The Israeli estimates are pointless- they admit they dont know how many rockets Hezbollah has, or how many are being resupplied, but they feel comfortable making estimates on what percentage they have left? Thats idiotic on its face. The correct statement is the Israelis have destroyed 2/3rds of their target lists, which may or may not correspond in a meaningful way to the real world.

I dont want to seem like im baggin on Israel or the IDF all the time, because what is happening is not god-awful or unprecidented. The US has made many of the same mistakes with its airpower, convincing ourselves of its supremacy. Unfortunately the enemy gets a vote, and Hezbollah isnt so stupid as not to realize the extent of Israels airpower. They have apparently compensated for it in various ways, because as Donald says the bottom line is that rocket fire has not decreased, it has increased. When the point of your war is to stop rocket fire that is not a good sign. If it peters out in the next week or two, fantastic! But if not that is a psychological and moral defeat for Israel, and Israel built the scoreboard so they have to live with it.

Now a lot of people are saying that given a certain length of time (another 2 weeks, a month, a year?) Israel will be able to end the threat. Maybe, maybe not. But in order for Israel to get more than another couple weeks it will be in defiance of the world including the US, and regardless of what any of us say or think that is a major consideration that Israel always takes into account. Dont tell me they dont really need to care. That is immaterial, because they do care. Nations are run by men, not robots.

Finally, even if Israel does manage to knock out most of Hezbollahs current rocket supply, what stops them from resupplying the week after the cease fire? Anybody that thinks some sort of MNF will I have a bridge to sell.

I dont see the long term solution here, unless Simon is right and Israel is setting the stage for taking the fight to Syria. But unfortunately I dont think that is what they are doing. This has all the earmarks of seat of the pants freelancing after the initial strategy (airpower and raids) failed.

Latest total reported today is 300 so far.

The hizzies may be in a use it or lose it mode.

Mark,

What makes you so sure they will be in defiance of the US?

In any case France has walked out of the MNF meeting. And those were the guys who promised the biggest stick.

It can't end without a MFN ready to go. So where are the troops?

So why do you think a two week deadline is possible let alone likely?

The only thing that could stop resupply is a change of heart or regime in Damascus. Which i predict. Because it is required. Olmert and Bush promise strategic victory. I'm betting on the home team.

That should be MNF. Multi National Force.

666333 again.

FWIW Iran thinks the Israelis/Americans have been planning this for months. As you know I'm going against the conventinal wisdom and saying there was a plan ready before the Israelis crossed the border.

I think the hizzies may have accelerated the time table with the snatch. So they may have given Israel a gift. The Iranians think so. At least that is what the NYT reported on 29 June.

In PM Olmert's sound bite on the radio as I drove to work this morning was very unambiguous that Israel would not accept a cease fire without the immediate entry into southern Lebanon of an MNF. That's not a quote, but is the gist.

Actually, he said no cease fire without the presence of an MNF, but I can't believe he expects the MNF to move into positions with actual combat going on.

Since last weekend, Olmert et. al. seem to have awakened and smelled the coffee, perhaps because, as Tom Holsinger linked to in a comment, the Israeli public has a stiffer backbone and greater resolve than Olmert demonstrated initially. This no doubt gave him to understand he has a freer hand with domestic opinion than he probably thought he did before.

The upshot of all this is that the Olmert government, especially including its security cabinet, seems just since the weekend to have concretized its resolve on destroying Hezbollah. Despite what some commenters have said on my posts, I have always said that Israel could do this once it firmly resolved to. Barring some severe reversal of military fortunes (very unlikely) or political situation (decreasingly likely), I would say that Israel is going to steadily gain the upper hand henceforth. Nothing succeeds, as they say, like success. As the IDF achieves additional victories on the ground the politicians' backbones will be stiffened even more and the Israeli public will resolve to accept the additional casualties those successes will entail.

I am less certain about Israel's sensitivity to world opinion than Mark Buehner is. Let's face it, "world opinion" to Israel has really meant nothing but "US government's opinion." And George isn't going wobbly on this one.

Just as they said that "only Nixon could have gone to China," it may well be the case that only the left-of-center Ehud Olmert and his way-left-of-center defense minister, Amir Peretz, have finally acted upon what they may have always known in their hearts: that UN resolutions meant exactly squat without American force behind them.

