From the JPost: 

Annan angered Israeli officials when he told Channel 2 on Tuesday that "dismantling Hizbullah is not the direct mandate of the UN," which could only help Lebanon disarm the organization. Annan upset officials further when he said that deploying international forces in Lebanon would take "weeks or months," and not days as expected.

"He has been one-sided," the [Israeli] official said. "He tried to be even-handed in a situation that was clearly asymmetrical. When one side committed crimes against humanity and engaged in genocide and the other side defended itself, he cannot treat us in the same manner."

Annan rejected charges of bias, saying, "I have been very hard on Hizbullah and condemned Hizbullah for what it has done. I have condemned Israel for what I consider excessive use of force but it doesn't mean I am taking one side." 

In his opening remarks at last week's United Nations Security Council meeting -- when the resolution for a cease-fire between Israel-Hezbollah passed 15-0 -- Secretary General Kofi Annan stated his disappointment that the Council had not acted more quickly in drafting a resolution.  Notably absent from his comments have been references to Hezbollah or its role in instigating the conflict with Israel.

Why has Annan failed to publicly reference Hezbollah "for what it has done" before now? 

For even the un-objective observer -- the answer should be obvious.

Neither Annan nor the Security Council have yet to address Lebanon's arbitrary decision NOT to disarm Hezbollah -- in contradiction to the resolution passed. 

Israel has, however.

The IDF will have to resume operations in Lebanon if the expanded United Nations force being assembled does not fulfill its obligation to dismantle Hizbullah, an official in the Prime Minister's Office warned on Tuesday.

Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Saniora and Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah reportedly reached a deal allowing Hizbullah to keep its weapons but refrain from exhibiting them in public. Israeli officials called the arrangement a violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which passed over the weekend and was approved on Sunday by the cabinet.

"The resolution is clear that Hizbullah needs to be removed from the border area, embargoed and dismantled," the official said. "If the resolution is not implemented, we will have to take action to prevent the rearming of Hizbullah. I don't think backtracking will serve any useful purpose. There has to be pressure on Hizbullah to disarm or there will have to be another round."

I don't think there will be any question about the action to be taken if there is a "another round." 

Annan will have to come up with a superlative for  "disproportionate."

   Oh well.

It's not that my computer wasn't protected by some of the best products on the market.  But it happened.  Not sure how or when (problems began 3-4 days ago), but it did.  My computer (and this blog) were invaded and rendered useless.  Until I had everything "sanitized" and cleaned out this evening, it felt like a personal-type of violation.

Unless someone(s) have been offended by my pro-Israeli stance or my pro-troop support or my anti-extremist position(s) -- there is and has never been anything personally identifiable on this computer.  Except a few tears [rhymes with ears] and tears [rhymes with airs].

So I'll take up where I left off.  More secure (system guards) and cautious ..... 

Heroes of the Moment: Binyamin Netanyahu and Condi Rice. And the US basketball team with Coach K!  The IDF......

Yuckos of the Day:  Leaders of Hezbollah, Iran, Syria.  And the boyz from 18th Street. 

Favorite Links of the Day:  Lucianne.com and the Jpost.com

Told-ja-So of the Day:  Lebanon hedging.

With the onus on their backs to comply with the UN Resolution Lebanon (and Hezbollah) accepted, Lebanon is now hedging on disarming Hezbollah and deploying troops to Southern Lebanon.

It is obvious Lebanese leaders realize they cannot control Hezbollah. 

From JPost.com:

A critical Lebanese Cabinet meeting set for Sunday to discuss implementation of the cease-fire between Israel and Hizbullah was postponed, a move that was likely to delay the dispatch of the Lebanese army to the south and an end of the fighting.

A top aide to Prime Minister Fuad Saniora said the meeting had been indefinitely postponed but would give no reason. Published reports said the Cabinet, which approved the cease-fire unanimously Saturday night, had been sharply divided over demands in the cease-fire agreement that Hizbullah surrender its weapons in south Lebanon.

That disagreement was believed to have caused the postponement of the Sunday meeting that was to have taken up the dispatch of some 15,000 troops to the south.

Will UNIFIL troops be dispatched without their Lebanese counterparts? 

Good question. 

It may well be back to the drawing table for the UN Security Council -- coupled with major changes in Lebanon's government .....

Meanwhile, Israel entrenches itself along the Litani River -- awaiting movement back to its border.  Trampling Hezbollah in its way.  Uh rah. 

Cautions:

1.  Lebanon is on the verge of losing significant credibility -- among its people, in the Middle East and globally. 

(As predicted in previous posts ....)

2.  Hezbollah leader Nasrallah is not pleased to have egg in his beard.  Nor are his bosses in Syria and Iran.  Not much they can do about it, however. 

eh eh. 

Nice diplomatic work, Condi and crew.

3.  Israel now has the time, location and leverage to root Hezbollah from its ruts in Southern Lebanon. 

Lots of nay-sayers may be eating their words soon, as well. 

4.  The pressure is also on Annan to enforce the UN Resolution.   

His next display of diplomatic ineptitude will only be further tainted by his true oil-stained colors. May more responsible minds prevail.  May the Security Council look disfavorably on those who fail to comply with the recent Resolution.

