Today the Gaza Strip, Tomorrow Lebanon...

Today the Gaza Strip, Tomorrow Lebanon...

www.globalresearch.ca

In the Middle East, it is widely believed that the war against Gaza is an extension of the 2006 war against Lebanon. Without question, the war in the Gaza Strip is a part of the same conflict.

Moreover, since the Israeli defeat in 2006, Tel Aviv and Washington have not abandoned their design to turn Lebanon into a client state.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Prime Minister Ehud Olmert told France's President Nicolas Sarkozy, in so many words, during his visit to Tel Aviv in early January that today Israel was attacking Hamas in the Gaza Strip and that tomorrow it would be fighting Hezbollah in Lebanon.

Lebanon is still in the cross-hairs. Israel is searching for a justification or a pretext to launch another war against Lebanon.

...snip...

Crossing Arms III: Israel Simulates a Two-Front War against Lebanon and Syria

This war is already in the advanced planning stage. In November 2008, barely a month before Tel Aviv started its massacre in the Gaza Strip, the Israeli military held drills for a two-front war against Lebanon and Syria called Shiluv Zro’ot III (Crossing Arms III).[4]

The military exercise included a massive simulated invasion of both Syria and Lebanon. Several months before the Israeli invasion drills, Tel Aviv had also warned Beirut that it would declare war on the whole of Lebanon and not just Hezbollah.[5]

Israel's justification for these war preparations was that Hezbollah has grown stronger and become a partner in the Lebanese government since the Doha Accord.

snip...

Tel Aviv has been mapping a large-scale blitzkrieg against Lebanon as a whole, which includes an immediate land invasion. [7] Just before the Israeli massacre in the Gaza Strip started, Israeli officials and generals had promised that no Lebanese village would be immune from the wrath of Israeli aerial bombardments, regardless of religion, sect, and/or political orientation. [8]

In substance, Tel Aviv has promised to totally destroy Lebanon. Israel has also confirmed that in any future war against Lebanon, the entire country rather than Hezbollah will be the target. In practice, this was already the case in 2006’s Israeli aerial attacks on Lebanon. [9]

Very informative and interesting article that I suggest to be read fully. I merely copied some interesting points.

After the 2006 war, there was no doubt on my mind that Israel would sooner or later hit again. They lost that war by not achieving the goals that were set: liberating the kidnapped soldiers and destroy Hamas. Hamas has grown stronger and is believed to have tripled its missile and rocket stock to over 40,000. They are also believed to possess much more advanced missiles and other weapons than during the 2006 conflict.

Clearly, the US and Israel failed to set up a puppet regime in Lebanon, which resulted in a great deal of influence by Hezbollah on the country's politics.

Furthermore, Russia supplied 10 Mig 29s (if I'm not mistaken) lately, while the US supplied various kinds of ''low tech'' military equipment to the Lebanese military such as Cobra attack helicopters.

I've noticed that Syria has received very little media attention lately nor has it really meddled with the conflict between Gaza and Israel.

I wouldn't be surprised if the author is right, Gaza strip might very well be an indication and exercise for a much bigger war to come.

Although I believe that one part of the conspiracy is to eliminate the Hezbollah threat, the real goal is, in my opinion, to establish a 'greater Israel'. Parts of Lebanon and Syria would be occupied and eventually annexed as supported by Israel's Kadima party.

Syria has lately been little of a threat, with a far inferior military it can do barely anything to defend itself let alone attacking Israel. I, therefore, don't see any reason why Israel would have to attack Syria other than for establishing a greater Israel. If they'd deal with Hezbollah, then Syria would have no Hezbollah to supply, so that cannot be used as a motive.

Hopefully, this is not the 'generated crisis' Biden and Powell have been talking about, because we would be really screwed. Especially because I wouldn't be surprised if Iran, the US and possibly Turkey get directly involved. It could easily evolve into something much bigger than a regional war only.

