Iran losing all ability to disrupt Iraq pulls the trigger with Hezbollah to show it can still disrupt matters.

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/3D7DD5AC-6C8C-44EE-A39D-EACB9A8FDD8B.htm

http://www.asharqalawsat.com/english/news.asp?section=2&id=12686

http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives/192671.php

Quote :

"Al-Qaeda has reportedly called on its operatives to go to Lebanon and defend what it called the Sunni community of the country. The report came while some Arab media outlets described the current clashes in Lebanon as a fight between Sunni and Shia communities. The TV network reported that al-Qaeda on all of its websites urged its operatives to defend the Sunni community of Lebanon."

http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=54916§ionid=351020203

I have no idea how this will turn out. But at least Iraq is gonna be fine

5/10/2008 10:27:38 AM

Quote :

"Iran losing all ability to disrupt Iraq pulls the trigger with Hezbollah to show it can still disrupt matters"

I honestly can't sum it up better. Don't worry, Obama's camp has the low down on a computer somewhere from that employee they just fired, so we are all safe.

5/10/2008 11:34:17 AM

does john mccain have the low down? if not i dont want to vote for him

5/10/2008 11:36:58 AM

Low Down/Jibba Jabba 08

5/10/2008 12:20:48 PM

Quote :

"BEIRUT, Lebanon - Hezbollah-led opposition forces will withdraw all their gunmen from Beirut in compliance with an army request, Hezbollah TV reported Saturday. The move comes after the army called on gunmen to get off the street and reopen the roads, according to an opposition statement. But the statement said that a "civil disobedience" campaign will continue until its demands are met. Hezbollah gunmen seized most of the capital's Muslim sector Friday in the worst sectarian strife since a 15-year civil war ended nearly two decades ago. Prime Minister Fuad Saniora called on the army Saturday to restore law and order across Lebanon and remove the gunmen from the streets, accusing Hezbollah of staging an armed coup. But Saniora also appeared to be backing away from the government decisions that triggered the street confrontation, offering a compromise that is unlikely to be accepted by Hezbollah. A similar offer from Sunni majority leader Saad Hariri earlier was rejected. Hezbollah seized the Sunni neighborhoods of Beirut Thursday after its leader Hassan Nasrallah accused the U.S.-backed government of "declaring war" on his group by its recent decision to consider the group's communications network illegal and remove the airport security chief for alleged ties to the militants. Saniora said he did not declare war on Hezbollah and the decision on the communications issue would be handed over the army to deal with, a position that the opposition had already rejected. "The decisions have not been (officially) issued and will be referred to the army command," he said. Saniora also said Lebanon can no longer tolerate Hezbollah keeping freely its weapons — signaling that the U.S.-backed government was toughening its stand against the Shiite militant opposition group despite the government coalition's loss of ground in street fighting in Beirut in the past few days. Saniora's harsh criticism of Hezbollah, his first since the fighting began, was bound to further escalate the fierce power struggle between the government and Syrian- and Iranian-backed opposition. Click for related content Q & A: What's happening in Lebanon? Hezbollah gunmen seize large areas of Beirut Addressing the army, he said: "I call on it once again to impose security on all, in all areas, deter the gunmen and immediately remove them from the street ... to restore normal life." Although he talked tough, his embattled government appears unable to move against Hezbollah or force the army to act. The army has stayed out of the fighting and has deployed troops in the last 24 hours in some areas to protect besieged leaders of the pro-government factions. But it has not intervened with the Shiite fighters who seized large areas of Muslim west Beirut from pro-government Sunnis. PM fights with words Saniora has been holed up at his government headquarters protected by Lebanese troops after Hezbollah and its allies swept through the Muslim sector of the capital after sectarian clashes that have killed 25 people. "We can no longer accept that Hezbollah and its weapons be kept like this. The Lebanese can no longer continue to accept this situation," he said in a nationally televised addressed. But he said government was not planning on forcefully attempting to disarm the group which fought Israel in the 2006 war and possesses a huge arsenal of rockets and guns along with thousands of fighters. He said the fate of the weapons would have to be decided through state institutions and dialogue. The dream of democracy in Lebanon has been dealt "a poisonous stab the armed coup carried out by Hezbollah and its allies," he said, saying Beirut was an "occupied, besieged" city by Hezbollah and its allies. "Hezbollah must realize that the force of arms will not intimidate us or make us retreat from our position," he said. Deadly clash Rivals clashed in a deadly gun battle in a remote region of northern Lebanon Saturday, killing at least 12 gunmen and wounding 20 others, said Lebanese security and hospital officials. Saturday's battle occurred in the town of Halba in Akkar, a remote Sunni region in northernmost Lebanon. The pro-government fighters stormed the office of the SSNP and set it ablaze after the battle. "

