What the Hell Has Happened To The Israeli Army?

[A.Rahman]

What the Hell Has Happened To The Israeli Army?

By UriAvnery

08/13/06

SO WHAT has happened to the Israeli army?

This question is now being raised not only around the world, but also in Israel itself. Clearly, there is a huge gap between the army's boastful arrogance, on which generations of Israelis have grown up, and the picture presented by this war.

Before the choir of generals utters their expected cries of being stabbed in the back - "The government has shackled our hands! The politicians did not allow the army to win!

The political leadership is to blame for everything!" - it is worthwhile to examine this war from a professional military point of view.

(It is, perhaps, appropriate to interject at this point a personal remark. Who am I to speak about strategic matters?

What am I, a general? Well - I was 16 years old when World War II broke out. I decided then to study military theory in order to be able to follow events. I read a few hundred books - from Sun Tzu to Clausewitz to Liddel-Hart and on.

Later, in the 1948 war, I saw the other side of the medal, as a soldier and squad-leader. I have written two books on the war. That does not make me a great strategist, but it does allow me to voice an informed opinion.)

The facts speak for themselves:

0 On the 32nd day of the war, Hizbullah is still standing and fighting. That by itself is a stunning feat: a small guerilla organization, with a few thousand fighters, is standing up to one of the strongest armies in the world and has not been broken after a month of "pulverizing". Since 1948, the armies of Egypt, Syria and Jordan have repeatedly been beaten in wars that were much shorter.

As I have already said: if a light-weight boxer is fighting a heavy-weight champion and is still standing in the 12th round, the victory is his - whatever the count of points says.

0 In the test of results - the only one that counts in war - the strategic and tactical command of Hizbullah is decidedly better than that of our own army. All along, our army's strategy has been primitive, brutal and unsophisticated.

0 Clearly, Hizbullah has prepared well for this war - while the Israeli command has prepared for a quite different war.

0 On the level of individual fighters, the Hizbullah are not inferior to our soldiers, neither in bravery nor in initiative.


THE MAIN guilt for the failure belongs with General Dan Halutz. I say "guilt" and not merely "responsibility", which comes with the job.

He is living proof of the fact that an inflated ego and a brutal attitude are not enough to create a competent Chief- of-Staff. The opposite may be true.

Halutz gained fame (or notoriety) when he was asked what he feels when he drops a one-ton bomb on a residential quarter and answered: "a slight bang on the wing." He added that afterwards he sleeps well at night. (In the same interview he also called me and my friends "traitors" who should be prosecuted.)

Now it is already clear - again, in the test of results - that Dan Halutz is the worst Chief-of-Staff in the annals of the Israeli army, a completely incompetent officer for his job.

Recently he has changed his blue Air-Force uniform for the green one of the land army. Too late.

Halutz started this war with the bluster of an Air-Force officer. He believed that it was possible to crush Hizbullah by aerial bombardment, supplemented by artillery shelling from land and sea. He believed that if he destroyed the towns, neighborhoods, roads and ports of Lebanon, the Lebanese people would rise and compel their government to remove Hizbullah. For a week he killed and devastated, until it became clear to everybody that this method achieves the opposite - strengthens Hizbullah, weakens its opponents within Lebanon and throughout the Arab world and destroys the world-wide sympathy Israel enjoyed at the beginning of the war.

When he reached this point, Halutz did not know what to do next. For three weeks he sent his soldiers into Lebanon on senseless and hopeless missions, gaining nothing. Even in the battles that were fought in villages right on the border, no significant victories were achieved. After the fourth week, when he was requested to submit a plan to the government, it was unbelievably primitive.

If the "enemy" had been a regular army, it would have been a bad plan. Just pushing the enemy back is hardly a strategy at all. But when the other side is a guerilla force, this is simply foolish. It may cause the death of many soldiers, for no practical result.

Now he is trying to achieve a token victory, occupying empty space as far from the border as possible, after the UN has already called for an end to the hostilities. (As in almost all previous Israeli wars, this call is being ignored, in the hope of snatching some gains at the last
moment.) Behind this line, Hizbullah remains intact in their bunkers.

HOWEVER, THE Chief-of-Staff does not act in a vacuum. As Commander-in-Chief he has indeed a huge influence, but he is also merely the top of the military pyramid.

