Friday, August 18, 2006

Q) When Can A 12-Year-Old Outsmart The UN, The State Department And Europe?

A) When he pays attention, and deals with reality.

A friend of mine has what I judge to be an exceptionally bright 12-year-old. When we visited inbetween his summer trips, we discussed the proposed "cease fire" between Hezbollah and Israel, that the UN, the US and Europe were pushing for.

Apparently he'd done quite a bit of research (thanks to computer "hot spots" almost everywhere these days), and he came to the same conclusion I did -- that the "peace" that the aforementioned bodies, and particularly Hezbollah, and the "peace activists" (including the mainstream media) were so virulent for, was going to be nothing of the sort; that Hezbollah would agree to practically any "peace" agreement so it could rest, re-arm and re-supply, then instigate another war against Israel.

Well, in the immortal words of Gomer Pyle, USMC, "Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!!!"

Guess what is happening, less than 72 hours after the "peace" broke out? You got it - Lebanon and Hezbollah are refusing to comply with foundational criteria of U.N. Resolution 1701 - while Israel is being compelled to comply with both the letter and intent of it:


U.S.: Iran Suspected of Attempts to Rearm Hezbollah Since Cease-Fire
Thursday , August 17, 2006


WASHINGTON -- Iran has been attempting to rearm the Lebanon-based terror network Hezbollah since the U.N.-backed cease-fire between Hezbollah and Israel took hold earlier this week, two U.S. officials told FOX News on Thursday. A U.S. arms control official said it appears that Iran is using Syrian channels in its effort to give Hezbollah weapons it has used in the past, including Chinese-built C-802 radar-guided anti-ship missiles.

Military observers said a C-802 was used successfully on an Israeli naval vessel off the coast of Tyre on July 14. The arms control officer and a senior American counterterrorism officer both said the U.S. government is "very concerned" about the "ongoing" effort.


UK Guardian: "Stand Alongside Hezbollah," Lebanese Army Tells Troops
August 18, 2006

An internal Lebanese army statement, circulated among forces in the past week, has called for troops to stand "alongside your resistance and your people who astonished the world with its steadfastness and destroyed the prestige of the so-called invincible army after it was defeated". The circular has alarmed ministers in the Lebanese cabinet who had been calling for the army to disarm Hizbullah.

It will also fuel the concerns of Israel, the US and the UN security council that the Lebanese army is incapable of securing the south of the country, adding increased urgency to the calls for a multinational force to be swiftly deployed.

August 17, 2006


Hezbollah fighters
were not expected to resist the soldiers, nor to hand over their weapons. Instead, they probably would simply put their weapons into hiding and melt away into the civilian population.

The top Hezbollah field commander in the south, Sheik Nabil Qaouk, said as much on Wednesday.
“Just like in the past, Hezbollah had no visible military presence and there will not be any presence now,” Sheik Qaouk told reporters in the hard-hit port city of Tyre. He praised the army’s deployment, but said Hezbollah would maintain its presence without displaying its arms. He added that since Israeli tanks were still in Lebanon, the guerrillas reserved the right to respond accordingly. A Hezbollah representative in Parliament, Hassan Fadlallah, was equally insistent, telling
Al Jazeera television that his organization would not pull back over the Litani, that the fate of its arsenal was not open to public debate and that the army deployment had nothing to do with its presence.

August 17, 2006


The Lebanese Army’s move into the separate southern fief that Hezbollah ran for nearly two decades was the potential beginning of a diplomatic way out of the bitter monthlong battle with Israel, whose vaunted army bogged down against a smaller force of skilled and entrenched guerrillas.

But while Israel and the United States have said that the Lebanese Army is supposed to disarm Hezbollah under the terms of a United Nations Security Council resolution, the reality on the ground is a kind of murky backroom deal in which Hezbollah takes its weapons off the street and the army will not look too hard for them, if at all.

“There will be no confrontation between the army and the brothers in Hezbollah,” Ghazi Aridi, (Lebanon's) information minister, said. “They are not going to chase or, God forbid, exert revenge.” Israeli officials were not quite so tolerant, at least in public. The Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman, Mark Regev, said that “the resolution clearly calls for the creation of a Hezbollah-free zone south of the Litani River and anything less would mean the resolution is not being implemented.”


The article I recently posted by Thomas Sowell is exactly correct: the main fruit that will be bore by the those who advocated "peace" between Israel and Hezbollah (and viewed them as being morally almost indistinguishable), will be more bloodshed, more loss of civilian lives, more terror, more destruction.

Had Israel simply finished the job it started -- to rout Hezbollah to the greatest extent possible, seized its weaponry, and if necessary, re-occupy southern Lebanon until its government could exert dominion over every square inch of that nation -- we would be neither in this mess, nor in the one that is surely to follow, in days, weeks or months. But no. It buckled to "world opinion," and the pressure from "world leaders" and their minions, all of whom screamed collectively for "peace."

Today's youth are routinely dismissed as being uninformed, unsophisticated and lazy. At least in this particular case, one bright young man proved to me that at some pivotal moments, the supposed "leaders" of the world cannot see what is right before their eyes, with the clarity of a child.

© Copyright 2006 by Jon Quixote. All rights reserved. Qualified media representatives interested in publishing this item may contact for information.


1 comment:

akash said...

you have done some really good research work. but majority wont agree with u.