5/10/2008 12:37:40 PM

that is a rough looking picture

jesus

5/10/2008 4:00:09 PM

Quote :

"hezbollah is a legitimate army, using guerrilla tactics. Israelis call them terrorists. Hezbollah's problem is they dont know how to spin the media, like the terrorist Israelis can. now see, when the US uses terror tactics we rationalize them like so: 'we had to nuke them slant bastards, cuz a full invasion woulda cost a lot and hurt too much. so if we vaporize hundreds of thousands of innocent old men, women and children, that will scare the Japs into surrendering.' see? nice and tidy. just plug your ears while you repeat it 500 times. guaranteed to help you feel superior."

Quote :

"al-qaeda is not a military organization, and they dont engage other militaries. they target civilians hezbollah is a uniformed military organization that engages opposing military units. when they are outgunned and/or underfunded, they move to guerrilla tactics. assymetric warfare does not equal terrorism."

JoeSalisbury

http://thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=421131&page=3

5/10/2008 6:11:58 PM

???????? ????????? ?? ?????

edit: Damnit, can't see Arabic on TWW.

[Edited on May 10, 2008 at 8:27 PM. Reason : ]

5/10/2008 8:26:43 PM

5/10/2008 8:42:53 PM

I don't know if its Iran primarily driving this move. From what I gather, Hezbollah's engaged in a power struggle with the anti-Syrian factions within Lebanon, and when some of their guys got sacked from power, they decided to take matters into their own hands.

5/10/2008 9:55:17 PM

http://www.michaeltotten.com/

Very interesting.

Quote :

"May 12, 2008 Jumblatt's Men Set Back Iran's Militia in Lebanon By Lee Smith Our friend and colleague in Lebanon Elie Fawaz writes in to remind us that The War for Lebanon has not even begun yet in earnest and Hezbollah's “victory” in Beirut is not all it seems: “So, we know that Hezbollah's well-trained fighters are in control of most of west Beirut. The decision taken by Walid Jumblat and Saad al-Hariri not to fight back in Beirut, but rather hand most of their positions to the army ended any illusion regarding the sanctity of the “resistance” – that it would never turn its weapons inward, for now its hands are dripping with the blood of innocent Lebanese. But it's different in the Chouf where Jumblatt's forces bloodied Hezbollah. “The Chouf is calm now after fighting over the weekend in which forces belonging to Talal Arslan, part of the Hezbollah-led opposition, jumped sides and joined alongside Jumblatt's men. As the Progressive Socialist Party website reports: 'The free people of the Shouf roll back an attack by the Iranian militias causing severe casualties in lives and equipment.' “Hence, Jumblatt sounded more assertive last night on LBC news because he knows he got the upper-hand in the Chouf battles (Reuters is reporting at least 14 Hezbollah gunmen killed. Meanwhile, the PSP website is claiming 32 Hezbollah fighters killed and 250 wounded.). He was willing to hand his offices over to the army to deflect some of the tension and because he wants to avoid a civil war.” In short, what happened in West Beirut was a given. According to a report from the pro-Hezbollah Lebanese paper Al-Akhbar, this coup had been planned well in advance and its mastermind was the recently assassinated Hezbollah commander Imad Mughniyeh. The government may in fact have forced Nasrallah to show his hand at a time of its choosing, not his. Hezbollah's walkover in Beirut came as a surprise to no one; nor did the performance of the army, except perhaps the Bush administration which must now reconsider the amount of money it has spent on equipment and training for the Lebanese Armed Forces. As for the pro-government fighters in Beirut, contrary to most press accounts, there are no Sunni “militias” in the capital. Rather, it is mostly defensive armament, private citizens with small arms defending their families, homes and property. So it is hardly any surprise that Hezbollah managed to overrun Sunni neighborhoods easily. But that is merely one small part of Lebanon, and while the attention of the foreign press has focused on fighting in one sector of the capital, events throughout the rest of the country suggest that Hezbollah's “rout” is illusory. Tony Badran, drawing on various Lebanese accounts and his own reporting, offers this account: “After taking over West Beirut, Hezbollah tried to move to the Shouf, where there are two Shiite towns, Kayfoun and Qmatiyye. Hezbollah is trying to link them up to the Dahieh through the Karameh road, which links Dahieh to Choueifat-Aramoun-Doha-Deir Qoubel-Aytat-Kayfoun and Qmatiye, so that it can make encroachments, maintain access routes and not allow the Druze to surround the two Shiite towns. “That was the plan, but Hezbollah got a severe beating in the Shouf. They were not able to penetrate anything, relying instead – for the first time in the current fighting – on artillery/mortar fire. To no avail. Yesterday alone we heard that seven Hezbollah fighters who tried to infiltrate got killed. “Hence, Hezbollah burned its Druze ally, Talal Arslan. Whatever tiny following Arslan had before this, it's safe to say it has been seriously damaged. Witness for instance the fate of Syria's little Druze creation, the pitbull Wi'am Wahhab, who, it is rumored, has taken his followers (which on a good day may actually reach about 100) and left the Shouf altogether. “Meanwhile in Northern Lebanon, the pro-opposition Alawites are being slammed by Sunnis in the Baal Mohsen area. Similarly, Sunnis in the Akkar area in the north attacked and torched offices of the SSNP, Baath party, Hezbollah and Aoun, killing a good number of SSNPs. As with Arslan, we see a parallel development, former PM Omar Karami, a Sunni who is at the same time trying to support Hezbollah while shoring up his Sunni bona fides. So he lamented the “deep wound” that has occurred between Sunnis and Shia, and told Hezbollah that if this becomes a sectarian fight, then we have two choices: to either stay home, or fight with our sect. “So far we've had the luxury of not seeing this sad charade play out in the Christian areas. Sleiman Frangieh has been inconspicuously quiet these last few days. Michel Aoun, on the other hand, can't help himself. So, while there are rumors that he might be urging Hezbollah in to East Beirut, others are watching to see if Nasrallah will attempt to do with the tiny Shiite communities in Nab'a, Metn, and Keserwan/Jbeil, what they did with Qmatiyye and Kayfoun. “And so, the Party of God has achieved the 'great victory' of conquering a few Beiruti streets, terminating the credibility of the army, hastening the prospect of its disintegration, and damaging beyond repair for the foreseeable future, the Shiites' ties to the Lebanese social fabric.” Hezbollah and its allies have won one small battle in a war that has just begun. "