 

[A.Rahman]

This war casts a dark shadow on the whole upper echelon of our army. I assume that there are some talented officers, but the general picture is of a senior officers corps that is mediocre or worse, grey and unoriginal. Almost all the many officers that have appeared on TV are unimpressive, uninspiring professionals, experts on covering their behinds, repeating empty clich?s like parrots.

The ex-generals, who have been crowding out everybody else in the TV and radio studios, have also mostly surprised us with their mediocrity, limited intelligence and general ignorance. One gets the impression that they have not read books on military history, and fill the void with empty phrases.

More than once it has been said in this column that an army that has been acting for many years as a colonial police force against the Palestinian population - "terrorists", women and children - and spending its time running after stone-throwing boys, cannot remain an efficient army. The test of results confirms this.

AS AFTER every failure of our military, the intelligence community is quick to cover its ***. Their chiefs declare that they knew everything, that they provided the troops with full and accurate information, that they are not to blame if the army did not act on it.

That does not sound reasonable. Judging from the reactions of the commanders in the field, they clearly were completely unaware of the defense system built by Hizbullah in South Lebanon. The complex infrastructure of hidden bunkers, stocked with modern equipment and stockpiles of food and weapons was a complete surprise for the army. It was not ready for these bunkers, including those built two or three kilometers from the border. They are reminiscent of the tunnels in Vietnam.

The intelligence community has also been corrupted by the long occupation of the Palestinian territories. They have got used to relying on the thousands of collaborators that have been recruited in the course of 39 years by torture, bribery and extortion (junkies needing drugs, someone begging to be allowed to visit his dying mother, someone desiring a chunk from the cake of corruption, etc.) Clearly, no collaborators were found among the Hizbullah, and without them intelligence is blind.

It is also clear that Intelligence, and the army in general, was not ready for the deadly efficiency of Hizbullah's anti-tank weapons. Hard to believe, but according to official figures, more than 20 tanks were hit.

The Merkava ("carriage") tank is the pride of the army. Its father, General Israel Tal, a victorious tank general, did not want only to build the world's most advanced tank, but also a tank that provided its crew with the best possible protection. Now it appears that an anti-tank weapon from the late 1980s that is available in large quantities, can disable the tank, killing or grievously wounding the soldiers inside.

THE COMMON denominator of all the failures is the disdain for Arabs, a contempt that has dire consequences. It has caused total misunderstanding, a kind of blindness of Hizbullah's motives, attitudes, standing in Lebanese society etc.

I am convinced that today's soldiers are in no way inferior to their predecessors. Their motivation is high, they have shown great bravery in the evacuation of the wounded under fire. (I very much appreciate that in particular, since my own life was saved by soldiers who risked theirs to get me out under fire when I was wounded.) But the best soldiers cannot succeed when the command is incompetent.

History teaches that defeat can be a great blessing for an army. A victorious army rests on its laurels, it has no motive for self-criticism, it degenerates, its commanders become careless and lose the next war. (see: the Six-day war leading to the Yom Kippur war). A defeated army, on the other side, knows that it must rehabilitate itself. On one condition: that it admits defeat.

After this war, the Chief-of-Staff must be dismissed and the senior officer corps overhauled. For that, a Minister of Defense is needed who is not a marionette of the Chief- of-Staff. (But that concerns the political leadership, about whose failures and sins we shall speak another time.)

We, as people of peace, have a great interest in changing the military leadership. First, because it has a huge impact on the forming of policy and, as we just saw, irresponsible commanders can easily drag the government into dangerous adventures. And second, because even after achieving peace we shall need an efficient army - at least until the wolf lies down with the lamb, as the prophet Isaiah promised. (And not in the Israeli version: "No problem. One only has to bring a new lamb every day.")

THE MAIN lesson of the war, beyond all military analysis, lies in the five words we inscribed on our banner from the very first day: "There is no military solution!"

Even a strong army cannot defeat a guerilla organization, because the guerilla is a political phenomenon. Perhaps the opposite is true: the stronger the army, the better equipped with advanced technology, the smaller are its chances of winning such a confrontation. Our conflict - in the North, the Center and the South - is a political conflict, and can only be resolved by political means. The army is the instrument worst suited for that.

The war has proved that Hizbullah is a strong opponent, and any political solution in the North must include it. Since Syria is its strong ally, it must also be included. The settlement must be worthwhile for them too, otherwise it will not last.

The price is the return of the Golan Heights.

What is true in the North is also true in the South. The army will not defeat the Palestinians, because such a victory is altogether impossible. For the good of the army, it must be extricated from the quagmire.

