Thursday, April 10, 2008


Robert Fisk breaks the taboo in the mainstream media on mentioning the definitive factor explaining why Israel hasn't conducted another utterly illegal attack on the innocent civilian population of a completely non-threatening neighboring country as part of the murderous rampage the world knows as Israeli foreign affairs: rockets, and the inability of the Israeli military to do anything about them. It's ironic that the IDF is hardly defensive, and when faced with one defensive task, can't do it (I've already noted that the Israeli military planners are obviously dragging their feet on setting up what purports to be an anti-missile system). Fisk:
". . . the body of the latest Shia fighter to be buried here – from the local Hashem family – was flown back to Lebanon last month from Iran.

He was hailed as a martyr in the village Husseiniya mosque but the Hizbollah would say no more. For when a Lebanese is killed in live firing exercises in the Islamic Republic, his death brings almost as many questions as mourners. Yet it is an open secret south of the Litani river that thousands of young men have been leaving their villages for military training in Iran. Up to 300 men are taken to Beirut en route to Tehran each month and the operation has been running since November of 2006; in all, as many as 4,500 Hizbollah members have been sent for three-month sessions of live-fire ammunition and rocket exercises to create a nucleus of Iranian-trained guerrillas for the 'next' Israeli-Hizbollah war."

Israel isn't slaughtering its innocent neighbors for the simple reason that, for the first time, its innocent neighbors can fight back. This is so important a factor that you won't read about it anywhere.

More Fisk:
"Can the Hizbollah shoot Israeli jets out of the sky in the event of another conflict? It is a question much discussed within the 13,000-strong United Nations force in southern Lebanon – essentially a Nato-led army, which contains French, Spanish and Italian troops as well as Chinese, Indian and sundry other contingents – which would find itself sandwiched between the two antagonists."

"If its aircraft could no longer bomb at will over Lebanon without fear of being destroyed, would Israel stage another costly land invasion – highly unlikely after the bloodying its troops took in 2006 – or use its own ground-to-ground missiles on Lebanon? For if the latter option were chosen, it would bring a whole new dimension to Lebanon's repeated wars."

Of course, other than the fact that there would be no possible way for the disgusting Zionist apologists to excuse rocket attacks against urban Lebanese areas (along with the illegal use of cluster bombs against civilians,the big PR problem of the last illegal Israeli attack), the goal of an Israeli attack is, as always, land and water seizure, impossible to do with rockets. All the while, legitimate self-defense attacks by Hezbollah will be hitting civilian populations in Tel Aviv, and we all know that the 'normal' civilian population of Israel has little stomach for retaliatory self-defense.

As I've been saying for some time now, the reasons for optimism - which include security for Lebanon, Syria, and Iran - are based on the ability of the victims to fight back successfully, and not on mythical Jewish good will. Watching the missiles take down tall buildings in Tel Aviv will give the world something to cheer about.