"The Lebanese were trying to get rid of Hezbollah. They were not given the time it takes in this region to get anything done. Sadly, the West does not have time to wait. Iran refuses to cooperate, and Lebanon suffers."

I suggest the Lebanese take up their complaint about lack of time with Hezb'alla. Israel was attacked.

I am a Jewish French whose ancestor was a minister in Israel.I really don't understand this new war against all the Lebanese territory.
Seen from France,even among the Jewish community,this new action is undefendable and purely predatory.

It's true I am a left-winger but even though, I cannot stand morally to support Israel once again for I don't perceive the offence to Israel and the real necessity to counter-attack.

Add to this the minable communiqué from the Israeli Embassy in Paris and you'll understand all the angst i feel against Tsahal these days.
The world is watching you and,this time, be aware that we,overseas Jewish,are not supporting you like a single man...

#4.1 Julien Tolédano on 2006-07-20 05:42 (Reply)

"Seen from France,even among the Jewish community,this new action is undefendable and purely predatory."

Confirms everything I know about the French media. But stick around and read the news that isn't spun by the Euro media, and maybe you'll understand why Israel is defending itself against years of rocket attacks, by destroying the attackers. (Unfortunately, the predatory ones, Hizbullah, base their operations in civilian homes, and get their rockets from Syria and Iran).

There may be more Lebanese than French who are on Israel's side . . . .

What would you have Israel do?

If she had done nothing, it would have merely been an open invitation to continue the campaign of abducting soldiers in order to release the Hizb'allah murderers.

If she had gone in for a short campaign, at the end of it, when she withdrew, Hizb'allah would use it as propaganda that it had successfully beaten Israel - because she didn't have the guts to pursue a mission to the end. That fits with their narrative, in any case, that the US and Israel don't have the will power to fight any more, so it would not have been a jump for them.

There is no doctrine of balanced force in war. You go in with the aim of winning, not maintaining a rotten status quo, particularly in a case when you have been provoked into war by unilateral actions of the other side.

France, for example, never has moral qualms about pursuing her martial aims to the fullest extent - even when the fighting is disproportionate. And these are against "enemies" who do her very little harm, certainly not lethal militias on her borders. For that, you'd have to recollect your national attitude back before the beginning of WWII - the early 20th century, the 19th century.

France does not permit other countries the same lattitude, however.

Read this article; it might help to give you a clue. In fact, there are many Lebanese who don't like Hizb'allah and the ties to Syria and Iran that it forces upon Lebanon.

I don't know what the "minable communiqué" is. Do you mean, in your understanding, the Israeli government simply sounded like it was whining about being a victim of Hizb'allah in an official communiqué? Or do you mean something else?

I believe you mean "limiting its attacks to Hezbollah, the odd Canadian tourist and any other civilian who happens to be in the wrong place". You know, the same way Hams and Hezbollah "limit" their attacks to the IDF. Not.

But I suppose that's what happens when you get all your news from CNN.

Ha. You really think we get our news from CNN? Everyone I know who is pro-Israel and pro-Iraq hates CNN because they get so much wrong. For example. (But the BBC is worse.)

Israel bombed the transportation infrastructure of Lebanon to keep war materiel from moving into the country from Syria and Iran. It has bombed wherever there are Hizbullah strongholds, including South Beirut. It has dropped flyers warning people to evacuate before they bomb. It has not wantonly killed civilians. Unfortunately, these groups base themselves among civilians. Hizbullah pays civilians rent to store their missiles in their homes.

I'd seen your anti-CNN post before (indeed it was one of the pieces I cited over on EKN as especially amusing). I didn't (and don't) expect you to agree with me, but US media coverage of the Middle East, and much of British, is heavily biased in favour of Israel, and CNN certainly appears to be part of that.

If you still think the BBC is biased the other way, try reading this for some counter-examples.

Hello,

French media are no good, it's true. But it's not Soviet Union and we have both sides.