If that now enters the consciousness of the Israeli public, something good may yet have come out of this war.


http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14522.htm

 

[A.Rahman]

As we all now know on Monday (within 24-48 hours from now) the seize-fire between Hezbollah & Israel will come into
effect.

Inshallah, all military hostilities will come to an end - to the relief of the citizens of Lebanon.

This may be an end of a chapter in history.... Israel's misadventure into Lebanon 2006.

In my opinion, Hezbollah has won this historic confrontation hands down. Out numbered, out gunned, and without any significant external support Hezbollah has shown its might, determination, courage and resolve to Israel & the rest of the world.

In geographical terms and in the loss of infrastructural loss Hezbollah lost this engagement. That was almost a given.

The fact, a gorilla force of 3,000 to 5,000 stood up against the worlds 4th largest & most modern fighting machine is a miracle in itself.

This will have great geopolitical ramifications across the region..........

Following is an interesting analysis of this embarrassing Israeli defeat from an Israeli himself:..........

 

[Awesome]

So Israel loses (could not meet objective). Lebanon loses (the country lies in ruins)

Hezbollah wins (still holds governmental positions, will be getting more recruits, might even win the entire governance or form some sort of stronger presence in the coalition).

The world is a better place?

The idea was to get to Iran and Syria, I believe. This might just be an experiment leading to Iran. They wanted to see how much can they bomb out of Iran before the world cries bloody murder. Now that their experiment is successful, they'd be feeling good about themselves.

An Iranian invasion is also not on the cards. They just want to destroy all that there is to destroy. Imagine Iran in a similar state as Lebanon? Mission Accomplished, right?

 

[wadawada]

So Israel loses (could not meet objective). Lebanon loses (the country lies in ruins)

Hezbollah wins (still holds governmental positions, will be getting more recruits, might even win the entire governance or form some sort of stronger presence in the coalition).

The world is a better place?

The idea was to get to Iran and Syria, I believe. This might just be an experiment leading to Iran. They wanted to see how much can they bomb out of Iran before the world cries bloody murder. Now that their experiment is successful, they'd be feeling good about themselves.

An Iranian invasion is also not on the cards. They just want to destroy all that there is to destroy. Imagine Iran in a similar state as Lebanon? Mission Accomplished, right?

I agree.

This was mainly a provocation to syria, and behind it to iran. remeber : iran and syria have "mutual" defence treaties.

israel wanted ABOVE ALL that syria gets into the war, and brings iran. that way, syria then iran declares war, israel AND especially USA send some cruise missiles, at least, to destroy what can be destroyed and at the same time "terrorise/wake up" the iranian pop. (so giving some strenght to the opposition) and if possible destroy some iranian sites and push iran to fire back in ARABIA (gulf states, the detroit...). that way, usa and israel will have "their" other holy war.

israel was also expecting seriously that leabanese be divided and begin to inter-fight. Alhamdullillah christian, sunnis, druzes and shiites stood united during this agressing, despite harsh criticism from many other (non shiaa) lebanese factions.

the article is excellent and Ari Uveni is a trustable leftist zionist (I would say leftist israeli nationalist, what israel needs really, instead of her messianic ideologists and leadership that make it like a jewish israelstan)

also, the new medias played a special role in this conflict. this is the first israeli internet-age war, with blogs and webnews vs. Stupid TV Netwoks (tm) . thank Allh for the DARPA and the TCP/IP. i'm sure that arabs have not yet understood while israelis are right now improving their PSYOP war methods and adapting them...


this war showed finally something precious : the problem is somewhere in the arab culture. hezbollah as a shiite organization is influenced one way or another by iranian culture. the proof is that : al qaida is considered to be the sunni/wahabi "equivalent" of hezbollah. but al qaida managed succesfully to bring LOSSES to sunni controlled areas, including afaganistan under taliban rule and iraq under sunni-arab saddam and even saudia is put under strong pressures...

arabs, if serious, have the duty to ask themselves what's the problem in their culture that prevent them from being respectable.

hezbollah is a social network, a humanitarian organisation (helping also non shiaa lebanese), a (relativly to its means) sophsiticated propaganda/counter-propaganda machine (al manar, the official hezbollah TV, broadcasts ALSO in hebrew. hezbollah not only understands the ennemy language, but also speaks it if necessary). hezbollah avobe all is a strictly lebanese national organisation (at the opposite of the al qaida world empire...). Nasrallah even speak in lebanse instead of classical arabic, which gives him a national aspect, near to the people andthe country, and not some crazy psychoislamists wanting to go back -1400 for their egoist phantasms.