5/12/2008 11:20:35 AM

if i were hezbollah i'd get syria and iran start pummeling the shit out of israel with no warning

we are so busy with the primaries / china relief / myanmar relief / iraq / afghanistan that it would take too long for a US response to defend them


too bad for them i guess; they are too busy doing what the democratic party is doing: suiciding itself with an internal civil war.


[Edited on May 12, 2008 at 8:39 PM. Reason : .]

5/12/2008 8:38:29 PM

if i were the middle east i'd want mccain to win so the price of oil keeps going up and they keep making more money

5/12/2008 8:39:12 PM

yeh bc mccain said he will accept their oil at high prices just for fun. yeh let's equate mccain with high oil prices. hahaahaha

5/12/2008 8:40:24 PM

Quote :

"let's equate mccain with high oil prices"

whats wrong with this?

5/12/2008 8:42:02 PM

my bets would be on Obama for higher gas prices. A half assed attempt at pulling out of Iraq may not have a good effect.

5/12/2008 8:45:58 PM

the following --could-- occur if obama is elected. i hope he has contengency plans

1) withdrawl from iraq in small stages
2) iran invades iraq, takes aim on israel
3) hezbollah, syria, palestine get drawn into conflict to start chaos all over israel
4) gas prices rise to >$10 a gallon in the US.
5) obama releases oil reserve
6) troops sent BACK to middle east to secure area
7) US slips into depression

somehow my guess is that russia and china won't help us much either if something like this happens

[Edited on May 12, 2008 at 8:52 PM. Reason : .]

5/12/2008 8:51:49 PM

The one thing that keeps all of that from not happening is that the US will have some sort of presence in Iraq forever. Just like Germany, just like Japan.

This means that if you attack Iraq, you attack the US. And we have 1 bomb that cant take out 1/2 of an entire armored column. Thank you military channel.

