Hezbollah is the Wild Card
Date: Wednesday, July 19 @ 02:01:07 UTC
By Kurt Nimmo, kurtnimmo.com
Israel will probably not send ground troops into Lebanon to confront Hezbollah. Israel realizes it cannot decisively defeat Hezbollah, as its experience prior to 2000 made painfully obvious.
In fact, the mass murder campaign currently underway in Lebanon has little to do with Hezbollah, as our pro-Israel corporate media tells us, ad nauseam.
Instead, it has to do with "order out of chaos," rendering Arabs and Muslims helpless, destroying their societies. It has to do with balkanizing the Middle East, reducing once organized societies to mutually hostile tribal and ethnic factions, forever at each others throats, and thus exploitable and malleable. It is an updated version of British colonialism, the time-tested divide and conquer strategy.
If you require and example of this, look no further than Iraq where "civil war," externally imposed, works like an acid on the political and social fabric of the country, if indeed you can characterize what remains of Iraq a country. It is devolving into a patchwork of mutually antagonistic factions, tribes, religious sects, a situation created by false flag terrorism straight out of the neocon Pentagon.
Syria is next.
Enter James "World War IV" Woolsey, former CIA spook and Booz Allen Hamilton VP.
Following on the heels of Newt Gingrich and William Kristol, Woolsey told Fox News loudmouth John Gibson that Syria needs a heaping dose of shock and awe (see video excerpt on the Crooks and Liars website) and this will serve as a prelude to doing likewise to Iran. The irascible Gibson asked why the United States simply does not go after Iran now and Woolsey admitted such things are done incrementally, in steps.
First Syria, and then Iran, along with North Korea.
As Juan Williams told "General" Kristol on Fox the other day, the neocons "want war, war, war," an obvious enough fact, although Williams may now be reassigned to doing weather reports in Anchorage, Alaska.
"This is our war, too," declared PNAC Bill in the Weekly Standard, a failed publication propped up by Rupert Murdoch money. For Kristol, of course, Israel's "war" (shock and awe of innocent civilians) is "our war" because Kristol is an Israel First neocon-Zionist.
"Echoed Larry Kudlow, a neo-conservative commentator, at the Standard's right-wing competitor, the National Review: ‘All of us in the free world owe Israel an enormous thank-you for defending freedom, democracy and security against the Iranian cat's-paw wholly owned terrorist subsidiaries Hezbollah and Hamas…. They are defending their own homeland and very existence, but they are also defending America's homeland as our frontline democratic ally in the Middle East,' according to Kudlow, who, like Kristol and other like-minded polemicists, also named Syria, ‘which is also directed by Iran', as a promising target as the conflict expands," writes Jim Lobe.
Naturally, as long planned, the conflict will expand.
"The two columns are just the latest examples of a slew of commentaries that have appeared in US print and broadcast media since Israel began bombing targets in Lebanon in retaliation for Hezbollah's fatal cross-border attack last Wednesday," Lobe continues. "They appear to be part of a deliberate campaign by neo-conservatives and some of their right-wing supporters to depict the current conflict as part of global struggle pitting Israel, as the forward base of Western civilization, against Islamist extremism organized and directed by Iran and its junior partner, Syria."
Of course, this depiction is hardly new—it is the same old neocon warmongering cause cÚlèbre exploiting Israel's latest binge of serial murder.
However, the neocons best counsel air campaigns and air campaigns only because if they go to ground with troops they will get a bloody nose, as Israel understands.
Israel is sending out winged squadrons to kill mostly helpless Lebanese like fish in a barrel. If they deploy troops in a serious manner, these will be picked off in large numbers by Hezbollah, seasoned in modern asymmetrical warfare. Israeli troops will be sitting ducks, as Americans are sitting ducks now in Iraq. If the neocons have their way, the Americans in Iraq will be ducks deluxe, as the entire Shia community in southern Iraq will become Hezbollah. In fact, Iran is a nation of Hezbollah guerillas waiting to attack the enemy, if he ever descends from the sky and places his boots on the ground.
And that's why the Bush neocons have strived to scrub the stigma from "mini" or "tactical" nuclear weapons—these will be needed to shock and awe Iran, a nation of millions upon millions of people Hezbollahized, fearless in their desire to confront the enemy head-on, as folks defending their homeland often are.
The neocons are not talking about nuking Iran, not yet anyway.
Robert Satloff, executive director of the Jacobin Washington Institute for Near East Policy, tells us "defeat for Israel—either on the battlefield or via coerced compromises to achieve flawed ceasefires—is a defeat for US interests; it will inspire radicals of every stripe, release Iran and Syria to spread more mayhem inside Iraq, and make more likely our own eventual confrontation with this emboldened alliance of extremists" (see previous link).
Satloff does not bother to mention Israel was unable to contain or decisively defeat Hezbollah, or does he mention that shock and awing Syria and eventually Iran will not take the wind out of Hezbollah's sails.
Hezbollah is purely indigenous and any support by Syria or Iran is strictly secondary. In order to decisively defeat Hezbollah—basically a catch-all for Shia-based resistance to Israeli hegemony—hundreds of thousands, possibly millions, of Muslims will need be eradicated.
Israel and the Israel First neocons have no problem with this horrific scenario.
Depleted uranium is the slow way to do it, while "small build enhanced radiation weapons" of about one kiloton will be a lot quicker.