Most of Israel's targets in Lebanon serve none of its stated goals

[spindrifter]

Daily Star-Lebanon

By Marc J Sirois
Daily Star staff
Tuesday, July 25, 2006


<snip>

The Jewish state's official position is that it is destroying "terrorist infrastructure" as a means of (in no particular order, for reasons which will shortly be evident); a) degrading the command and control and combat capabilities of Hizbullah; b) freeing the two Israeli soldiers whose capture sparked the disproportionate onslaught; and c) establishing a new "buffer zone" along the border to put northern Israel beyond the reach of most Hizbullah rockets.

It is hard to see how these goals can be furthered by a target list that has so far included a textile factory, a dairy, a glass factory, and a woodworking shop. A key component of the Jewish state's strategy is emerging: One of the world's most technologically sophisticated military organizations wants to make sure that no Hizbullah fighter can wear a T-shirt while he drinks milk from a proper tumbler while sitting at a wooden table. But the fighter might find some milk - and a usable receptacle therefore - and might be lactose-intolerant and suffer some kind of stomach problem after he drinks the "terrorist elixir," so pharmaceutical plants also need to be bombed in order to cut off his access to treatment. The fighter would then require considerable amounts of toilet tissue, which must explain why a paper factory was destroyed. He might call a friend to bring some, so cellular phone transmission networks must also be eliminated, and since the call might get through anyway, the friend must be denied mobility by blowing up gas stations. The Hizbullah man might also see a television ad for a home remedy, so broadcasting has to be hit, too, as well as grocery stores. In case the fighter is in a washroom equipped with a bidet (however unlikely), he must be prevented from using it, so water reservoirs are legitimate targets as well. And what if he calls an ambulance? Start knocking them out, too, and throw in a couple of hospitals for good measure.

If we assume that these kinds of facilities (and there have been dozens of others just as innocuous) are "terrorist infrastructure," perhaps it would be less time-consuming to enumerate those that are not. Hopefully someone can discern what these might be. One has to assume, after all, that at least some Hizbullah fighters like to smell flowers, for instance, so florists' shops are fair game. The same goes for just about anything human beings require for sustenance. Maybe, given the dietary restrictions followed by many practicing Muslims, alcohol is off-limits? But alcohol is not just an intoxicant. It's also an antiseptic, so anyone who stocks Johnny Walker on his shelves is hereby forewarned. How about pork farms? They seem safe right now, but give Israeli planners a few days to consider contingencies.

<snip>

Does the destruction of such targets serve any of the goals the Jewish state has enunciated? The answer is mixed at best. Certainly, Hizbullah's capabilities have been reduced, but its fighters have provided spirited and apparently well-coordinated defense against Israeli ground incursions, and its rockets continue to exact some small measure of revenge for the devastation meted out in Lebanon. Obviously the two soldiers are no closer to being released, and while Foreign Minister Fawzi Salloukh has said that they are in good health, that could change if and when the Israeli Air Force flattens the wrong building. A buffer zone might still be established, but to what end? The only real protection for residents of northern Israel is not an armed presence that will try to keep Hizbullah out of rocket range, but a serious look at the party's very real grievances.

<snip>

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp?edition_id=1&categ_id=1&article_id=74221

[BillZBubb]

1. Israel always lies. Their stated goals were a lie.

You can almost always be certain if the Israeli government says something, the truth is on the other side.

[jrd200x]

3. I am never certain of that

I don't think you have any way of knowing that.

[BeHereNow]

12. THINK!~ Israel is backed by the BIGGEST bunch of LIARS

to ever hit the world stage- The BUSH KKKABAL and the
lying sacks of shit that pass for our Congress and Senate.
What part of:
"Birds of a feather flock together" do you not understand?
BHN

[jrd200x]

2. How would we know?

We spend all our time complaining about the MSM being wrong, and now you're believing them?

