Announcements

I've set up a multi-author social blog to be used by my part-time blogger friends who don't want one of their own. Send me a note if you'd like to be able to write on For Consideration

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Two questions

Can someone explain to me how Israel's strategy in its war against Hezbollah is in Israel's best interests? I understand that getting rid of Hezbollah or weaking them and getting them away from the Lebanon/Israel border is in Israel's best interest. But I'm talking about the strategy here, the mechanics, as it were, of accomplishing this task.
A prosperous, stable and democratic Lebanon is in Israel's best interest as well; a country on its border that does not learn or re-learn to see Israel as its enemy, as an invader. Is it in Israel's best interest to be at war with the government of Lebanon, the people of Lebanon and even the military of Lebanon? How can bombing the airport, bombing ports, destroying roads, bombing military installations and killing Lebanese soldiers be in the best interest of Israel?
Isn't it more likely that the result of this strategy, whether the stated objective is achieved or not, is that the Lebanese people and the Lebanese government will see Israel as a threat? Isn't it likely that from these ashes will be born new members of Hezbollah or new hezbollahs? Doesn't this play into the hands of Syria and Iran? How can Lebanon ward off the influences of Syria or more importantly defend itself from Syrian-backed terrorists and infiltrators when the Lebanese government is weakened, when its people grow to hate Israel and respect Hezbollah because of the humanitarian things that Hezbollah has done in Lebanon?
There are members of Hezbollah in the Lebanese government. Do you think this strategy that is harming the citizens and government of Lebanon as much as it is hurting Hezbollah will result in more or less members of Hezbollah being elected to the Lebanese government?

Is the United States strategy, or lack thereof, of standing by Israel while not seeming to be standing by the people and government of Lebanon a smart one? Is not Lebanon an ally of the United States? Is not a stable, democratic, prosperous (stop me if this mantra sounds familiar) Lebanon, a good neighbor and friend of Israel, in the best interest of the United States? Can't we support Israel and yet be supportive of Lebanon? Can't we do more than publicly tell Israel to use restraint as it pummels its neighbor, a neighbor who is an ally of the United States.
You wonder what our strategy is, what our government thinks is in our best interest in this situation as we watch Israel bomb the Beirut airport, destroy roads and other infrastructure, even bomb military installations that result in the deaths of Lebanese soldiers.
Shouldn't we at the very least appear to care about what's happening to Lebanon? The result of standing by and appearing not to care is that we'll have one less ally in that region, actually likely one more enemy...another nest of future jihadists and killers of infidels, terrorists, insurgents, etc. Wasn't and isn't our purpose in being involved in this part of the world to make us safer at home?

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

So many questions.

In a nutshell, the Lebanese government is over run with Hezbollah, so trying to co-exist with Lebanon as it is now isn't possible. Israel, the U.S. and even the UN experssed concerns about Hezbollah's role in government after the elections in Lebanon. They simply won't leave, even though the Lebanese people themselves don't want them there.

We can't expect that Hezbollah will cave under popular opinion, that isn't how government over there works. So if they won't leave when they aren't even wanted...then they have to be thrown out.

Brent Kremer said...

A one-year government cannot be a true ally to the US in the Middle East. As for the military installations being hit, isn't great luck that Hezbollah could fire the missile that hit a warship so precisely without radar help from the Lebanese Army?

Zebster said...

I understand your points but I think there's a lot of merit to the larger picture that I describe.

In the long run I don't think this is a good strategy.