5.  Will there finally be peace in the Middle East? 

When and if this Lebanon issue is resolved, the peace process will begin .... (See previous "cornerstone" posts.)   I don't doubt that those who attempt to disrupt the peace process will face sanctions that go beyond the threat.  Hezbollah included.

If Lebanon fails to act, peace between Lebanon and Israel may require intense UN intervention.   This may, however, be the last united front by this corrupt and archaic organization.   Other accords and associations will quickly form .... One of these will be to fight the GWOT.

If Iran and Syria openly enjoin their militia-arm, Hezbollah, to fight the Israelis, peace will only exist in the rumble of what was the Middle East. Israel will be left standing alone, adjacent to a radioactive dying field. 

Too harsh a prospective?  Maybe.

But not from a Jewish point of view.

Sometimes we over-politicize and -analyze situations.  For example, no one ever actually "wins" in war.   Unless you measure post-war gains .... 

So, let's measure the Israeli vs. Hezbollah gains (as of Monday morning, when the cease fire goes into effect in Southern Lebanon):

Measure 1: With a force of approximately 30,000 troops, Israel claims to have reached the Litani River (their goal) and now encircle Hezbollah fighters trapped between the River and the Israeli-Lebanon border. 

The Israeli's may have just employed an age-old military strategy to counter Hezbollah's "hit and run" technique:  encircle the enemy and move to the middle.

Measure 2:  Israel will maintain this position (defending itself if attacked, per yesterday's UN resolution) until 30,000 Lebanese forces and UN peace-keepers (with guns, this time) replace them.  

The onus for controlling Hezbollah will then be on Lebanon and the UN.

Measure 3:  The Hezbollah leader has sorta-kinda accepted the UN resolution ... Hezbollah will honor the cease fire, but will continue to fight "as long as Israeli forces remain on Lebanese soil."  

OKKKKKK. 

Fighting should be fierce with casualties on both sides, but this sounds like a death wish for the entrapped terrorists. 

Sobeit. 

-----------------------

Did Israel move too slowly in achieving one of its original goals?  Seems like it, but I don't know (and few others know either) what obstacles had to be displaced before this goal could be met. 

Has the Israeli military fared well against a combatant whom others have failed to contain?   Seems that they have.  Hezbollah has been stocking and entrenching themselves in their own backyards for over six years.  [Just as the fanatics and militants have in Iraq .....] 

Will Israel survive? 

Israel has literally "won" every battle against intrusive Arab forces -- including, but not limited to Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan and the PLO.  At issue has been protecting Israeli land and people -- not the acquisition of other lands. 

Don't agree?  Then debate it amongst yourselves.  I prefer not to argue with history -- Biblical or military.  Especially when it concerns the Israelis.

Godspeed.

I'm just glad they're on our side.

I certainly have no inside information or expertise on the matter, but after  watching the Security Council vote 15-0 for a cease-fire resolution, Israel may have actually "won" a significant diplomatic coup this evening.

While my expectation was and will be that Israel maintains the right to peacefully [co]exist in the Middle East, I had misgivings about anyone's ability to actually decimate, i.e., physically "defeat" an entrenched terrorist militia. 

Those who expected Israel to achieve what larger, more powerful nations have been unable to do are likely disappointed.  Those who expected Israel to fail militarily, likely  feel that Hezbollah "won." 

Both perspectives are erroneous, in my opinion.

Israel won.  Hands down.  And so did the U. S. and it's pro-Israeli allies on the Security Council.  How?

1.  Israel will be allowed to continue to defend itself. This time, with U.N. sanction.  I have little to no doubt that Israel leaders will comply with this cease-fire resolution.
2.  Lebanon (now officially responsible for Hezbollah) must ensure that no further attacks occur -- something it should have done six years ago.  If Lebanese leaders fail to accept this resolution, their U.N. support should dwindle.
3.  As for Hezbollah -- their only "recognition" is for starting this mess.  Nothing more. 

Hezbollah leader Nasrallah and his benefactors in Syria and Iran must be terribly disappointed.  Not only did the west "win," via George Bush and Condi Rice -- Israel's right to defend itself has been confirmed!

They can thank Condi Rice for that. 

"When this UN Security Council resolution is passed,
we're going to know who really did want to
stop the violence and who didn't."

-- Condi Rice

I just feel like dancing.

... Awaiting the beginning of a lasting peace:

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — After weeks of inaction, the United States and France appeared close to breaking a deadlock on a U.N. resolution aimed at ending the monthlong conflict between Israel and Hezbollah and a U.S. diplomat said there could be a vote on Friday.

....

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett said she was flying to New York to "reinforce" Britain's efforts to reach agreement on a resolution, calling the situation "urgent" and saying "we need now to complete the task."

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also was prepared to come either to vote "or, if need be, to work out any last-minute details," State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said.

In Jerusalem, Israeli officials said they would hold off on expanding the current offensive in Lebanon to give diplomacy more time to work. The Security Cabinet has authorized Olmert to expand the offensive.