[spindrifter]

18. Much of the information we are getting does not

come originally from the Corporate Media. Much is from sources in the Middle East that are not part of the so-called Main Stream. Many of us try to balance our postings to include news from Israeli sources as well as Arab sources.

[Crunchy Frog]

30. Normally the term MSM is used here to refer to the U.S.

corporate media. I'm not sure that a Lebanese newspaper would fit that criteria.

[Clarkie1]

4. How do we know there was not a weapons cache in the dairy factory?

This writer seems to taken it as a given that none of the places mentioned actually housed terrorists or weapons. How does he know that for certain? Is he privy to Israeli intelligence reports?

[msongs]

14. remember sadaam's baby milk factory, with hand written signs in only

english and not arabic?

you never know what those sneaky people are up to, so why not just bomb every thing?

msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[Clarkie1]

24. The Israelis are not bombing everything.

I think it is likely targets have been bombed that were not in fact what the intelligence said they were...intelligence is not perfect.

I do not agree with your suggestion, however, that the Israelis should bomb everything. It is important to minimize civilian casualties, so really I think they should use intelligence (as they are doing) when selecting targets...yes, I'm being a bit sarcastic in reply to your bit of sarcasm.

:sarcasm:

[Emit]

16. How do the Israelis know there were? n/t

[MadHound]

20. For you it seems that there is a weapons cache in every bombed building

And a terrorist cell in every bombed household. However given that there is aprox. 40,000 members of Hezbollah in Lebanon(and that is being generous), and also given that during this state of war, most of the weapons have either been used or are actually in the possession of Hezbollah members, your premise is statistically wrong the vast majority of the time. Sadly however, it seems that Israel seems to share your way of thinking.

[atreides1]

21. If Israeli intelligence was that good

Their attack on the Hezbollah leadership would have been a success, it wasn't.

By the way did they find that missile factory under the runways of the international airport, or was that another great find by Israeli intelligence.

And let's not forget the hit on the UN outpost, of which most are very well marked and the vaunted Israeli intelligence should have known exactly where it was at, I guess not.

None of us can say what the Israelis have planned, we know what Hezbollah is trying to do, they seem to be more open about destroying Israel, it sucks and I'm definitely against that idea, but
at least Hezbollah is honest, about what they want.

The Israelis seem to be hitting what they think are good targets, but I kind of don't buy what they're selling, at least not since they hit Tripoli, which isn't in Hezbollah's area of operation.

[lastliberalintexas]

35. I seriously do not understand pro-war posters

with peace sign avatars...


And before you or anyone else jumps my ass, do a search of my posts and you'll see I'm just a plain old run of the mill pacifist who has decried the violence of both sides. But posts like yours are mind boggling. How does the Bush government know there is not a terrorist cell operating out of your house? Does that give them justification to bomb your home to hell and back? Crazy.

[The Magistrate]

5. War Requires Funds, Sir

It would be interesting to know who owns some of these enterprises that have been demolished, and where the capital behind them came, and where their profits go. This is not information we are likely to receive from the author of this article....

[blonndee]

7. Nor from those who wiped them all out.

I'm not up to taking on your argument tonight, Magistrate, but that sounds far-fetched to me. Just sayin.

[The Magistrate]

8. It Is Not Far-Fetched, Ma'am

It is how things are done in underground enterprises that require ready cash. Whether it is the case in any particular instance, of course, is quite beyond my knowldege.

[Superman Returns]

23. Off topic,

Blondee-

The thread we were posting in got blocked. I was wrong, my past username was President Parker it was Senator Parker. Just to let you know.

[blonndee]

28. Superman,

it wasn't me who was questioning you. I hope you had a chance to read my post to you.

Peace

[Clarkie1]

10. Excellent point. nt

[bigtree]

13. We won't likely receive any information with any assurance of truth

from the ones who struck them either. How many incidents*of this collateral destruction do we swallow without any substantial accomplishment of Israel's stated goals?

What responsibility will Israel bear when these collateral attacks breed and inflame more resentment and more violent reprisals?