5/12/2008 9:08:36 PM

yeah seriously we need to keep at least 20k people there forever imo

5/12/2008 9:10:59 PM

And of course, the only thing that allows the US to keep any kind of presence in Iraq is the Iraqi people. Some will argue that having a US presence in Iraq will me a magnet for terrorists and such. Well, our defense is the Iraqi population. They know if someone comes in the area and is suspicious or foreign. That is the importance of the moral high ground, and that is what we have achieved.

The Iraqi government is another story. They have to prove themselves to the populace. They did in Basra, they just need to keep up the reconstruction and aid. Need to do the same thing in the north with the push through Mosul. And finally prove themselves to central Baghdad. Mainly by making sure the Iraqi police isn't corrupt.

5/13/2008 5:36:26 PM

Quote :

"Well, our defense is the Iraqi population. They know if someone comes in the area and is suspicious or foreign."

Suspicious or foreign like the Americans who invaded and plan to occupy their country for the next 100 years?

5/13/2008 10:27:19 PM

If I have not convinced you how the Iraqis feel about the American military by now, then I am not going to waste my time.

And besides, its not up to you, its up to them.

5/14/2008 10:23:36 AM

i'll be convinced when people stop dying in large numbers.....nothing more, nothing less.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/136788

interesting article describing a terror analyst's prediction that Iraq will end up much like present day lebanon....perpetually semi-stable.

5/14/2008 10:34:49 AM

http://search.barnesandnoble.com/Moment-of-Truth-in-Iraq/Michael-Yon/e/9780980076325/?itm=1

As he says in his book, you cannot convince anyone without going into excruciating detail about Iraq. Obviously I have failed in this. If you cant be convinced by news reports, then maybe this book can handle it.

The answer is there. You have to acknowledge it.

^Iran = Hezbullah
Iran = Special groups in Iraq
Iran losing in Iraq

Iraq /= Lebanon

[Edited on May 14, 2008 at 10:51 AM. Reason : dd]

5/14/2008 10:50:17 AM

Let's invade Lebanon and Iran; showing all those towel heads whose boss. RAWR RAWR USA #1; only we can wage war

5/14/2008 10:55:34 AM

Quote :

"If you cant be convinced by news reports"

but I am convinced by news reports, just of the opposite conclusion. I'm sure a large part of the population is in favor of the troops mission, likewise you're crazy to think everyone in Iraq views the "occupation" favorably. When the violence stops, i'll share your view.

5/14/2008 10:57:29 AM

Most likely there will be a Dem in office after the election.

I want you to pay attention to how drastic the coverage of Iraq changes. There will be 1 of 2 possible changes. Either they start saying its complete anarchy, or its very stable.

Since there is no evidence to support the former option, you will see the latter. Then all the arguments in the media will be that Iraq is so stable, that we do not need to be there. Therefore we should pull out.

The generals will argue against pulling out to fast. And hopefully we can meet in the middle and not pull the carpet out from under the Iraqis during the draw down.

5/14/2008 11:00:57 AM

Quote :

"but I am convinced by news reports, just of the opposite conclusion. I'm sure a large part of the population is in favor of the troops mission, likewise you're crazy to think everyone in Iraq views the "occupation" favorably. When the violence stops, i'll share your view."

If the Iraqis viewed us as these evil occupiers, then we would be where we were in late 06. They do not, and all we have left is to finish up AQI and deal with the criminality created by the Mahdi Army.

The only way they think of us as occupiers again is if we dont draw down and stay regardless of the security situation. Which none of us think is going to happen.

5/14/2008 11:04:22 AM

Quote :

"They do not, and all we have left is to finish up AQI and deal with the criminality created by the Mahdi Army."

you make it sound so easy. The Mahdi army is a force within Iraq, consequently, made up of Iraqi citizens.....am I missing something, or are they unhappy?

In in years past, the story was "if we can deal with the secretarian violence, we can stabilize the country", or "AQI is the cause of all the problems in Iraq". Well, both of those problems have been stopped or contained, yet the violence continues.....but now its largely shite on shite violence, and the story becomes "if we can deal with the Mahdi militia, we can stabilize Iraq"? Sounds oddly familiar, and i'm not buying it.

Like I said, when the violence stops (regardless of what particular group is to blame), i'll be convinced.

5/14/2008 11:17:36 AM

Quote :

"secretarian violence"

damn those secretaries can throw some mad cat-fights, can't they?

