's, as any western country, weakness is the way it chooses its targets in a war, assimilated within the villages and cities of Lebanon. An organization with military bases almost nowhere to be found, but with the strength, motivation, organization and weaponry that would honor a small country.
Besides taking advantage of the civilians, Hizbullah took advantage of the natural environment and placed its bunkers deep within natural growth of trees and bushes, very hard to locate. Those bunkers were supplied with a large amount of weaponry, food and even security measures like cameras outside the bunkers, are small military bases hidden deep within the south-Lebanese environment. Hizbullah terrorists need, appearently, a few minutes outside to bunker to launch a rocket, a minute after the launch both them and the rocket launcher are already quite safe back inside the bunker.
That kind of organization is not set to beat Israel militarily in an all out war, but knowing that the rocket attacks paralyze the northern-Israeli life and economy, it is set to wear out Israel, just like it succesfully did during the 18 years of Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon.
Another opinion I noticed is that Israel "Planned" this war for a long time.
I can honestly say this statement is completely false, and has no basis in reality. Of course, the Israeli military watched the Hizbullah grow its power and collect information of its infrastructure, just like any military who has a terrorist organization residing its border would do. But if the Israelis wanted this war, why did Israel retreat from Lebanon in first place? Why did it let Hizbullah grow its power? Why did it wait for Hizbullah to act?
If Israel would launch an immediate surprise attack on Hizbullah before the incident, it would be whilst none of the Hizbullah leaders/fighters knew of it and therefore would be much more successful killing those and damaging the Hizbullah.
A subject that is now very "hot" is the Israeli destruction of UN outpost killing 4 men. As a part of the "military system" in Israel, you have my word, if it means anything, that there is no chance in hell that Israel would purposely do such a thing. Apart from my word, you can also take into consideration the following facts:
1. Israel would gain nothing (and gained nothing) from such an attack.
2. Moreover, the more actions like these occur, the larger the pressure is on Israel to stop its actions, therefor damaging its interests and decreasing its breating space for military actions inside Lebanon.
3. Kofi Annan has already took back his words that "The action appaered deliberate", after a conversation with Ehud Olmert (the Israeli PM).
4. Israel is a member nation of the UN, and has an ambassador in the UN.
Are the Israeli actions proportionate? Is Israel over-reacting?
Probably such questions will always raise a debate, as they are not only questions of fact and logic but also questions of emotion, ideology and morals.
My opinion as an Israeli, who lives in Nahariya (one of towns most severely hit by the Hizbullah rocket attacks), the answer is no.
I do not think the actions of the IDF are perfect (there are always mistakes, both in the decision making process and both in the targeting/firing process), but Israel certainly does its best to minimize civilians casualties in this equation of Civilian damage versus Element of surprise and the ability to actually damage an organization which is so deeply assimilated and rooted into the civilian life and infrastructure like the Hizbullah.
It is known that there's terrorist infrastructure inside the cities and villages, and to protect its citizens the army must destroy this infrastructure, even in the cost of civilian lives. It is deeply unfortunate that civilians in both sides pay the price of this war, but usually that is the situation in wars.
Whilst watching the news one day I saw a British reporter amazed by the fact that Hizbullah activates its rocket launchers from within the concentration of civilians, IIRC it was in Sidon. It is known that Hizbullah prevents civilians from leaving the villages and cities in which it operates in order to prevent Israeli attacks, or portray them as slaughter.
Some say that launching a war after the kidnapping of "only" two soldiers is outragous. But remember that:
a) Israel struck a deal with the Hizbullah in the first kidnapping, in 2000. It only led to another one.
b) Hizbullah always tried to "ignite" the border, usually taking advantage of circumstances and events in the Palestinian territories.
c) Hizbullah is also tied to Palestinian terror organizations and supplies them with information and weaponry.
d) Hizbullah is a part of the Lebanese parliament.
e) For six years there have been no progress or effort to implement resolution 1559, whilst Israel's retreat was recognized by the UN as full and complete. Seems like there's no true effort to protect the lives of Israeli soldiers and civilians.
f) Aside from the two soldiers kidnapped, 8 were killed IIRC.
g) Hizbullah does pose a substantial threat, even if not existential (as it wishes it to be), to Israel. Allegedly they have rockets which can reach Tel Aviv, Israel's startegic facilities, its international airport etc.
Some wonder how come the Hizbullah militia men are so "motivated" to fight Israel.
Firstly, consider the armies of many empires and dictators which fought for no pure interest but the ones of their rulers. For example, the army of Japan during WWII. Is this case so different?
Secondly, Hizbullah is full of pride of the success of its raids in the last years. I think some Hizbullah men truly believe they can "teach" Israel a lesson once again, or even destroy it by provoking a full-scale war (with Syria, or Iran, or Both).
Another one of the popular questions is - why the Hizbullah, or Nasrallah, decided taking this action?
I guess Nasrallah will never honestly answer such a question so all we can do is guess, but one of the more popular interpretations in Israel is that he gambled. He thought that Israel once again, would choose the diplomatic way and the weak military response, with a prisoner deal, like last time. He perhaps did not expect such a strong Israeli response (one Hizbullah leader even admitted Hizbullah was "surprised" by the strength and area of Israel's response).
Another explanation, which I don't think is true, is that Hizbullah was used by Iran to divert attention from its nuclear program.
Firstly, I don't think its true because I dont believe anyone knew Israel's actions would be of these proportions. Secondly, I think if Hizbullah is really such a pawn of Iran, they would probably want to keep its power in case a conflict would arise between Israel and Iran concerning the abovementioned nuclear program, and not let Israel weaken Hizbullah so deeply without any true diplomatical or military achievements. That takes Iran after a few weeks / months (in which I do not think it would make such an impressive advancement in its nuclear program), back to square 1 only this time Hizbullah is weakened, perhaps almost nonexistent, and the International community is deeply involved in Lebenon and the ties between Hizbullah, Syria and Iran.
Anyway, it's late here and I'm tired after a long week in the army, I'll be happy to answer questions and have a true debate, but please do not "flame" or "troll" in this thread.
Good night