the biggest problem with arabs is that they are REALLY arrogant. arabs are arrogants mostly because they don't know the TRUE and full complex history of islam. pan-arabism and sunni fanatism have created a "legendary" history of islam, and given arabs the main beautiful role, through history rewrite and censoship, which prevented and still prevents arabs from taking consciousness of their historical mistakes, faults, decisions, and share of participation in the islamic civilisation. let's face it, when we hear arabo-islamic civilisation, we tend to assume that "arabo" is the ethnic component, thus giving the credit of islamic science, advance and empires to arabs. the reality is that "arabo" means simply (without pan-arabism and sunni fanatism distortions) "written in arabic", that played the role of standard language (much like english or latin). but the biggest contributors to islam in quantity as much as in quality where the people from the iraqi borders of iran (iraq had a huge persian minority until the panarabism obliged them to arabize) to the muslims of india. the biggest and best managed islamic empire was found by othoman turks. as strange as it may seems, the SAME nations who made the glory of islam are still standing for the same aim ! that excludes the arab countries who are still living in "walt disney's" islamic history.

if i say this so brutally, this is because arabs have to lose their unfounded arrogance and their comfortable ignorance and begin to work seriously to gain some respect. the win of hezbollah is not the win of arabs, it is the win of iran. this will not bring more stability, because the arab regimes will be mor afraid of iran and shiaa, SOOO, more cooperative with usa/israel/g.b against iran and other arab shiaa. this will help only the Empire. until the arabs learn, the sooner possible, to give back to ceasar what belongs to ceasar, israel will win the next war.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

From a military perspective, the Israelis got all their OPOBJs but their OPOBJs suck.

 

[Awesome]

I agree.

This was mainly a provocation to syria, and behind it to iran. remeber : iran and syria have "mutual" defence treaties.

israel wanted ABOVE ALL that syria gets into the war, and brings iran. that way, syria then iran declares war, israel AND especially USA send some cruise missiles, at least, to destroy what can be destroyed and at the same time "terrorise/wake up" the iranian pop. (so giving some strenght to the opposition) and if possible destroy some iranian sites and push iran to fire back in ARABIA (gulf states, the detroit...). that way, usa and israel will have "their" other holy war.

israel was also expecting seriously that leabanese be divided and begin to inter-fight. Alhamdullillah christian, sunnis, druzes and shiites stood united during this agressing, despite harsh criticism from many other (non shiaa) lebanese factions.

the article is excellent and Ari Uveni is a trustable leftist zionist (I would say leftist israeli nationalist, what israel needs really, instead of her messianic ideologists and leadership that make it like a jewish israelstan)

also, the new medias played a special role in this conflict. this is the first israeli internet-age war, with blogs and webnews vs. Stupid TV Netwoks (tm) . thank Allh for the DARPA and the TCP/IP. i'm sure that arabs have not yet understood while israelis are right now improving their PSYOP war methods and adapting them...


this war showed finally something precious : the problem is somewhere in the arab culture. hezbollah as a shiite organization is influenced one way or another by iranian culture. the proof is that : al qaida is considered to be the sunni/wahabi "equivalent" of hezbollah. but al qaida managed succesfully to bring LOSSES to sunni controlled areas, including afaganistan under taliban rule and iraq under sunni-arab saddam and even saudia is put under strong pressures...

arabs, if serious, have the duty to ask themselves what's the problem in their culture that prevent them from being respectable.

hezbollah is a social network, a humanitarian organisation (helping also non shiaa lebanese), a (relativly to its means) sophsiticated propaganda/counter-propaganda machine (al manar, the official hezbollah TV, broadcasts ALSO in hebrew. hezbollah not only understands the ennemy language, but also speaks it if necessary). hezbollah avobe all is a strictly lebanese national organisation (at the opposite of the al qaida world empire...). Nasrallah even speak in lebanse instead of classical arabic, which gives him a national aspect, near to the people andthe country, and not some crazy psychoislamists wanting to go back -1400 for their egoist phantasms.