[but i am with you 200% about what you said ]

5/14/2008 11:27:22 AM

there are mean ass motherfuckers out there in the holy land claiming that piece of turf

damn, what is so special about that place

5/14/2008 11:33:59 AM

Quote :

"damn those secretaries can throw some mad cat-fights"

5/14/2008 11:38:49 AM

the secretarian violence was out of control within the US in the years between 1861-1865

5/14/2008 11:56:34 AM

You say when violence stops. Do you mean violence all together or organized violence between government/us forces and disruptive forces?

There will most likely be lingering violence for years, just not any scale that can threaten the government or overall security.

5/14/2008 4:58:48 PM

Quote :

"you make it sound so easy."

The reason I see this as easy is because of several things.

1) The major actors against the Iraqi government are localized and have diminishing public support. This means that they can be targeted easily militarily. This wasn't the case in late 06 because AQI and sectarian violence was everywhere. There was no clear cut solution. The conditions on the ground now are, strategically, very easy to deal with. As we saw in Basra.

2) The Iraqi population is tired of violence in general.

3) The Iraqi government and US forces know what they are doing. They have been successful in counter insurgency all over the country and have learned from their mistakes and successes. And the US forces have become extremely successful in tactics both militarily and politically to get public support.

4) There are no more major actors left. None. Like I said before, you don't have anyone left with large scale organized tactics that can do anything close to what the Mahdi army or AQI tried to do. The only way violence returns on a tactical level is if something happens where the former insurgents that allied with us (see 1920's brigade, etc) feel that fighting the US forces is necessary again. But, the reason this has a small chance of happening is because we are not working against the Iraqi people. And the insurgents that allied with us are reasonable and can see this. AQI was not.

5) Many many more Iraqi security forces. The Iraqi government will be able to police itself in 1-3 years depending on progress.

6) The timing. We still have over 6 months for the dust to settle from the major engagements that are ongoing. I say 6 months in case whoever is elected does some bullshit crazy withdrawal. If the Mahdi army of AQI were in the state they were say, 3 months ago at the end of this year, I would be worried, because they could still be considered a tactical threat.

So, expect small, random violence for a while after Mosul and Sadr city are wrapped up. I just see this as tactically easy. With tactically hard being 06.

But, there is always Iran.

[Edited on May 14, 2008 at 5:31 PM. Reason : gdf]

5/14/2008 5:29:31 PM

Quote :

"You say when violence stops. Do you mean violence all together or organized violence between government/us forces and disruptive forces?"

when the whole country operates w/o curfews, barriers cutting off sections of cities, car bombs, roadside bombs, the need for a heavily fortified green zone, suicide bombings ect......or at least to the point the vast majoity of out troops can come home.

Quote :

"The Iraqi government and US forces know what they are doing. They have been successful in counter insurgency all over the country and have learned from their mistakes and successes. And the US forces have become extremely successful in tactics both militarily and politically to get public support."

I'm not convinced of that:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24582767/

corruption is running rampant in the highest levels of government, which is still deeply divided by sect, and the US turns a blind eye.....this can't bode well for peace in an "emeging democracy"....how many mulligans do they get?

Quote :

"There are no more major actors left. None. Like I said before, you don't have anyone left with large scale organized tactics that can do anything close to what the Mahdi army or AQI tried to do. we are not working against the Iraqi people. And the insurgents that allied with us are reasonable and can see this. AQI was not."

the mahdi army is still a significant threat, they're organized and apparently well funded and trained. But the biggest difference between them and previous threats, they make a point not to hurt Iraqis, with al sadr making statements saying the "invaders" are the only targets not Iraqi "brothers".....imo, this is potentially the worst threat yet, but unlike the previous threats, it seems like they can be reasoned with.

5/14/2008 10:46:21 PM

good, let 'em kill each other

5/14/2008 11:45:26 PM

This is gonna be good.

Hezbullah done fucked up now

Quote :