It could well be that Olmert & Co. have decided that Hezbollah and Lebanon aren't going to be the only beneficiaries of the UN's toothlessness and that the emptiness of UN resolutions can cut both ways.

There will be no MNF entering southern Lebanon under the terms Olmert spelled out today. And you can bet your sweet bippy that Olmert knows it.

This little essay at Braden Files sheds some light on what Israel is doing, I think.

Mark,

Have you read the Dorsai novels?

If not start with "The Tactics of Mistake" by Dickson.

I think it might change your view.

BTW I think they are required reading by The Marines and the Army. I know they are required by at least one of those services.

I think that is a valid point, when i suggest what Israel is sensative to, I generally mean US sentiment and Europe when they get to the verge of actually turning the screws, ie rhetoric aside. Europe can really hurt Israel economically very easily if they so choose.

Bush will lend support to Israel, but not indefinately. I think 2 more weeks to a month is likely, but beyond that the costs are going to get pretty steep for the US. The Iran thing is coming to a head and the Iraqis are certainly not happy seeing Israel in he news every day. Bush will at some point need to decide if the balance of our foriegn policy in the region is going to take a backseat to Israel.

Can Israel complete its objectives in a month? Well that all depends on exactly what its objectives are, which i am still not entirely clear on in a concrete way. In my opinion this multinational force is an illusion. We couldnt get Europeans to send meaningful troops to the Balkans without US leadership, they arent sending thousands for troops into Lebanon, not with its history. Is there a realistic endgame scenario in play? This is more and more starting to seem like 1982 all over again, but without the big victories to kick things off. I think Israel picked the wrong end of that lesson. Send in an overwhelming force to splatter Hezbollah than get out and dare them to try it again. Not slowly occupy Southern Lebanon and hope for the UN deus ex machina to get you out.

Don,

I believe that Braden Files bit was a piece on an Israeli blog. The blogger's name was Treppinwitz (or something like that). Since I had been to Olongopo, I asked him a few questions about his time there. He seemed legit to me.

I'll see if I can dig up a url. Proper attribution and all that.

Treppenwitz

Mark --

GWB would LOVE to make the November elections a referendum between Republicans supporting Israel against America's enemies (Hezbollah has killed the most Americans in terror attacks after Al Qaeda and is the Herman Goerring Division of our mortal and eternal enemy Iran) ... and Democrats who embrace the Mel Gibson -- Cindy Sheehan philosophy of abandoning Israel, "Always Again" and embracing as Dingell said "neutrality" on Hezbollah (who are by past deeds terrorists who have killed hundreds of Americans).

I'll go further and say it might be the only issue that's a winner for Republicans.

Republicans win and Democrats lose when the choice is between fighting terror and appeasing it.

The more Israel fights Hezbollah and the more Democrats embrace Hezbollah (as Dingell and others are closer to every day IMHO) the better GWB looks. He's not getting any "prettier" simply the opposition getting uglier.

[This of course depends on buying Jim Geraghty's view that the "American Street" is made up of "to hell with them hawks" who have reached the "tipping point" and simply see all Muslims as the enemy. It certainly doesn't help Dems to have nothing but diplomatic appeasement on the table for Iran/Hezbollah/Al Qaeda and throwing Israel under the bus. The long-term consequence of the decisive choice between left-wing politics and support for Israel (since the Left has made the latter an excommunication offense, see Joe Lieberman) is also one IMHO Bush and Rove wish to make unavoidable.]

M Simon, i havent read them but i will pick it up. Hasnt crossed my reading list, and not to degrade the novels, but I generally dont rank sci-fi novels with historical and biographical works. Theory is great but Clausewitz strongly suggests war is so damned confusing and full of unintended consequences that deep levels of deception and manipulation are unlikely to work out and very dangerous to hinge your goals on. Sun Tzu obviously disagreed, but Michael Handel laid out a fascinating reconciliation in Masters of War: Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, and Jomini that suggests Sun Tzu wrote of war in the idealized realm while Clausewitz dealt with the nuts and bolts. Hence they compliment each other. I think there is a lot of truth to this. Elaborate plans rarely come off as intended, particularly on a strategic level, but on the other hand its easy to get bogged down in the fighting in front of you and miss the big picture. In regards to the current situation, I think the lesson is it is extremely dicey to craft a strategy that ever relies on the thought process that goes "we will do this and then the enemy will do that". Another old adage is that given 5 options your enemy will always take the 6th.