the biggest problem with arabs is that they are REALLY arrogant. arabs are arrogants mostly because they don't know the TRUE and full complex history of islam. pan-arabism and sunni fanatism have created a "legendary" history of islam, and given arabs the main beautiful role, through history rewrite and censoship, which prevented and still prevents arabs from taking consciousness of their historical mistakes, faults, decisions, and share of participation in the islamic civilisation. let's face it, when we hear arabo-islamic civilisation, we tend to assume that "arabo" is the ethnic component, thus giving the credit of islamic science, advance and empires to arabs. the reality is that "arabo" means simply (without pan-arabism and sunni fanatism distortions) "written in arabic", that played the role of standard language (much like english or latin). but the biggest contributors to islam in quantity as much as in quality where the people from the iraqi borders of iran (iraq had a huge persian minority until the panarabism obliged them to arabize) to the muslims of india. the biggest and best managed islamic empire was found by othoman turks. as strange as it may seems, the SAME nations who made the glory of islam are still standing for the same aim ! that excludes the arab countries who are still living in "walt disney's" islamic history.

if i say this so brutally, this is because arabs have to lose their unfounded arrogance and their comfortable ignorance and begin to work seriously to gain some respect. the win of hezbollah is not the win of arabs, it is the win of iran. this will not bring more stability, because the arab regimes will be mor afraid of iran and shiaa, SOOO, more cooperative with usa/israel/g.b against iran and other arab shiaa. this will help only the Empire. until the arabs learn, the sooner possible, to give back to ceasar what belongs to ceasar, israel will win the next war.

I'd have to disagree to the sectarian element you pointed out as to the Arabian failure, but ethnic and political element I'd agree to. Lebanon has now moved on as an Arab state and even faced with such destruction (hence poverty) they are still socially a well bounded unit.

Arabs refuse to get over the little things, how do we expect them to unite and forget the bigger things. United we stand, divided we fall.

Iraq fell because of divisions. Afghanistan was divided for decades.

Heck Arab mullahs in Saudi Arabia even tried to divide the Lebanese from the Hezbollah over the Shia Sunni issue in the beginning, the new King thankfully saw things at least from a humanitarian point of view even though something grand was expected from the "Custodian of the two mosques".

There are many Muslim in several pockets of Muslim nations who are now leaning towards the no sect(ioned) Islam. Hopefully the Lebanese can find a victory in that, perhaps, just perhaps they'd rekindle that much needed flare to go back to unity.

Destoryed they may be, but you got to respect their unity. Compared to that Israel seems divided now.

 

[Awesome]

From a military perspective, the Israelis got all their OPOBJs but their OPOBJs suck.

full forms?

You don't want to post an unknown abbreviation and end it with BJ... Then say suck too.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

This is SUPPOSED to be a MILITARY forum. OPerational OBJectives.

 

[Awesome]

Didn't know.

Google wasn't helpful either.

 

[Awesome]

From a military perspective, the Israelis got all their OPOBJs but their OPOBJs suck.

Quite frankly the meeting of the Operational Objective of reaching the Litani is more like a game of "Tag, you're it".

As the original article mentions, Halutz decided on hurrying up and getting as much as vacant space to bring home and show it to mom n dad. That objective sucks, sure, but they didn't quite make it either, by just tagging the Litani.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/world/15266823.htm

Ahead of truce, Israel and Hezbollah show their strength
By Dion Nissenbaum and Carol Rosenberg
McClatchy Newspapers

MALKIYA, Israel - Israeli forces bombed Beirut and fought ground battles in a race to take turf in south Lebanon on Sunday while Hezbollah fired its biggest one-day fusillade of rockets into northern Israel in an offensive frenzy ahead of a U.N.-brokered cease-fire meant to silence the month-old war soon after dawn Monday.


The weekend warfare was Israel's bloodiest of the month-old campaign. At least 29 soldiers were killed, among them the 20-year-old son of acclaimed Israeli author David Grossman who had publicly opposed the offensive, and the first Israeli woman soldier to die in this Lebanon conflict, a mechanic aboard a helicopter shot down by Hezbollah.


On the political front, the Israeli cabinet endorsed the cease-fire but said it would not withdraw thousands of troops ranged across Lebanon's south. Lebanese Prime Minister Fuad Siniora's government was mired in crisis after Hezbollah balked at disarming fighters in the conflict zone.


And still uncertain on the eve of the truce was whether it would take hold and stick long enough - a week or more - for the United Nations to assemble and dispatch a 15,000-member multinational force to move south with the Lebanese army and take control of the war zone.