"May 14, 2008 Hezbollah's Third Botched Coup Attempt By Tony Badran (cross-posted at Across the Bay) In three years, since the murder of former PM Rafik Hariri, Hezbollah has attempted three coups — and failed. On March 8, 2005, Hezbollah thought that by rallying supporters they would nip the independence movement in the bud, maintain the Syrian occupation of Lebanon, and move on as though nothing happened. One week later, March 14 happened, in large part as a reaction to Hezbollah's rally. It secured the expulsion of the murderous Assad regime's occupying force. Then in 2006, with the July war and its aftermath, especially the movement in December 06-January 07. In their first attempt in January 23-25, Hezbollah tried its coup and relied on Aounist elements. That proved a disaster as the Aounist riffraff were done away with in a matter of hours, ending any prospect of relying on Christian proxies to do Hezbollah's bidding. The Lebanese Forces' Samir Geagea, whose supporters were instrumental in dispersing the Aounists, was the central figure during that coup. Then came this last attempt, which Nasrallah deliberately placed in parallel to the aftermath of the Hariri assassination: i.e., this was intended to be the official reversal of the independence movement. After Hezbollah took west Beirut, attacking civilians in their homes, ransacking and terrorizing neighborhoods and media outlets, following a conscious decision by Hariri not to put up a fight, the Iranian militia foolishly thought that it can just as easily overrun Jumblat on his own turf in the Shouf. Hezbollah had another thing coming. For three days of intensive fighting in the Shouf, and contrary to the lying info ops and disinformation of Hezbollah water carriers like this clueless Hezbollah willful tool (on whose propaganda for Hezbollah I've written in the past and will soon be ripping to shreds once again), not a single village in the Shouf fell to Hezbollah. Not Niha, like that Hezbollah watercarrier MacLeod wrote, not anything. Quite the contrary. According to the PSP and other local sources, more than three dozen Hezbollah fighters were killed and a number of their vehicles were destroyed. The fact that they had to introduce artillery and vehicles (mounted with heavy machine guns, like so, and recoilless rifles, like so) only showed that they could not make advances into the villages. Not just that, but Hezbollah's attack has led Talal Arslan's fighters to switch and fight alongside the PSP against Hezbollah, undermining Hezbollah's tiny Druze ally — which is precisely why Jumblat put him in the forefront from the get go (it was not, as shrill commentators and dishonest flacks read it, a sign of “weakness.” It was a shrewed move by a master tactician.). At the end of the day, the PSP maintained control of the strategic hills of the Barouk to the east and Ras al-Jabal west of Aley, overlooking the Dahiyeh. And so, Jumblat and the Shouf played a historical role these last few days (and I will have a lengthy post on Jumblat's role in this crisis asap) and have essentially botched Hezbollah's coup. All the idiotic commentators, from Paul Salem onwards, who talked about a different “political balance” as a result of the fighting, don't and never did know what they're talking about. This is political suicide for Hezbollah, who has already made contacts with Hariri through a third party informing him that they're looking for an exit. They know they're in a jam. Not just that, now the government is in a position to leverage rescinding its decisions — which it could never implement to begin with! — and we're already seeing M14 and government sources expressing that. For one, all M14 officials — including Hariri who made a powerful, uncompromising speech yesterday — are now unanimous about placing the fate of Hezbollah's weapons as the first item on any “dialogue” agenda. Gone are the days of the “sanctity” of the weapons of the “resistance.” Minister Joe Sarkis has added that any rescinding of the decisions has to be met by not just a withdrawal of armed men from the streets and the reopening of all roads, but also the evacuation of the tent city in downtown Beirut. The mere fact that M14 and the government are bartering the rescinding of a decision that was never going to be implemented (and if the government was illegitimate, according to Hezbollah, then why even bother focusing on its decisions and thereby affirm its legitimacy?) suggests, regardless of outcome, that they know that there's no “new balance” advantageous to Hezbollah that forces them to capitulate. Army Commander Suleiman is now under tons of pressure. Hariri himself criticized the Army's performance, and we know that 40 senior officers submitted their resignation (which would've split the Army) in protest of Suleiman's handling of the situation (and we also know that criminal pro-Aounist officers were particularly egregious during the crisis). Saudi outlets have even criticized the Army's performance, putting more pressure on Suleiman to get his act together if he wants to become president (especially now that any gambit about Hezbollah tilting the balance has failed). The US, which also has leverage through its aid to the Army might also do the same. These kinds of pressures, domestic, regional and international, and Suleiman's susceptibility to them, is why Syria won't take a chance with him. Anyone who doesn't fall and lick Bashar's boots without hesitation at a moment's notice cannot be trusted as far as the murderer of Damascus is concerned, and it's why Syria knows that it must return militarily to Lebanon in order to rule it. Even doing it by proxy, through Hezbollah, hasn't worked. This is far from over. In fact, this has only just begun. "

More here

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=42984

And here

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=42894

[Edited on May 15, 2008 at 4:31 PM. Reason : dasd]

5/15/2008 4:30:53 PM

Here is an essay breaking down why Iran pulled the trigger in Lebanon.