Israel Television reported that the latest draft resolution calls for the current 2,000-strong U.N. force in southern Lebanon to be enlarged to 20,000 troops, with Spain, German, Italy and Australia among the new troop contributors.

The Americans and the French want to make sure the resolution is acceptable to the Israelis and the Lebanese, who rejected their original draft circulated Aug. 5.

France is backing Lebanon's call for Israeli troops to start pulling out once hostilities end and when Lebanon deploys 15,000 troops of its own in the south.

Bolton said the United States believes Lebanon's decision to deploy the army "is significant, and we are going to take account of that in the resolution." But he said the strategic issue remains how to ensure that Hezbollah does not "re-infiltrate the southern part of Lebanon."

The United States is supporting Israel's insistence on staying in southern Lebanon until a robust international force is deployed, which could take weeks or months.

What's a few weeks when you've been waiting thousands of years?

Godspeed.

It really doesn't bother me that comparatively few read my views as expressed in this blog.  I neither solicit nor receive money for doing this.  I write for myself as a release for my own frustrations with most things political and because it is my right to write!  I write with sincerity and without drafts .... only recently (at the urging of my niece) have I begun using spell check on a regular basis. 

I do read other blogs, however.  Regularly.

A theme that piqued my attention today was the reaction to President Bush's use of the term "Islamic fascists." 

Immediately --- CAIR expressed their objection. 

"We believe this is an ill-advised term and we believe that it is counter-productive to associate Islam or Muslims with fascism," said Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations advocacy group. "We ought to take advantage of these incidents to make sure that we do not start a religious war against Islam and Muslims," he told a news conference in Washington. "We urge him (Bush) and we urge other public officials to restrain themselves."

Ace offers the most succinct response to CAIR I've read today:

"Restrain themselves? That IS the restrained form of the descriptor. It is an attempt to separate peaceful Muslims from the jihadists, by differently describing jihadists as not simply "Muslims," but "Islamic Fascists."

If we drop that phraseology, you know what descriptor we're left with? Just plain old "Muslims."

What CAIR really seeks is for the world to stop noticing at all that the people forever jacking off to Al Qaeda murder-porn are all -- all -- Muslims.

Sorry. Reality is a little more important to me than "sensitivity" to a group that has not shown much "sensitivity" to non-Muslims' legitimate desire to not be murdered in large numbers."

Leftist scholars also took the Prez to task for misusing/abusing the word "fascist."  While scholarly discourse has its value and place (heck, even I have a doctorate), let's lighten up on the BDS-induced hysterics and hyperbole, Hairballs. 

Fascism: "a political theory advocating an authoritarian hierarchical government  (as opposed to a democracy)."  Simple enough?  Even though I have profound respect for the historical significance for the roots of fascism -- this definition works for me.  So give it a break, OK? 

And speaking of scholars -- skip over to sisu (after reading my post, of course) for an enlightening discourse on why Islamic jihadists and moonbats want to blame  nigh-on-to everything on the Israeli's:  "Success is anathema to the Left because it puts an end to victimhood; without victims the Left has no reason to exist ...."  If you follow the link above, you'll find an insightful review which explains why moderates (such as moi) often believe as we do:

In her book The New Anti-Semitism (2005), American feminist academic Phyllis Chesler writes: "The American and European Left have made a marriage in hell with their Islamic counterparts. The same Left that has still never expressed any guilt over its devotion to communist dictators who murdered millions of their own people in the service of a Great Idea has now finally, fatefully, joined the world jihadic chorus in calling for the end to racist Zionism and to the Jewish apartheid state."

Just to prove I'm not all highbrow <wink>, I'll slap low line hockey pucks at both CAIR and those elitist scholars from the left. 

Get off the ice. 

Enter BDS: The acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency -- nay -- the very existence of George W. Bush.
  
Enter Left-Wing Lunacy.

Sorry, moonbats -- today's foiled terrorist plot to blow up several airplanes was not concocted by Republicans or Lieberman in retaliation for Lamont's slim win.  Nor can it be blamed on UK Muslims reacting to UK's support of Israel, U.S. foreign policies and the GWOT (global war on terror). 

The terrorist plot to blow up multiple airplanes carrying thousands of innocent civilians has been in the planning for months, if not years.  

Try again, Moonbats. 
The terrorists certainly will.

Recently posted at Whizbang by Gull: 

Beyond BDS ....

"One could hope that we could -- for once -- get beyond the Bush Derangement Syndrome and realize that, as a previous poster stated: terrorists want ALL of us dead.

Ahhhhhh ... to see bloggers working together: moonbats and wingnuts blogging keyboard to keyboard in a concerted war-of-words AGAINST terrorism -- instead of sniping at each other. We could be the Moonwing Marauders! The Batnut Brigade!!!

Seriously -- could it happen? Could we not find mutual goals? Common objectives?

Probably not. Now playing on monitors everywhere: the BDS soundtrack against undertones of left/right extremism -- with minimal moderation in a battle of woofers and tweeters.

Too bad. Our survival may depend on it."

Why not make an effort?  Every one of us should be united in our concern about 8 missing students who came to the US to study and have strangely disappeared.  Post their photos on your site and help locate them!