"We are all sick of this war," said Israeli Pvt. Tomer Ashkenazi, 21, who was deployed to the fight a month ago, as he helped prepare shells for his tank unit Sunday at this Lebanese border community. "But, as a soldier, I can't see the end. They keep firing at us and we keep firing at them."


Hours later, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's cabinet unanimously agreed with one abstention to stop its offensive at 8 a.m. Monday, or 1 a.m. EDT, and test the U.N. truce. Under the scheme, Israel would halt its air strikes and shelling of south Lebanon from artillery batteries arrayed along the northern border that have been shaking the earth night and day in support of advancing forces.


"It means we don't keep moving north. We do nothing to escalate the situation," said Israeli spokesman Mark Regev, adding that under the U.N. Security Council resolution adopted Friday, Israel reserved the right to fight defensively against Hezbollah until there is "a coordinated withdrawal together with the Lebanese army and the international forces."


But, he said, Israel would not bring home most of the troops it poured into the south over the weekend until the U.N. force arrives and separates the two sides, with Hezbollah going north and Israel back inside its territory.


So, questions remained about how both sides would behave during the week or more it takes to assemble the force: How much air and firepower would Israel bring to bear if it spots Hezbollah fighters in the zone south of the Litani River? What about suspected re-supply missions? Would it use artillery or air support in close-range clashes with Hezbollah fighters? What if Hezbollah continues to fire rockets into northern Israel?


Still unclear Sunday night was where Israeli forces were dug in around southern Lebanon after a weekend dash 18-miles north of the border to the Litani River. Israel's combat helicopters dropped commandos north of Hezbollah positions Saturday, its largest offensive into Lebanon, leaving an estimated 30,000 troops spread across a perilous patchwork of Israeli infantry and tank forces here, Hezbollah fighters there.


Hezbollah's leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah, said Saturday that his Party of God would accept the cease-fire, suggesting a halt in cross-border rockets. But he said, in defense of Lebanon, it would still fight Israeli troops on Lebanese soil even during the cease-fire.


In a show of strength Sunday, Hezbollah unleashed more than 250 rockets across the border into northern Israel in hour after hour of strikes that set off sirens and sent Israelis again and again to shelters from Nahariya to Kiryat Shemona. An 83-year-old man was killed in a Katyusha rocket attack, and more than 80 Israelis were wounded in the fusillade.


In Beirut, Israeli warplanes pummeled the southern suburbs, a Hezbollah stronghold, day and night. Prime Minister Siniora postponed a Cabinet session on implementing the cease-fire because of dispute over whether Hezbollah would disarm itself ahead of arrival of the Lebanese army and foreign forces. Most of Siniora's government, which includes two Hezbollah representatives, wants the Shiite fighters to lay down their arms before the Lebanese and U.N. forces arrive.


"We are still very hopeful there will be a cease-fire tomorrow, but ... the arms issue of Hezbollah is at the crux of that," said a Lebanese Cabinet member, on condition he not be identified.


Israel argues that Lebanon's government must leash Hezbollah.


"If a stone or a Katyusha is fired at Israel, we must deal the hardest blows at the Lebanese infrastructure, because Lebanon allows the Hezbollah to operate," Deputy Prime Minister Eli Yishai of the religious Shas Party said after Sunday's cabinet meeting. "Only in this way will Siniora watch over his area."


The infrastructure is already badly battered. Lebanese Red Cross said medics were digging through rubble in southern Beirut's Dahiyeh section Sunday for victims of Israel's bombing raids, which killed at least three people, two of them children, and wounded 18 others. In Tyre, Israeli strikes hit fuel stations north and south of the coastal city, said Qassim Shaalan of the Lebanese Red Cross there.


"We're expecting a very heavy night," said the Lebanese Red Cross' Ralph el-Hage in Beirut, predicting the death toll would climb. "Many more corpses lie under the rubble."


Israelis interviewed along the northern border offered a blend of bewilderment and anger over what the county had gained out of a month of warfare triggered July 12 by Hezbollah's capture of two soldiers inside Israel.


"We're a little bit confused because we didn't get anything at all out of the cease-fire," said Israeli army Lt. Roy Shaposhnik, 27, who was called into the reserves last week along with his old tank unit. "I think this is the first time that Israel lost a war."




Israel said it launched the war to both recover the two men and weaken or dismantle what it saw as a proxy of Iran and Syria, the armed wing of the parliamentary Party of God movement, which has dominated the south since Israel's May 2000 withdrawal inside its own borders.