[Marie26]

15. IMO, the fact that

a certain building is owned by someone who's in Hiz. does not make it a valid military target, unless it actually contains weapons caches.

[The Magistrate]

19. And In My View, Ma'am, It Does

If the funds generated by the operation go to the support of the organization and its military activities.

[Marie26]

22. Hezbollah gets support

from all over the world, and especially from Iran. That's the real source of Hezbollah's fund & weaponry - you must know that. It's been in Lebanon 20+ years, w/many Shiite Lebanese members. Some of those members have shops, or own apt. buildings. I hope you're not saying that a residential apt. building is a legitimate military target just because of who the owners are. That blurs the line between military & civilian targets in a way that I find disturbing.

[The Magistrate]

26. No One, Ma'am, Ever Has Enough Money

Every clandestine organization takes steps to be less dependent on its sponsors, as the less dependent it is, the greater its freedom of action.

[bigtree]

25. some of those enterprises were reportedly schools and foodstores

are all 'enterprises' everywhere in Lebanon to be 'legitimate' targets?

I think the notion of stopping Hizbollah has gotten out of hand if everything can be attributed to destroying their 'enterprises'. It reminds of the justifications for Bush's 'war on terror'

[The Magistrate]

27. When The Stated Objective Is To Destroy An Organization, Sir

Then that is what is sought, and all organizations have an economic base. Stores of foodstuffs are a classic "dual use" item. Schools can be another name for training facilities and propaganda centers. War is an unpleasant business, Sir, and its inherent logics not particularly palatable, but the thing is not susceptible to reasonable anaysis on any terms but its own.

[bigtree]

33. in those equations where we weigh the collateral effects against

the goal the goal usually outweighs the negative effects anticipated.

In this case, I find it very hard to believe that most of these targets were not* the result of a free-for-all against all of the 'intelligence' garnered targets they had gathered over the five years they had been keeping track. The Iraq invasion was flawed in similar ways. The information didn't match the facts on the ground. I'm not convinced by the strident way that we are being assured that these targets are legitimate and necessary.I'm more convinced against them on the basis of the scope and nature of the evident destruction alone that many of these actions were far outside the defense needs of Israel, and are actually antithetical to their cause.

[Crunchy Frog]

31. With respect Sir

wouldn't that make the World Trade Center an equally valid military target, depending on one's perspective?

[The Magistrate]

32. It Could, Ma'am, Be So Regarded From Some Angles

It was a shrewdly chosen target.

[lastliberalintexas]

36. I guess so long as you're consistent...

[The Magistrate]

37. It Is My Endeavor To Be So, Ma'am

If a person does not apply a uniform standard, in my view neither the charges nor defences they may advance deserve to be regarded as anything but rhetorical bludgeons.

[Ms. Clio]

39. wasn't that Ward Churchill's argument about the WTC?

on edit: never mind, that will teach me to read the whole thread.

[bigtree]

6. I don't like the reference to "poor little . . ."

But, the author makes good point. Our country was rightly outraged and horrified by the destruction and carnage left by Katrina. The images back from Lebanon show acres of destruction, skyscrapers of destruction from what are being described as pinpoint strikes.

This author makes very good points about the level and breadth of destruction from Israel's reprisals. There needs to be an accounting.


Reflections in Lebanon of a Failed Bush Doctrine (7-25-2006)

[Igel]

9. As of Thursday or Friday the Israelis claimed to have

struck over 1000 targets in over 2000 sorties. This does not count artillery strikes, or missiles launched from helicopters across the border.

This means that the writer can show that some 501 or more targets have no connection to the stated goal of dismantling Hezbollah as a military force. That the targets neither involve Hezbollah's communications, funding sources, or resupply sources; that the targets have no military use, keeping in mind that commanders and leaders, licit targets, also live with their families in residential areas and have offices that have two purposes, one civil and one military. It implies being able to state that houses targeted did not have missiles launched from them, nor have stockpiles of weapons under them.

I have no idea how a sane person could even assume the task of showing this, much less claiming it as a fact. But we have to go further.