I was thinking of visiting a friend of mine living in Beirut, this summer, however, I'm doubting whether I should already book a ticket with the current situation.

www.globalresearch.ca
(visit the link for the full news article)

Well, it is kind of one-sided article. Israel indeed threatened Lebanon, but on certain condition. If rockets will be launched from it. It is kind of - you attack me i attack you. I do not see even slightest mention of it in this article.
And by the way, there were several rockets launched at Israel, Iranians tried to push Hizbollah into doing more damage but since Lebanon leadership choose not to go along this path - nothing happened. Even in 2006 Lebanon war Israel acted (or pretty much over-acted) because it was attacked from Lebanon , got soldiers killed and kidnapped and North of Israel bombed. So it was a reaction to agression. It is kind of obvious.

Originally posted by ZeroKnowledge
Well, it is kind of one-sided article. Israel indeed threatened Lebanon, but on certain condition. If rockets will be launched from it. It is kind of - you attack me i attack you. I do not see even slightest mention of it in this article.
And by the way, there were several rockets launched at Israel, Iranians tried to push Hizbollah into doing more damage but since Lebanon leadership choose not to go along this path - nothing happened. Even in 2006 Lebanon war Israel acted (or pretty much over-acted) because it was attacked from Lebanon , got soldiers killed and kidnapped and North of Israel bombed. So it was a reaction to agression. It is kind of obvious.

I agree that the article is somewhat one-sided, nevertheless it remains very informative. Surely, Israel defended itself, but by no means it was justified what it did to Lebanon. After all, it was a terrorist organization that committed the kidnapping, which the Lebanese government couldn't control due to its outdated military.

Although I understand that Israel would like to deal with its ''northern threat'', I am also of opinion that removing Hezbollah is just part of the plan. Israel can occupy any country, but in the end there's just one solution and that's consensus - anyhow that's behind the scope of this discussion. Nor is it interesting to have a debate on who is to blame, I merely outlined what could happen.

That sounds about right. I think that what was happening in Gaza was supposed to spark enough tension to make Lebanon and Syria intervene, but they didn't.


This is supposed to be a Map of Israel. If you have a look at it, Lebanon, Syria and Jordan are all part of it. I guess this means they need to have it all.



This is according to the New Testament of the Bible. I think this only appears in the recent editions because it's not in my bible.

reply to post by Mdv2


Yes, i agree that Second Lebanon war was pointless, since objectives declared could not be reached from the start, and all the war brought was great deal of devastation to Lebanese people.
What happened in Gaza is pretty similar - just today there are conflicting reports about mortar in the south. People there say that it fell and police say that they are hallucinating. Elections time. Was it worth going into Gaza and devastating it just to get the same situation day after truce?
However solutions are not occupation. Israel occupied South of Lebanon and it still did not prevent rockets from there. Israel occupied Gaza and it did not prevent rockets from there. And the writer claims that Israel plans to occupy both Lebanon and Syria now? With what kind of forces exactly and what good it will possibly do?
Iran is openly hostile to Israel. Hizbollah is on Iran's paycheck, Syria is Iranian ally. So drill that deals with Lebanon and Syria simultaneously is very logical. Drill whose purpose is to train for occupation of Lebanon and Syria is very improbable to idiotic.

reply to post by Obliterated


Well actually it is too small! If you want to use maps that show what Israel plans to occupy tomorrow - then show this:
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Greater_Israel_map.jpg"
en.wikipedia.org...
An empire!!!!
Jokes aside - i actually met 1 (one) person who spoke about it seriously. So it is good to be aware that there are Jewish imperialists too, but alas, to contradict it all Israel actually shrinks in size since 1967.

[edit on 20-1-2009 by ZeroKnowledge]
All edits are trying to make link work. Or not.

[edit on 20-1-2009 by ZeroKnowledge]

Hezbollah and Hamas are proxies for Syria and Iran.

Iran will keep pushing Israel by using them because they know that Israel will never attack Iran unless Iran attacks Israel directly.

if Iran did a direct attack on Israel they know they would get nuked and this is why they use there proxies.