But Hezbollah has hung on for a month, rocketing northern Israel, battling Israeli forces in the south - and was no closer to freeing the two reservists it presumed were still alive Sunday. Instead, the Israeli government said it would name a special envoy to negotiate with the Siniora government for their return.


Shaposhnik said Israel shouldn't have accepted any deal that didn't include return of the two soldiers, who were snatched in a bold Hezbollah incursion on their last day of reserve duty.


"No one wants to go inside Lebanon, but if you think about it we've had more than 30 days of fighting and I can't really understand what we achieved," he said.


Amid the frenzy of fighting Sunday, Israeli unity was fracturing. Former Defense Minister Moshe Arens called Prime Minister Olmert and his cabinet unfit to govern, accusing them of mismanaging the war, then accepting a weak U.N. truce that kept Hezbollah strong.


"To lead the nation in a war to victory was just too much for them,'' wrote Arens, 80, in a commentary in the respected daily Haaretz newspaper. "Israel's enemies, and they are many, will conclude that Israel does not have the stamina for an extended encounter with terrorism. You do not need tanks and aircraft to defeat Israel - a few thousand rockets are enough."


---


McClatchy News correspondents Shashank Bengali contributed to this report from Beirut and Dion Nissenbaum from Malkiya, Israel, and elsewhere along the northern border. Leila Fadel reported from Beirut and Carol Rosenberg from Jerusalem.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

Quite frankly the meeting of the Operational Objective of reaching the Litani is more like a game of "Tag, you're it".

The original strategic intent was to create a buffer zone all the way to the Litani. They've done that. Not pretty. Not good. But it's done.

What they should have done was to race to the Litani, block the Hezbollah's LOCs with force and then reduce them at pace.

Instead, they tried cutting the LOCs through airpower when they have insufficent loads to do so; added on top of their need to reduce known Hezbollah's positions. The IsAF was running out of bombs.

When the army started their push, the Hezbollah was waiting for them and the stupidity of announcing your OPOBJ allowed the Hezbollah to setup ambush points and fortify their positions and their LOCs. That allowed them to withdraw in order. The Hezbollah won the recee battle. But they lost the main force battle mainly because they used up their main forces to win the recee battle.

The job was ugly. It was sloppy. But the job was done.

 

[sigatoka]

The original strategic intent was to create a buffer zone all the way to the Litani. They've done that. Not pretty. Not good. But it's done.

What they should have done was to race to the Litani, block the Hezbollah's LOCs with force and then reduce them at pace.

Instead, they tried cutting the LOCs through airpower when they have insufficent loads to do so; added on top of their need to reduce known Hezbollah's positions. The IsAF was running out of bombs.

When the army started their push, the Hezbollah was waiting for them and the stupidity of announcing your OPOBJ allowed the Hezbollah to setup ambush points and fortify their positions and their LOCs. That allowed them to withdraw in order. The Hezbollah won the recee battle. But they lost the main force battle mainly because they used up their main forces to win the recee battle.

The job was ugly. It was sloppy. But the job was done.

They thought they could destroy Hezbollah from the air, advancing ground forces to the Litani was the last thing they wanted to do (considering it took them so long to get out of that mess last time they did it).

If they had known that air power alone couldnt destroy Hezbollah, they indeed might have raced their ground forces up to the Litani as you suggest. However if they had known that they would have to do that to crush Hezbollah, they wouldnt have gone to war in the first place. Instead they might have just did the usual, a few bombing in the south and leaving it at that.

 

[Officer of Engineers]

Analysis contradictory. Unacceptable.

Re-read. Re-think. Re-postulate.

 

[wadawada]

I'd have to disagree to the sectarian element you pointed out as to the Arabian failure,

?? I pointed no sectarian element of the arab's failure. not beign counscious and respectful of the ethno-civilisational elements IS the reason of the failure.

strenght comes with truth and sincerity with one-self. objective truth bring ability to critique and put priorities and analyse them and continually improve them.

if the officially accepted history of arabs is itself biased, how can arabs be aware of their historical limits and faults to repair them ?

but ethnic and political element I'd agree to. Lebanon has now moved on as an Arab state and even faced with such destruction (hence poverty) they are still socially a well bounded unit.

alhamdoulillah. zionists were waiting foe another inter-libanese war, but it seems, and let's hope so, that this people have learned from his tragedies.

the strangest is that christians kept almost silent, while some sunnis and druze criticized (but not strongly).

israel want now arabs to belive that HA is a part of iran and not lebanon, to prepare for the next wars...