Look for Lebanon to be the center of the Jihad movement in the future now that Iraq is no longer a valid front.

http://talisman-gate.blogspot.com/2008/05/irans-shifting-strategy.html

Quote :

" Iran’s Shifting Strategy By NIBRAS KAZIMI May 12, 2008 The healing in Iraq and the deterioration in Lebanon are not unrelated. In fact, Iraq will serve as both cause and effect to Lebanon’s misfortunes. Iran, eclipsed in Sadr City, had decided to allow its sectarian acolytes to put on a show of strength in Beirut. And the jihadists of Al Qaeda’s ilk, soon to be eclipsed in Mosul, will migrate to Beirut to meet Iran’s challenge. Five years ago, there was a hope that held Iraq as a would-be beacon for democracy throughout the Middle East, but that vision had too many determined enemies both inside and outside Iraq. Yet as the situation there darkened through the actions of these regressive forces, the spontaneous outpouring of liberty demonstrated by the Lebanese people seemed to validate the notion that democracy and liberty would take in the region, and that the hope for what Iraq may portend was not misplaced. But the Cedar Revolution, as the March 2005 events of Beirut are remembered, also had too many internal and external enemies determined to spoil the elation. Two countries that were dead-set against Iraq succeeding were Syria and Iran. These are also the two countries most responsible for fomenting political paralysis and chaos in Lebanon. In Iraq, the Iranians and the Syrians began a joint-partnership aimed at harnessing the disruptive energies of the Mahdi Army as a weapon by which to retaliate against America should either of them get attacked, as well as acting as a force keeping Iraq in a state of permanent disorder. Syria’s influence on the Sadrist movement from which the Mahdi Army springs is often overlooked: Damascus was a refuge for many prominent Sadrists during the latter years of Saddam Hussein’s tyranny, and the Syrian Baathists brokered the initial rapprochement between the Sadrist old guard and Iran. Many of these Sadrist apparatchiks were openly hostile to the Iranians and Iran’s preferred acolytes in Iraq such as the Hakim family, long-standing rivals of the Muqtada al-Sadr’s father, the man who founded the Sadrist movement. Actually, many of them continue secretly to believe that Saddam’s regime had nothing to do with their leader’s murder in early 1999 and lay the blame solely on the Hakims and Iran. However, after the first major confrontation between the Sadrists and American troops in the spring of 2004, the Iranians saw potential in Sadr’s thugs at around the same time as they were becoming increasingly disappointed with the Badr Corps, the Iranian-trained militia under the leadership of the Hakim family. The Hakims had become too invested in, and integrated within, the Iraqi state — their revenues from contracts and trade earned inside Iraq exceeded the overall budget of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard, which had funded them previously — and could not be counted on to act as Iran’s agents of disorder. Whereas the Hakim turned independent as they didn’t need Iran anymore, the Sadrists were desperate for arms and training, and Iran was more than willing to accommodate them with the Syrians acting as go-betweens. It was in this vein that the first batch of Iranian-administered training was supposed to take place in Damascus during November 2004. It was geared towards turning ten of the top Mahdi Army field commanders into the security chiefs of a parallel intelligence agency working on behalf of the Iranians. The seminar did not take place on time, and it is unclear whether it ever subsequently took place in Damascus. But other training, on security matters and terrorism, did take place in a camp near Tehran, according to captured Mahdi Army commanders in Iraq, and it was administered by instructors from Lebanese Hezbollah. It should also be noted that the political channel through which the Syrian leadership maintains its relationship with Hezbollah — primarily through General Muhammad Nassif, ostensibly the Syrian prime minister’s deputy on security matters — is the very same channel through which the Syrians communicate with the Sadrists. Thus, the Iranians and the Syrians were hoping to turn the rag-tag elements of the Mahdi Army into an Iraqi version of Hezbollah, with both a political wing represented by Mr. Sadr and a military wing that they called the majamee’ alkhasa, or “Special Groups,” a name chosen in Tehran and not a technical term invented by American commanders as so many Iraq-watchers seem to think. And boy, was that a mistake: the Mahdi Army as a whole and the Special Groups in particular have collapsed after seven weeks of fighting against a confident and capable Iraqi Army that was bolstered by American air cover and logistical support. On Thursday, the Sadrists effectively offered their surrender to Prime Minister Maliki, who had earlier put them on notice that he would smash into their redoubts, especially Baghdad’s slum of Sadr City, if they continued to act as saboteurs. Mr. Maliki was prepared to go all the away, including displacing hundreds of thousands of refugees from Sadr City and arresting Sadrist parliamentarians. Iran had lost and the leaders in Tehran needed to save face fast. Iran needed to show that it could create mischief around the region for that has always been one of Tehran’s strategic strengths. That is why they pushed Hezbollah to overreact when given a juicy provocation by the American-backed cabinet of Fouad al-Siniora. The Lebanese government has done and said many provocative things in the past but Hezbollah chose this particular provocation to throw a theatric and violent tantrum. The situation in Lebanon is immensely complex and there are too many factors to list as to why it had been so messy, yet it was a manageable mess that never seemed to boil over — that is, until Hezbollah decided to rampage through Beirut and humiliate the Siniora government and the March 14 coalition that supports it; showing them up as weak and feckless, and in turn embarrassing America and Saudi Arabia for being unable to do anything to help their allies. This was no coup or deft move aimed at breaking the political stalemate: Iran was simply flexing its muscles in Beirut through Hezbollah because Iran’s other pawns were shown-up as feckless and weak in Sadr City. That too was a major mistake. The Iranians and the Syrians may have concluded that they have passed the worst of the Sunni-Shia tensions that were roiling the Middle East over the last couple of years. In particular, the ruling Alawites of Syria, a Shia-offshoot minority, were worried about internal fall-out should the majority Sunni Syrians get exposed to headlines blaring sectarians strife in Lebanon next door. However, recent polling from the Middle East seemed to indicate that being virulently anti-American and anti-Israeli was enough to offset the stigma of being a Shia or an Alawite among Sunni audiences, and this may have emboldened the Syrians to go along with Iran’s plan. But there was no escaping the potent imagery of armed Shia gangsters, under orders from Hezbollah and its affiliates, seemingly emasculating Beirut’s Sunnis and wounding their pride, especially given the rising sectarian temperatures in Lebanon that had never abated. Suddenly, the Sunnis of Lebanon felt exposed and no longer able to trust their established communal leaders, such as the Hariri family, to protect them. That is why they may look elsewhere for muscle, and that’s why jihadist internet forums have lighted up with giddy expectations of taking the jihad against the Shias from the streets of Baghdad to the streets of Beirut. Mr. Maliki has just ordered the launch of a much-anticipated military campaign to rid Mosul, Iraq’s third largest city, of whatever significant vestige of Al Qaeda’s remaining in Iraq. The inevitable jihadist collapse there will push more and more jihadists to re-establish their efforts elsewhere, and nowhere looks more promising than Lebanon."