No Sh*t!

Why do you think they moved outta Gaza?
To focus on hezzbollah.

that's why they said if they get attacked one more time, they will go in...
They made it public, as a warning.

So when they act, no one will be surprised.

Originally posted by ANNED
Hezbollah and Hamas are proxies for Syria and Iran.

Iran will keep pushing Israel by using them because they know that Israel will never attack Iran unless Iran attacks Israel directly.

if Iran did a direct attack on Israel they know they would get nuked and this is why they use there proxies.

Hezbollah may be armed by Iran but they are not controlled by Iran. They are a political movement and armed defence militia and stand against Israel.

Originally posted by Britguy
Hezbollah may be armed by Iran but they are not controlled by Iran.

Oh yeah? If they stop giving them guns and munitions......now who's "controlling" them?

reply to post by MrPenny


Why shouldn't Iran give arms to a defense militia? Hezbollah react to Israeli incursions and aggression, they don't try and invade.

One could turn this around and ask why should the USA give all that military hardware to Israel?

Originally posted by Britguy

Originally posted by ANNED
Hezbollah and Hamas are proxies for Syria and Iran.

Iran will keep pushing Israel by using them because they know that Israel will never attack Iran unless Iran attacks Israel directly.

if Iran did a direct attack on Israel they know they would get nuked and this is why they use there proxies.

Hezbollah may be armed by Iran but they are not controlled by Iran. They are a political movement and armed defence militia and stand against Israel.

Right. Because the people controlling your purse has no influence at all on your pure righteous ideals.

Originally posted by Britguy
reply to post by MrPenny

 

Why shouldn't Iran give arms to a defense militia? Hezbollah react to Israeli incursions and aggression, they don't try and invade.

One could turn this around and ask why should the USA give all that military hardware to Israel?

Because you kind of need to make sure that canal remains open and you have some influence that isn't stone ages in the area? Just snowballing here.

reply to post by Britguy


Just so we're on the same page here...

After emerging during the civil war of the early 1980s as an Iranian-sponsored second resistance movement (besides Amal) for Lebanon's Shia community, Hezbollah focused on expelling Israeli and Western forces from Lebanon. Source

I was pretty sure my memory wasn't failing me....found this so I wouldn't think I was getting senile. Yup, Hezbollah is an Iranian sponsored organization.

I guess though, the entire argument may be pointless when viewed in a larger context.....Is Iran doing anything different than what the U.S., Russia, and other countries have done? Which is, provide arms and munitions to organizations within other sovereign nation's borders in order to destabilize them? I'll answer that...nope, not really.

My point is, Hezbollah is not an autonomous organization, answering only to their own counsel.

I'm getting a bit tired of posting this now but here it goes again. Israel and its backers are intent on achieving the objective of a greater Israel by taking by force land from all its neighbours. The purpose of this is to act as a buffer between the islamic states and to ensure that the oilfields end up under Israeli control, a pro Western country.

Despite what we all make say and think about Israel and the Jews, right now they are the Wests's patsy. Its why we give them money and arms. Oil is the life blood of the western democracies. Stop that and our economies and lifestyle would collapse. So the bigger picture here is making sure Israel achieves its objectives but also takes the blame. Once the oil has run out the West will turn its back on Israel just as it has all others in the past.

Originally posted by magicmushroom
Israel and its backers are intent on achieving the objective of a greater Israel by taking by force land from all its neighbours. The purpose of this is to act as a buffer between the islamic states and to ensure that the oilfields end up under Israeli control, a pro Western country.

Despite what we all make say and think about Israel and the Jews, right now they are the Wests's patsy. Its why we give them money and arms. Oil is the life blood of the western democracies. Stop that and our economies and lifestyle would collapse. So the bigger picture here is making sure Israel achieves its objectives but also takes the blame. Once the oil has run out the West will turn its back on Israel just as it has all others in the past.

