Le French To....The Rescue?

The French are up to their old tricks again; namely, flipping the bird to Israeli National Security and facilitating Civil War in Lebanon. The French, who are supposedly keeping the peace in Southern Lebanon, have, for the past few months, taken issue with Israeli Air Force overflights in the area. Of course, the reason the IAF does these fly-overs is to monitor Hezbollah and try to prevent them from smuggling rockets into the area. Those rockets will, naturally, be used against Israel; and the reason that the Israelis have to keep an eye on the situation is because, well, no one else seems to be able to. The Lebanese government can't control Hezbollah, the Syrians are sponsoring them, and the French, who are the UN's designated 'peacekeepers,' aren't exactly doing anything about it either.

But, the French just can't stand it when another Nation has the gall to point out their incompetence. So they've decided to make the IAF leave by sending in unmanned drones to patrol the area.

The IAF, of course, isn't stupid enough to stop its flyovers. If the French couldn't patrol the area and monitor Hezbollah with the military regiments it already has there, what's to make them think that these drones will solve the problem? What new evidence does the Israeli government have that will make them think the French are serious about disarming Hezbollah? Indeed, the French don't even consider Hezbollah a terrorist organization. And herein lies the rudimentary problem - and that is that the only folks capable of effectively dealing with Hezbollah are the Israelis. The French and other UN do-gooders certainly have proven themselves unworthy. Most everyone else in the Middle East is on Hezbollah's side. The United States can't do anything because we're in Iraq and Afghanistan. And that leaves Israel.

So here's a word of advice to the French and all their peacekeeping pals: When it comes down to it, the Israelis are the most stabilizing force in Lebanon, so don't spend so much time and effort trying to get rid of them! They're on your side! Or, at least, you should be on theirs.

School of Hard Knocks?

Yesterday, when Kofi Annan toured Southern Beirut for the first time since the recent conflict, he was greeted by a chorus of boos. In fact, the world's number one peacekeeper was so well received that he was hustled off the streets by nervous security guards after only 10 minutes of tour time. Kofi must have been surprised that the Muslims in this area had such a hatred for him, and Israel, and the UN, and the United States and....well, a lot of other things too. The question is though, did all this first hand experience with Muslim radicals' wrath turn on that light bulb in his head?

Annan has had, to put it mildly, a less-than-successful tenure as head of the United Nations. Whether it was participating in the Oil-and-food scandal or sitting around and watching (a.k.a 'doing nothing about) genocide in places like Iraq and Sudan, Annan has not exactly increased cooperation and understanding amongst the world's Nations. This, in my opinion, is due in large part to his complete misunderstanding of Islamic radicals - who are the primary folks responsible for some of the most horrific violence in the world today. They run al-Qaeda, they are the dictators screwing up Africa, they inflame conflict with Israel, and essentially perpetrate all 'crimes against humanity' that are committed outside of China and North Korea.

Furthermore, as we have, hopefully, learned, these Muslim radicals aren't exactly reasonable; and thus don't tend to respond well to things such as 'talks' and 'diplomacy.' However, Annan, in his wisdom, refuses to recognize this. He has continued to pursue what he deems 'peaceful' solutions to problems in the Middle East; as well as continuing his attempts to 'reach out' to the radical Islamic community. He went so far as to, in essence, blame the recent War in Lebanon on Israel. And what has all this hard work gotten him? Well, it seems that, at least to supporters of Hezbollah (and other Islamic terrorist groups, I'd bet), he has earned himself a place amongst the supposed 'Worldwide Zionist Conspiracy.' An amazing feat to be sure.

Indeed, Kofi Annan, and the rest of the UN, have played nice with Muslim terrorists and radicals for a long, long time - at the expense of the Nations they're supposed to be helping. Yet, maybe this trip to Beirut will finally teach Kofi a lesson. Could those insults and racist ramblings bring the UN Secretary General to his senses? If they do, it will certainly be a lesson learned the hard way. Then again, this is the United Nations we're talking about - and they always seem to find ways to simply astonish us with their ineptitude.

No Reason to Get Excited About Cease-Fire

So, after days of deliberation, the UN has finally shaken its fist and demanded an end to hostilities in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah. However, anyone with a cautious and sensible mind should not be so quick to hail this cease-fire agreement as a success. While the main points behind it all sound great on paper, they could, in practice, prove disastrous.

First, the peace agreement calls for an end to hostilities. I can just hear everyone over the age of 50 in Israel shaking their heads. Since when have hostile Islamic terrorist groups not attacked Israel? Since 1948, when exactly has Israel had peace? The answer is, quite honestly, never. Israelis, perhaps more so than any other peoples, live in a constant state of war. They don't have a "homeland security alert level" system; because, if they did, it would always be on the highest level. So while the rest of the world may feel like 'hostilities have stopped' I can assure the Israelis have no such illusions.