Jim, you may be right, but i think there is a tipping point out there somewhere. If the choice is between the incoherence of the democrats and a Bush agenda that suddenly looks a lot like getting bogged down in unending fighting in Lebanon, Iraq, and Afghanistan, people may go for the devil they dont know. Not that that is reality, but the perception might be strong. If Israel is still slogging it out 3 months from now with the world screaming bloody murder, I dont think that helps Bush given the current climate. People vote for optimism, and if the best Bush can offer seems to be morass, and the Dems manage to show a pulse and offer a 3rd way (however ridiculous and untenable), the Republicans could be in trouble in a hurry. I dont like relying on democrats continually shooting themselves in the foot as a strategy for retaining the agenda.

Mark,

Next to "Strategy" by Hart, it is the best stuff on Military strategy written. It is a kind of a case book in novel form. Science fiction.

Here is a book review:

http://powerandcontrol.bl*gspot.com/2004/09/tactics-of-mistake.html

If you like that one get all the rest.

I think most commenters here neglect to consider that we have an incomplete picture of what is really the state of affairs in Lebanon.

Assume MSM paints only the picture that's easy at hand -- i.e., in accordance with Hezbollah press releases and staged media events. IDF less forthcoming, more careful. Probability high that some news reports are intentional disinformation.

ANY reporting would be data points against a greater unknown, makes true picture very difficult.

I would compare this to the bulk of the grossly distorted reporting on the Iraqi Campaign.

Military analysts record our toppling of Saddam as lightning quick, although absent sufficient "overwhelming" defeats of RG, who largely evaporated. A day or two of sandstorm imposed delays, reports read "bogged down."

Remarkable achievements in Iraq, terrific military accomplishments, very low loss of life (military and civilian), all overwhelmed by a storyline that insists our military effort was "disasterous," and post war planning "non-existent."

Results of course do count more than intent; but when analysis and reporting skews to only one typoe of data points and ignores contrary info, then the entire picture is distorted.

Current reporting on Lebanon describes the country as "destroyed." I forget where, but links here to where IDF attacks are occurring shows the country virtually untouched except for Hezbollah strongholds. This is equivalent to how the security situation in Iraq is reported.

We surrender to the enemy's IO war if we accept prima facie protrayals of what they want us to accept as established truth. As we all have seen, even our eyes lie to us.

#11 Mark,

We are blessed that our enemies have such a limited repitoire of actions and thinking patters.

As I pointed out an analyst (who I didn't know was an analyst but have had extensive conversations with at Belmont Club) thought my outline was excellent.

uh oh 666333

#12 Mark,

I'm betting Bush and the Israelis run the table in the next month or so. Condi believes. It is the basis of her New ME rap. IMO

I search for the signs and the better signs is what Israeli political heads talk and change the talking. Today Olmert talked about retiring from Judeia/Samaria. Now in what kind of world a lider of a Country that it is at war talks about a divisive issue for its own population? In what world?

For now i bet that Olmert is and would be a disaster because i have many more negative signs than positive.

Dear Mark and M. Simon,

Before you debate too heavily the validity of military science fiction to military applications, please note the following datum:

The only book on the reading list for all four United States military academies is "Starship Troopers", by Robert A. Heinlein.

Granted, the fact that Heinlein was a product of one of the military academies helps his cause more than Gordon Dickson's, but I believe my point is made. (And besides, it's a dang good book.)

#17 Catfish,

I was aware of that. Thanks.

The Dickson books used to be on the list but I didn't find them on this year's list. They may have revised the lists since I last looked

FWIW, the "record numbers" of rockets being launched reminds me of a really big bet in cards. The analogy probably isn't as bad as it first appears, because in both cases the player betting is representing a big hand. The other players have to decide whether the information is true or false.