The expanionist Israel claim is negated by their handing over Gaza to the Palestininians and leaving Lebanon. Given that Israel has been fighting for 60 years just to maintain the once arid strip of land they got that is less than 1% of the the Muslim controlled Middle East, there's not much to substantiate the claim.

Annually the US gives more money to Egypt, Jordan, and Palestinians every year tha Israel receives in repayable loans and business investments.

The Iranians are on a self-professed program to expand in the Middle East, largely trying to counter Sunni control by the Saudis. With little wherwithal for military, Iran has funded Hezbollah and Hamas to do their dirty work for them.

Hamas was instructed by Iran to provoke Israel into retaliation in the hope of a showdown. Most Muslims perceive Israel as a colony of the US. It was sort of a dry run for a Muslim vs West confrontation that the Iranians have been promising for 30s years with their Islamic Revolution.

Iran's hope is that Muslims will rally together and take out Israel tegether - the first step towards a conquest of the West. But except for mercenaries like Hamas and Hezbollah, the Muslim world is not biting.

Oil is always a primary factor, but it's been discovered by Western powers that cutting preferred rate on the resource with compliant leaders in place is far less expensive and less troublesome than taking over a country and trying to run it. Iraq has been the example.

When and if the Muslims decide co-operation with each other and reinvesting their oil profits to develop agriculture, education, manufacturing is a better direction than sustained tribal conflict, things might change.

But so far little indication that the oil money will be used for anything that actually betters the quality of life for all those who live in the region.

Israel is just stuck in the middle being nest door and small enough to pick on.


MF

Oh dear, another oh its all the Muslims fault, perhaps before commenting it would be best to at least research the history of the ME. It would give one a better perspective of whats going on. Israel gets more money than any other single country there is no point putting several together and stating they get more plus Israel does not pay the money back.

Its not just about the oil, as I stated if you had read my comments, I said its primary function was two fold, a bulwark between the West and Islamic nations and control of the oil. Its not about just buying the oil the peprs want to control it as they know the supply is unstable due to the actions of the West over the last hundred years or more.

Also the process of a greater Israel will take time, I never said it was going to happen tomorrow. With Israel/US backed and created terrorist groups they will make sure that Israel will have all the excuses it needs to wage war on its neighbours. For the countries of the me The best weapon they have against the West is terrorism and the oil supply as their military's will never match those of the West. hence the reason for not wanting Iran to have nukes. Not that Iran would want to use them but it would provide Iran and its allies with a force mulitplier and thats what the perps don't want.

Despite all the hate and bull about Muslim fanatics the majority are not and those that are fanatics are so because of our own actions and not theirs.

Originally posted by MrPenny

Originally posted by Britguy
Hezbollah may be armed by Iran but they are not controlled by Iran.

Oh yeah? If they stop giving them guns and munitions......now who's "controlling" them?

well clearly somebody didn't read the article very well according to the article Hezbollah is going to be absorbed into the Lebanese military when Israel is no longer a threat to Lebanon so they don't need Iran's help for that if anything it's a bonus for Iran because now there "proxies" are now in the military and it's a bonus for Lebanon because now they have another 20,000 - 50,000 troops in their army but let's not get ahead of ourselves i don't think Israel is as mad as we'd all like to believe enough to attack Lebanon without provocation and even if EVEN IF Iran attacked Israel for the "lulz" isreal isn't going to nuke Iran because a few Jews died (and no im not being racist/antizionist look at Gaza 13 Jews died and Gaza is still going)

reply to post by mmiichael


If iran instructed hamas to do it's dirty work for them surely someone from iran or 1,000's of say STUDENTS would want to go to Iran and clearly iran would let them but since the iotola of Iran REFUSED any student's to go blow themselves up i guess it is SAFE to say that at least the iotola or "religious leader" of iran isn't the one condoning martyrdom at least not of the iranian's

sorry for the double post mods delete this if you want.

[edit on 20-1-2009 by rationaluser]