And we have to claim that those things that clearly weren't military in nature and yet were hit weren't believed to have any military purpose. That, as one pundit put it, a cement truck from 20k feet doesn't look like a missile launcher. That there was no intelligence that a truck claimed to be carrying milk hadn't actually been carrying arms. This is an impossible task.

The author makes claims and expects us to accept his ignorance as accurate, and the results as proof of that his ignorance was true.

[bigtree]

17. the same can be said for your argument.

where is your proof that they were. There needs to be an accounting of this from Israel. That begins with questions about intentions and results. Those aren't out of line. I'll bet this author is in a pretty good position to judge all that. I hope that those who have insisted that Israel's actions are above board will remain engaged to insure that they are in the end.

[The Magistrate]

29. Israel Certainly Should Account For Its Actions, Sir

[Igel]

34. However, I'm not making a claim as to facts.

I'm make a claim as to possibilities.

There are three options here: Proof of war crimes; proof of Israeli innocence; sufficient leeway to allow the standard assumption of innocence to apply in the absence of sufficient proof. I'm in the third category. You've tried to put me in the second, probably because you've chosen to impose a false choice, not being aware of the third option; this is a fallacy. The OP is in the first group.

To claim war crimes, in a way that should be taken seriously, at least, you need to show that the facilities were either non-military, or that the harm to the civilian population exceeds the military benefit. The IAF doesn't have to prove its innocence; I can remain agnostic if I simply can think of a truly plausible reason (which is a trivial matter in most cases); the OP has to prove his point. Neither I nor the IAF have any burden of proof. Reversing the usual burden of proof is an additional fallacy.

Most of the OP's claims are about facilities that have dual use, even if he says that they're clearly civilian. Other claims are that facilities and people clearly of a non-military nature were intentionally targeted, with Israel knowing they were civilian; however, I don't see how he can prove his claims without access to IAF intelligence and targeting information.

Let's take a clear example; I don't know if it's one of the OP's or not. The IAF targeted, and destroyed, non-Hezbollah (Christian, IIRC) tv towers. Only civilian use, it seems. War crime, QED. But they also are key to relaying mobile and cellphone traffic. Ah, it compounds the civilian damage. QED! Not to fast: a standard military goal is to disrupt communication between HQ and the men in the field. The Hezbollah commanders aren't in the field; they're safe. They're communicating either by cellphone, mobile phone, or satellite phone. If the former, you take out mobile/cellphone relay towers. Even if they also serve as civilian tv broadcast towers, they also have a military use. At this juncture, one must show that the IAF knew that Hezbollah's communications weren't plausibly routed through those towers, or that the harm to the civilian population is outweighed by the military benefit. One cannot simply pretend it doesn't exist. But crucially one does not have to prove that Hezbollah was using the towers.

[bigtree]

38. amazing how all of this is allowed to devalue the lives of those affected

the innocents affected, in the justification that other innocents were at risk. These types of strikes should be balanced against the effect on the innocents on the other side, but the Lebanese have been determined less important than the ones Israel says they are defending with the destruction of lives and infrastructure. That determination has been allowed to stand because of the weight of the military force Israel is employing and has at it's disposal. The UN is condeming them all over the place so I don't understand how the determination that these attacks are justified is allowed to carry the day outside of the fact that the more powerful prevail.

[BeHereNow]

11. My personal favorite was distributing leaflets to civilians

warning them to leave the area AFTER they bombed the
fuck out of all the exit routes.
It's fucking obscene, what is happening over there.
AND I am REALLY pissed, every inch as pissed about Iraq,
and the fact that MY tax dollars are funding the depravity against civilians
in both Iraq and Lebanon.
This is ALL about neocon hegemonic demonic agenda for
the ME.
No one can tell me that Israel is "defending itself."
Not when they are armed to the teeth and backed by our criminal
congress and neocon administration.
Anyone who supports this shit has no ability to
connect the dots.
BHN