The second point of Secretary Rice's cease-fire plan is the disarmament of Hezbollah. Of course, this should be easy, especially considering that many Lebanese people support Hezbollah and that the Lebanese government can't even control them. . . . oh, wait, I guess that could complicate the process. Furthermore, Hezbollah is being financed by Iran and Syria, and since the UN, and the United States for that matter, have done very little in the way of dealing with those two countries, it's very difficult to believe that we can stop them from arming Hezbollah, again. Now, if the Lebanese Government can't disarm them, and we can stop their suppliers from giving them more stuff, how exactly are we supposed to achieve this "disarming of Hezbollah?"

The final point in the UN's peace plan is the sending in of an 'international' peace-keeping force, which could perhaps be the least successful of all 3 points. The UN, and its peacekeeping forces, especially the ones that aren't made up entirely of American troops, have one of the most miserable track records in history when it comes to actually maintaining peace. The UN does more to exacerbate conflicts than stop them. I mean, c'mon, there was a UN peacekeeping force, in Southern Lebanon when this conflict began; and they sure did a hell of a job keeping the peace. What is to make us believe that one of the UN's 'international forces' is actually going to keep the peace this time, after failing every other time?

The bottom line is this, for the past 10 years or so, the UN has actually done more to support Hezbollah than disarm them; and the Lebanese government has admitted that they have no real leverage with the organization. In fact, it seems the only one who can put an end to Hezbollah is Israel - but they're now being forced to halt this task by the cease-fire agreement. I hope I'm wrong, but somehow, I don't see the current Security Council resolution changing anything. Indeed, I'm skeptical that this will lead to a true 'cessation' of hostilities at all. So don't be surprised if in the coming year the Israel/Hezbollah conflict starts up again - and when it does, thank the cease-fire.

Don't Mess With the Jews!

There is, indeed, one truly sane country left in the world today. One country that takes threats against itself seriously, has the guts to actually do something about those threats, and doesn't much care what anyone else in the world thinks about it. That country has spent the last 6 days bombing Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon. Perhaps 'bombing' is not the appropriate term - how about 'kicking the living sh*t out of them with airplanes'. Seriously, all Israel has done is bomb for 6 days and somewhere between 40 and 50% of all Hezbollah military capability has been destroyed. Ouch. That's like Italian tanks versus Ethiopian bows-and-arrows bad. (And yes, the Ethiopians vs. Italians is a real historical event.) Furthermore, I believe Israel will actually have the brains to stay and finish the job they started; instead of deciding half-way through that they feel like they've 'sent a message' and can go home.

Needless to say, I fully support Israel and its right to beat Hezbollah to a pulp. Terrorists who willingly attack innocent civilians do not need to have old Soviet-era rockets at their disposal. Fortunately, the task of getting rid of Hezbollah's weapons falls to Israel, a Nation who is quite happy to complete it.

Furthermore, what do these successful attacks say about Hezbollah and the situation in the Middle East? Or Islamic terrorism in general? Well, first of all, it shows us, once again, that Israel really does have a right to exist. Remember, Hezbollah is a group on par with the PLO, (who are also on the receiving end of this bombardment) and they have crumbled, for the umpteenth time, in the face of Israel. How can one possibly say that a people who lose 40% of their military capability in six days, despite not even being invaded, deserve to have a country? Remember if you run a country, you are in charge of "National Defense" something these Arab groups don't quite seem to have figured out. Especially compared to Israel.

Also, on a more philosophical note, this could tell us one of two things about Islamic Terrorism. Either a) the Islamic will to fight is weakening slightly or b) Bush was right. Hezbollah's resistance is quite minimal and, on top of that, they seem to be getting little or no support from the rest of the Arabic and Islamic world. To me, this seems an indication that Islamic militants really feel that Hezbollah can't win this fight; and given the Islamic terrorists 'Allah is with me so I'll never give up' attitudes, that's kind of surprising. On the other hand, it could mean that Islamic terrorists can't help Hezbollah fight back because they are already overcommitted in different places. In other words, no one can support Hezbollah because all their terrorists have been deployed to, say, Iraq. Which would course vindicate President Bush's belief that going into Iraq would attract the terrorists there and prevent them from doing harm elsewhere. Again, this is purely philosophical, but I find it compelling.

So, to our allies and friends in Israel: Good Luck and Happy Hezbollah Hunting!!