In the current situation, Hizballah could be trying to induce Israel to cease hostilities (believing that their current strategy to be ineffective and counter-productive), or to increase the intensity of attacks (believing it to be critical to eradicate Hizballah more quickly).

In either case, my interpretation is that Hizballah is indicating that the status quo is not desirable to them; if it is they would have kept the same strategy.

Therefore, my read is that Israel's strategy is working, that Hizballah sees its best chance as either delivering a demoralizing blow or to induce radically increased foreign pressure on Israel (prompted by more well-documented destruction of Hizballah's civilian shield) to cease and desist. If that's the case, Hizballah's big bet is most likely a classic desperation bluff, and Israel's best counter is to call.

I am surprised there has been no mention of Blair's speech yesterday in terms of the current pulse of world opinion. The Jerusalem Post has the full speech as a document file Key graphs:

But the central point is this. In the end, even the issue of Israel is just part of the same, wider struggle for the soul of the region. If we recognised this struggle for what it truly is, we would be at least along the first steps of the path to winning it. But a vast part of the Western opinion is not remotely near this yet.

Whatever the outward manifestation at any one time - in Lebanon, in Gaza, in Iraq and add to that in Afghanistan, in Kashmir, in a host of other nations including now some in Africa - it is a global fight about global values; it is about modernisation, within Islam and outside of it; it is about whether our value system can be shown to be sufficiently robust, true, principled and appealing that it beats theirs. Islamist extremism's whole strategy is based on a presumed sense of grievance that can motivate people to divide against each other. Our answer has to be a set of values strong enough to unite people with each other.

. . .

Why are we not yet succeeding? Because we are not being bold enough, consistent enough, thorough enough, in fighting for the values we believe in.

For purposes of this discussion, the speech is significant in that it implicitly rejects calls that Blair use his influence on Bush to use his influence on Israel. He also condemned Iran and Syria in particular. He sees the recent violence in Israel as attacks on the two-party solution, which requires more Western engagement, not retreat. So, it wasn't that odd for Olmert to reinforce his support for withdrawal from the West Bank. European opinion will be divided so long as Blair is p.m. and the two-state solution is on the table.

BTW/ Its actually a pretty interesting speech in terms of laying out a more liberal version of Bush's grand strategy in the Middle East.

Could there be any truth in this?

The War on Lebanon and the Battle for Oil

by Michel Chossudovsky
July 26, 2006 - GlobalResearch.ca
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=CHO20060726&articleId=2824

Militarization of the Eastern Mediterranean

The bombing of Lebanon is part of a carefully planned and coordinated military road map. The extension of the war into Syria and Iran has already been contemplated by US and Israeli military planners. This broader military agenda is intimately related to strategic oil and oil pipelines. It is supported by the Western oil giants which control the pipeline corridors. In the context of the war on Lebanon, it seeks Israeli territorial control over the East Mediterranean coastline.

In this context, the BTC pipeline dominated by British Petroleum, has dramatically changed the geopolitics of the Eastern Mediterranean, which is now linked , through an energy corridor, to the Caspian sea basin:

"[The BTC pipeline] considerably changes the status of the region's countries and cements a new pro-West alliance. Having taken the pipeline to the Mediterranean, Washington has practically set up a new bloc with Azerbaijan, Georgia, Turkey and Israel, " (Komerzant, Moscow, 14 July 2006)

Israel is now part of the Anglo-American military axis, which serves the interests of the Western oil giants in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Go to the site - some interesting maps.

So fundamentally - the issue of terrorism is just a smoke-screen
Israel/US were looking for an issue they could leverage and used the captured soldiers as the excuse to get started.

... and Stephen Harper is in on this!

Stephen it is in YOUR / OUR best interest if the ME Oil does not make it to North America - then Alberta Oil becomes even more important

.... or maybe you are thinking even longer term - empty out the ME and then when oil is $200/barrel then Canada really starts raking in the cash!