[Edited on May 18, 2008 at 8:37 PM. Reason : dasd]

5/18/2008 8:36:57 PM

Quote :

"Thus, the Iranians and the Syrians were hoping to turn the rag-tag elements of the Mahdi Army into an Iraqi version of Hezbollah, with both a political wing represented by Mr. Sadr and a military wing that they called the majamee’ alkhasa, or “Special Groups,” a name chosen in Tehran and not a technical term invented by American commanders as so many Iraq-watchers seem to think. And boy, was that a mistake: the Mahdi Army as a whole and the Special Groups in particular have collapsed after seven weeks of fighting against a confident and capable Iraqi Army that was bolstered by American air cover and logistical support. On Thursday, the Sadrists effectively offered their surrender to Prime Minister Maliki, who had earlier put them on notice that he would smash into their redoubts, especially Baghdad’s slum of Sadr City"

haha. that's my favorite part. we are kicking some serious ass over there.

god if we could just let our boys have at em for one day, the entire middle east would be in submission. damn these rules of engagement

5/18/2008 10:40:33 PM

^That kind of thinking is what made the situation so terrible in the first place.

The reason we are kicking so much ass is because are armed forces were forced to transform into the most sophisticated, dynamic, flexible, and effective counter insurgency force on the planet.

5/19/2008 9:56:58 AM

More on Iran and Lebenon

http://www.nowlebanon.com/NewsArticleDetails.aspx?ID=43262

5/19/2008 7:36:03 PM

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080521/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_syria;_ylt=AoIShDMxSri9Qyd8mQz0wxKs0NUE


thought the poll numbers at the very end were cool...apparently giving up the golan hights is like being a dem or repub

5/21/2008 4:35:42 PM

giving up the golan heights is like giving up the air force. strategic nightmare for any future conflict

5/21/2008 4:53:01 PM