On my web-lg, I finally chose to defend Israeli's right to defend after having analyzed the pros and the cons, thanks to the diversity of viewpoints expressed on the French media:

-Commentators Bruno Tertrais or socialist leaders took a balanced stance and highlighted the similarities with the 1996 operation on Lebanon and the Israeli strategy

-I saw the point you're mentioning, namely that a part of Lebanese-Christians-have supported for a long time the Israeli army and government, although silently.

-I realized the fanaticism of Hizbollah and the complete sickness of such an attack on the Northern part of Israel

-I antagonized the public assessments of senior politicians, such as Mr De Charette-formerly the Ministers of Foreign Affairs-, who said that French diplomacy should be less balanced than it is and spouse the traditional pro-Arab stances it has adopted since 1967.

I found that Mr de Charette is just an old hidden antisemitic piece of shit that intends to remain politically alive. Just look at his records and you'll understand.

"Hizbullah pays civilians rent to store their missiles in their homes."

Really? You have seen receipts? Sounds a bit like "Wicked Lebanese make passover matzohs from the blood of dead babies". Oh wait, that was the other guys lying about the Jews; sometimes the lies get hard to tell apart. Do you have proof to offer (and please, not another IDF spokesperson with no supporting evidence).

In any case, if all the "civilians" killed were actually being paid by Hezbollah, where did they get those pesky Canadians to hide the Katyushas? ("Did you pack this bag yourself, sir? Has anyone given you anything to put in it?.....")

Re your assertion that Hezbollah pay civilians rent to store their missiles, I have in fact found corroboration I can believe. On the BBC website here, though you may find that hard to believe as you describe the BBC as the Beirut Broadcasting Corporation. Here is the precise exchange, in a Q & A session with John Simpson, WOrld Affairs Editor:

Q: Is it correct that Hezbollah is firing these rockets from densely populated residential areas, and do you think they have support for this in these areas?
Leslie, Oslo

A: Hezbollah stores its rockets in densely populated areas, with the willing agreement of those who look after them, but they usually (though not always) fire them from open areas away from towns and villages. Having travelled round southern Lebanon many times, I have no doubt that Hezbollah has a great deal of support in these areas.

Is it not ironic that it is the BBC who confirm your story?

No it is not ironic that the BBC confirms it; it simply means that it is so self-evident that even the BBC can't quite ignore it in their reporting, though in other respects they are doing a good job in trying to cover up data like that. Look here, here and here for Stephen Pollard's take. There is also Melanie Phillips.

But, then, even Jan Egeland from the UN implied as much about Hezbollah the other day:

The U.N. humanitarian chief accused Hezbollah on Monday of "cowardly blending" in among Lebanese civilians and causing the deaths of hundreds during two weeks of cross-border violence with Israel.

The militant group has built bunkers and tunnels near the Israeli border to shelter weapons and fighters, and its members easily blend in among civilians...

Jan Egeland spoke to reporters at Larnaca airport in Cyprus late Monday after visiting Lebanon to coordinate an international aid effort. On Sunday, he toured the rubble of Beirut's southern suburbs, a once-teeming Shiite district where Hezbollah had its headquarters.

During that visit, he condemned the killing and wounding of civilians by both sides and called Israel's offensive "disproportionate" and "a violation of international humanitarian law."

On Monday, he had strong words for Hezbollah, which crossed into Israel, captured two soldiers and killed eight others on July 12, triggering fierce fighting.

"Consistently, from the Hezbollah heartland, my message was that Hezbollah must stop this cowardly blending ... among women and children," he said. "I heard they were proud because they lost very few fighters and that it was the civilians bearing the brunt of this. I don't think anyone should be proud of having many more children and women dead than armed men."

Actually he doesn't specifically mention paying civilians to store missiles, merely hiding out among them (which is arguably a lesser charge). AT least he's even-handed about the killings, pointing out the illegality of Israel's actions as well as Hezbollah's. It's always refreshing to find someone who recognises that both sides need their asses kicked.