Of course, its always about oil. All that Lebanese oil just waiting for the taking. Listen carefully: every nation on the planet has oil pipelines running through it. Just because there is an gas pipeline planned in Afghanistan doesnt mean every geopolitical move is aimed at it. Just because there are oil pipelines in Lebanon doesnt mean Bush is desperately attempting to attach it to his swimming pool in Crawford. If you want to swim in the big end of the pool I would take that kind of thing into account. It doesnt make any sense for the US to be both trying to open oil markets by invading Iraq and close them by starting wars in Lebanon. The biggest problem with the Oil Conspiracy Nuts is that they havent the basest idea how economics works. I know Bush haters have oil on the brain, but its just not the root of all that is evil in the world.

Although I did just put a preorder in for the new gas guzzling 4 door wrangler, with which I will hopefully go tearing through mother nature kick squirrels and hemp high into the stratosphere to increase global warming. My god given right as an evil American.

Thank god someone put a clue in Olmert. But damage was done.

14:46 PDT Ehud Olmert has decided to defer further realignment — a phrase for territorial withdrawal — for the present. “”From the conversation I had with the prime minister … he will not deal with the realignment plan at all now … we will conduct the arguments only after the war”. (Ynet)

Don & P.D. Shaw,

"Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's declaration Wednesday that the war in Lebanon will create new momentum for further West Bank pullouts was met by a harsh response on the part of right-wing parliamentarians as well as members of the PM's own Kadima party."

"Olmert Backs Down on Post War Retreat Olmert: War has nothing to do with realignment ..."

Given the will to win, any military conflict with our respective enemies will resemble a puppy being smacked by a truck.

Israel's old rules of engagement are gone. They are no longer casualty adverse for themselves, and that is cubed for Arab casualties. The Israeli people know full well that the survival of Hezbollah means they'll be nuked from Lebanon.

The Democratic party here has no idea what is coming for them in November. Israel's new will to win will have far greater effects here than then-British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher's demand for, and obtaining of, victory over Argentina in the Falklands had during the Reagan administration.

And the Arabs do not at all understand that this means a time for the strategic retreat in the face of overwhelming enemy power advised by the Koran.

I dont know Tom, they may be on their way, but i dont think they are there yet. Im actually feeling less hopeful about the new offensive if anything.

Watch Tyre and the Palestinian refugee camps surrounding it. The city is well within 20 miles of the border, and well south of the Litani River where it is speculated the IDF will push to. How Israel handles Tyre will tell us all we need to know about their resolve.

If Israel is as convinced as you say, they will have to take those areas and clear out Hezbollah, the arms dumps, and rocket launchers from the city and camps (or besiege the area indefinately I suppose). Watch and see if they do, because to date that is the last thing in the world Israel has wanted to get into. Tyre is the litmus test for just how resolved Israel is.

I've got good money that says aside from perhaps a few raids, Israel never seriously goes in, much less clears it out. For all the talk of a new offensive, look at the names that are getting reported: Ayta a-Chaab, Yaroun ... they are the same names reported 2 weeks ago.

Look at a map Israel has barely advanced a mile across the front. Bint Jbeil saw some of the hardest fighting yet a couple weeks ago but it was turned back over to Hezbollah. Thats not a little town, its the provincial capital and hub of the road network, and the IDF lost a bunch of casualties taking it. At least in the South East, the IDF is actually going backwards. What is going on?

If the argument is that this is how they intend to foot by foot fumigate southern lebanon, well maybe... but i think the conventional wisdom would be to create a breakthrough, advance and cut the enemy supply lines then wipe out the pockets of resistance by surrounding the enemy. But the way I read it is that Olmert is still wed to his 'raid and bomb' philosophy. This could be the escalation of failure option... if at first you dont succeed, try again with more men. I dont think Olmert even now plans to advance into Lebanon. He seems wed to killing ants as they emerge from the hill. Fun, but hardly decisive.

Keep an eye on Tyre in the coming weeks.

Mark B.,

This can't be quick if it is to be thorough. Israel must first reduce Hezbollah's ability to strike into Israel before going deep into Lebanon.

Israel's objectives, and therefore its strategy, have just changed so it will take a while before the new patterns are discernible.

It is known that Israel has, at least to this point, attacked Hezbollah's economic assets. The big untouched ones are in the Bekka Valley, notably the drug trade it shares with Syria and, to a much lesser extent, with Iran. And that's where Hezbollah has its training camps and major depots.

