Israel's March of Folly

[Ms. Clio]

Harper's
Israel's March of Folly
Posted on Monday, August 7, 2006. By Ken Silverstein.


Across the Middle East, Hezbollah and its leader, Hassan Nasrallah, are more popular than ever. According to a New York Times story filed from Gaza, “the best-selling items for the past couple of weeks have been posters, T-shirts, buttons and coffee mugs featuring” the image of Nasrallah. Last Friday, a huge crowd of marchers took to the streets of Baghdad to show support for Hezbollah, and many smaller rallies have been held in the region.

From just about any vantage point—not least that of public relations—the war has been a disaster for Israel (and for its chief sponsor, the United States). The military campaign has displaced about a quarter of Lebanon's population, caused billions of dollars in damage to infrastructure, and, as of Sunday, killed as many as 900 people, overwhelmingly civilians, many of them children. “Israeli forces have systematically failed to distinguish between combatants and civilians in their military campaign against Hezbollah in Lebanon,” said a report issued by Human Rights Watch last week. “he failures cannot be dismissed as mere accidents and cannot be blamed on wrongful Hezbollah practices. In some cases, these attacks constitute war crimes.” The report cited a July 13 Israeli air strike that “destroyed the home of a cleric known to have sympathy for Hezbollah but who was not known to have taken any active part in the hostilities. Even if the IDF considered him a legitimate target (and Human Rights Watch has no evidence that he was), the strike killed him, his wife, their ten children and the family's Sri Lankan maid.”

(snip)

The Israeli invasion has empowered Hezbollah and its allies in Lebanon and has severely weakened those political factions more sympathetic, or at least less hostile, to both Israel and the United States. The last few weeks have also cemented the perception—a dear one to Al Qaeda—that Israel and the United States are joined at the hip, and destroyed any remaining credibility of the United States in the Middle East, making it all but impossible for any U.S. official to serve as a political broker. Meanwhile, the radical Iraqi Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr has reportedly set up recruitment centers in Baghdad to send volunteers to fight Israel in Lebanon. And there's a higher risk than ever that Shiite forces in Iraq could attack American troops stationed there. If that happens, the situation in Iraq will grow even more chaotic.

(snip)

Israel now faces a problem in Lebanon similar to the problem faced by the United States in Iraq: it must try to win a “victory” in order to justify its foolish decision to go to war, and only then can it withdraw. But even if Israel manages to drive north to the Litani River, it's unlikely that many people will remember this as a triumph for the Jewish state. The members of Hezbollah who are killed in the conflict will be remembered as martyrs, and the call to destroy Israel will become even more fervent. “The Jews all died at Masada,” said Milt Bearden, a former CIA officer with broad experience in the Middle East, “but no one remembers that it was a Roman victory.”


I find it hard to argue with his conclusions, but I'm sure there are many here who will disagree.

[jpkenny]

1. I, for one, will NOT disagree. Thanks for the post. nt

[Ms. Clio]

5. The only way out of this is for the combatants to talk to each other

why anyone thinks some resolution cobbled together by the U.S. and France will have any applicability to the actual situation on the ground is simply mystifying to me.

[FlavaKreemSnak]

2. I don't know if he is right about that or not.

There is another article somebody linked here called something like we are losing World War III. But if you look at it from the point of view of the ones running the war, which is us and Israel, that is the side that is killing the most people, and the people are being cleansed off of the land, and the American and Israeli companies are making money.

So maybe it would be folly if they wanted Hezbollah to be unpopular but I don't think that is the point of the war. What that author is thinking is Hezbollah is fighting back against America and Israel which is the worst kind of terrorism so it is awful that they are getting popular.

But to the people running things, do they really care whether the people who are fighting back are popular with other people that are getting bombed and occupied? Especially since they are achieving their goals. It is not like Hezbollah or any of the anti-American Iraqis can actually beat America or Israel. They just don't have enough money or enough bombs!

[itzamirakul]

3. Remember reading about Napoleon marching his troops deep

into Russia? The Russians let the French soldiers just keep coming deeper and deeper into the country and didn't even fight them. Then when the French tried to leave Russia, winter set in and the French Army froze to death trying to march back home. I forget how many thousands of soldiers Napoleon lost in this winter march of retreat. And as they stumbled home, poorly dressed, eating their horses for food, the Russians then followed them and picked off the stragglers. Finally, napoleon left his remaining army to die while he escaped back to France.

In some ways, the Israelis seem to have painted themselves into a corner in much the same way as Napoleon did. Their soldiers have entered deeply into Lebanon. They have bombed and destroyed bridges, roads, airports, etc., so when they finally do try to leave Lebanon, it will be quite difficult. They have put themselves in a position to be surrounded and captured or killed. Being re-supplied will be the same problem that Napoleon had. I don't understand Israel's tactics in going so deeply into Lebanon. It is like they have not learned from the past. They thought they were going to have this over in a couple of days and now it is going on a month.

[FlavaKreemSnak]

4. If they cleanse all the Lebanese out then they won't have that problem

Plus maybe they don't mean for them to leave, just use it as a base, or for settlements.

[Ms. Clio]

7. the same overconfidence that has led to the bloody chaos in Iraq

very interesting comparison to Napoleon and Russia. Some people have pointed out that the U.S. supply lines and even the troops in Iraq are also quite vulnerable.