Arabs refuse to get over the little things, how do we expect them to unite and forget the bigger things. United we stand, divided we fall.

I totally disagree, for a very simple reason :unity is a very naive, thus superficial and subjective term, thus irrational, thus weak.

let's apply this principle: arabs feel angry about the usa. ben laden appears and tell them to declare war of usa. arabs, who wnat to stand united at any price declare war to usa. usa wipes arabs off the map. who lose ?

another american example about the voide of this "proverb": bush declars illegal war (iraq) and want liberticide laws (internal espionage). americans are frightened and united behind this "genious". their unity lead them to lose more civil rights and civil control over the admin. usa's democracy is wiped off the map. who lose ?


unity, because it is dangerous, should not be a reflex, but rather a tool. the reflex is solidarity, as muslims and christians have shown in lebanon. their disgagreements are deeps on many questions, but national solidarity have help them stay strong.

if the arabs refuse to get over little things, who could be BTW as important as the bigger things (detail is everything), this is because they have not a shared rational vision of thier past. this way, many arabs have a soooo short memory that they already forgot the imperialism and its tools in the region. no reason even to speak about the islamic 1400 long history. it is SACRED (!!) perhaps more than islam itself !!

many arabs ideas are based of false/fake elements. anything based on fake is fake. arabs have to go to the roots of their culture and make the distinctions, recognize the great civilisationnal role of non arabs, to have the ability to accept them AGAIN in their history. let's face it : turkey, iran, pakistan, malaysia are the pride of muslims, thank God that you exist. arabs have to learn from you many things, but arabs think that because you're muslims, it is YOU who have to "arabise" culturally and learn from us. ridiculous AND dangerous...

Iraq fell because of divisions. Afghanistan was divided for decades.

iraq was not a country, but a prison.

don't be mistaken by the "civil war" in iraq : it is provoked.

Heck Arab mullahs in Saudi Arabia even tried to divide the Lebanese from the Hezbollah over the Shia Sunni issue in the beginning, the new King thankfully saw things at least from a humanitarian point of view even though something grand was expected from the "Custodian of the two mosques".

there is no sunni mullah, we say moufti and they have different responsabilities (mullah in shiaa is total leadership, mufti in sunni is legal questions)

saudia was so under usa pressure that she made a historical mistake (semi-official saudia in fact). many elements is saudia are still dreaming of a saudi empire, and still no understanding that shiaa want only to live in THEIR countries, no more asa second class citizens (like in saudia), and that iran have deeply changed, from the "exportation of revolution" (in part against the agression of pan arabism), to the "cold" power.


the best thing that could happen is a saudi-iranian-turkish collaboration.



I believe that this saudi king is much more nationalist, conscious and free thant it predecessor. the only problem is that usa can destroy saudia easily, mainly due to saudi problems.

There are many Muslim in several pockets of Muslim nations who are now leaning towards the no sect(ioned) Islam. Hopefully the Lebanese can find a victory in that, perhaps, just perhaps they'd rekindle that much needed flare to go back to unity.

sorry, i disagree. the no sect is not the solution. its like saying unifiying the languages to unite etc...

sure, sectarianism is damaging. but the contrary of sectarianism is not the uniformity, nor the unity, but multi-sects soludarity. it is luch stronger, while respectful of natural differences between groups and nations.


unity, and worse, uniformity, is a classical utopian false-solution.

unity : who will decide ? govern ? choose the strategies ? you know very well that there woudl be a dominant culture and/or ethnicity. BUT the quetion is : who is better suited, and not who is dominant !

uniformity is worse, it is simply the transformation of islam of judaism-bis. please rmember that islam is not an ethnic religion, we have no "arab" god (astaghfirullah). in fact, diversity and difference INSIDE basic shared islamic principles AND positive solidarity (unconditionnal solidarity is a jewish thing. islam forbids to help another muslims doing wrong) will give us inshaaalah the strang of both islam and TRUE democracy. true democracy exists when there are differnets people having differnets ideas and aims. this creates a political and ideological competition, and like the market, allows the optimisation of solutions. we need that is we want to have serious islamic nations.

Destoryed they may be, but you got to respect their unity. Compared to that Israel seems divided now.

let's hope that this solidarity survives now, as they need it more. the psychological/diplomatic war have begun.