[The Magistrate]

9. They Are Not Deep In Lebanon, Sir

Not my any modern military standard. A man in decent shape could walk the distance in a day. To compare a months long slog into the vastnesses of Russia with an twenty or thirty mile incursion into the postage stamp that is Lebanon simply will not do. When the Israelis choose to withdraw, they will have no trouble doing so: the fusiliers of the Grande Armee should have been so lucky....

[itzamirakul]

12. Sir, I cannot help but wonder if it is fair for a moderator to take

sides in these posts while having the one-sided power to delete other people's posts. Somehow it feels like a very one-sided advantage on the part of said moderator, Sir.

In reference to your post, even if "a man in decent shape could walk the distance in a day," that assumes that there would be no snipers or fighters left to harrass those trying to leave the country. IMO, a "months long slog into the vastness of Russia" during the late 1800s, would indeed be comparable to a "twenty or thiry mile incursion into the postage stamp that is Lebanon" with today's weaponry and the range of rockets, etc. Also, they will have to transit the wreckage and ruined roads, etc on a march out. They may be "in decent shape," but after a few weeks of constant fighting, they will be exhausted on withdrawal.

The Russian people had no such weapons as are in use today, but they simply followed the retreating line and watched the French soldiers drop dead as a result of the destruction they had wrought on their march into the country.

Personally, I think that Israel's march into Lebanon is an unwise move. I think that now they also see it as unwise, but the leaders are not in there doing the day-to-day battle, so it is easy for them to lean back in an easy chair with a cigar and insist that their side is winning although the soldiers are having more difficulties than ever before.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Lurking Dem]

16. I can't believe

anyone would accuse, even obliquely, the Magistrate of deleting posts simply because he didn't agree with them.

He has been a font of wisdom on both sides of this debate and is a man of character not prone to partisan hackery.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[The Magistrate]

20. If You Seriously Want To Discuss The Retreat Of The Grand Armee, Sir

There are some factors you might want to take into account. First, the Russian countryside had been systematically turned into a lethal weapon, by one of the most famous scorched earth campaigns of history. All shelter and all stored food had been ruthlessly destroyed the previous autumn during the Russian retreat. The weather conditions were in themselves quite sufficient to kill: the variety of ways malnourished men put to the need of exertion die of cold many degrees below zero farenheit is astonishing. Nor did the Russians during the retreat sumply hang back and watch. Well-fed, warm riders cut up the columns dreadfully, and at will. The arms at their disposal were exactly equal to those of the men they assailed. The weapons of the Napoleonic period, weilded in the manner they were, actually tended to cause a greater proportion of casualties in the contending forces than modern equipment does, as a general rule.

The idea that weeks would be required for a withdrawl of no more than thirty miles in Lebanon simply has no merit whatever. When the Israelis choose to withdraw, they will do so over the course of an operation lasting no more than three days, even assuming the withdrawl meets with the stiffest resistance the Hezbollah can muster. Casualties, if there is resistance, will be for the Israelis no greater than those of their advance, and those have been minimal. Less than a hundred Israeli soldiers have been killed so far, and between five and ten thousand men have been involved. Casualties at that level pose no real check to the operation of any formed military body, in whatever direction it chooses to move.

My comments in response to you here, Sir, have not engaged the question of whether what the Israelis are doing is wise, or efficacious, even from their own point of view, nor have they expressed any view of whether the operations the Israeli Army is conducted are going well or ill. They have addressed nothing but the historical parallel you have suggested, which seems to me a very poor one.

[itzamirakul]

22. And there, Sir, we will leave it . nt

[Tom Joad]

19. Depends on your definition of what "deep" is. Nearly a million refugees.

So though troops are not many miles into Lebanon (and they have been in Lebanon for decades, they never fully withdrew) their mark is felt far and wide. When they withdraw, they will leave a terrible devastation. It is unbelievable what the US/Israeli governments are capable of this sort of brutality/barbaric actions, and no one putting a stop to it.

[The Magistrate]

21. My Definition Of "Deep', Sir

Is purely geographical, and considers no more than the capabilities of movement possessed by either a modern mechanized force, or of a fit man on foot bearing roughly a quarter of his weight in equipments and stores.

[Ms. Clio]

6. Well, but they didn't expect Hezbollah to be quite so good at fighting

back. I do think they planned on this being a much shorter and spectacularly successful operation, and the failure to achieve those goals has been much more damaging than they anticipated.

But I do see your point, and I don't think they would care if the people fighting back were popular or not, as long as they the resistance was largely ineffectual (like rock-throwing Palestinian kids).

[bananarepublican]

10. Very insightful point! The warmongers need to create more enemies!! n/t

[daydreamer]

18. I agree with you.

[breakaleg]

8. I find it frustrating to read this type of opinion in the media but not

see it evident with the politicians. I've read so many articles where goverment employees in many western nations are critical of Israel and the US, but not much is said publicly.

And if public opinion is not going their way, then you certainly don't see it in the faces of the Olmert or Bush. Maybe it's just one of those thing that will come out in 20 years?

[bananarepublican]

11. Another great post. I think they are being consciously incompetent.

To sustain a war you need lots of enemies...

Your post has brought home to me that the bozos in power for the last five and a half years have been running an enemy creation program equal to the JFK inspired moon shots of the early 60's.

[cali]

13. It's an excellent article

and I doubt that there are more than a handful of people here who will disagree with his conclusions.

[malaise]

14. Great read

the only problem is that neither Israel nor the United States cares about the number of enemies they create since they don't care who dies as long as their agenda is furthered. Listen carefully to Condi, Netanyahu or Gillerman - slaughter all enemies is the new mantra and the more than 100,000 dead Iraqis are all the proof we need.