Israel won't be serious about eliminating Hezbollah until it goes into the Bekka Valley bigtime, but the valley's military geography is such that Israeli forces will have to pretty much hug the Syrian border to reduce Hezbollah defenses there without incurring really excessive Israeli casualties. I.e., attacking the Bekka Valley will require significant preparation time and prior reduction of Hezbollahh military capability elsewhere.

If the immediate past is any guide, the Israeli government will balk umpteen times about doing the necessary preparation, let alone attacking the Bekka Valley itself, and be forced to act each time by demands from the Israeli people. Each balk will be perceived as the end of hostilitie, but won't be.

So IMO it won't be apparent that Israel really is eliminating Hezbollah until there are massive Israeli ground forces on both slopes of the Bekka Valley, including along the Syrian border. And we're looking at something at least several months off.

#26,

My take is that the coast road is a feint. The Israeli army will go north and make a right turn. At least some fraction. On the other side of Lebanon the army will go a little way north and turn left. A fraction will continue to Bekaa. The snatch and grab was preparation for that.

I expect the Bekaa operation will resemble Market Garden, except for the failure part.

The hizzies will get surrounded and their Bekaa resupply depot will be owned by Israel. From which area they can antagonise Syria.

If smart folks here are in doubt, I'm sure the opposing side is very busy with acrimonious general staff meeting trying to decide what to do. I don't think their plan locker was adequately supplied.

Surrounding the hizzies is the obvious thing to do. So that is the deception (like the Japanese move south). The key is the Bekaa (as was Pearl Harbor). That will be unexpected.

BTW I'm having a nice conversation with a Syrian. He agrees with all of us that the Syrian army is useless against the Israelis.

Like most of you (me excepted) he does not think the Syrian Army will attack. He does say that Israeli bombing near the Syrian/Lebanese border has annoyed the Syrian people.

I'll post a link here when I finish blogging it.

Fares Answers

http://powerandcontrol.bl*gspot.com/2006/08/fares-answers.html

The initial move towards the Bekaa will look like your ordinary precaution of a blocking force to prevent a flank attack.

Perhaps it will attract forces from the Bekaa to act as blocks from the Hizbollah side.

That would make the insertion north of Baalbek easier.

I might add that the Israelis have some very fine paratroops. One of them lives in Rockford and is a friend of mine.

One of the training methods of Hizbollah is to put a man in an isolated building and have him wait there several days until called.

What this tells me is that they are fortification and not mobility minded. Whatever mobility they have is strictly local. They have not taken Hart to heart.

#24 Tom Holsinger,

Go to the link I gave above and visit Fares. If you read his blog post (my usual copious comments provided) you will see he hasn't accepted the change (and he is a democrat who is reasonably sane).

The jihadis are immune to reason so they will be the puppies smacked by a truck.

So although we may differ on the details of how it will be accomplished we are in agreement on the end result.

The "balkiness" of the Olmert government is deception. Public opinion can't change large troop movements in a day or three. It is hard to do such changes in even a week. The logistics problems are enormous. The reserve call ups have to be done about a week before any movement.

I do agree also about Bekaa. In fact from what I read the Israeli public is of the same opinion. It will not be over until the Israelis control the Bekaa high ground.

I'm not sure Syria can sit idle and let one of their major money supplies and military bases go down the tubes.

Fares does not think Syria will act. I'm not sure that is correct. Syria wants Lebanon back badly. (see the comment by tse at Fares' place). If there is no hope for that there will not be enough $$$ to keep the cronies supplied. My bet is that right now Iran is making up the difference. If Iran starts having cash problems due to public discontent they may decide to cut Syria lose. Or they may say - do Bekaa or the cash flow stops. That may be the blackmail I suggested earlier. That spells trouble for Assad.

He may have made a bargain with the devil. And we know how those work out.

Mails from Lebanon and First Hand Information can be found here: http://alsharq.bl*gspot.com

M.Simon,

Israeli public opinion yesterday forced Prime Minister Olmert to eat his words in about four hours. It was one of the funniest political scenes I'm aware of.

What the Israeli government says at this point is close to irrelevant. The Israeli people are running the show, have overruled their government three times in 48 hours, and DON'T KNOW what they want save that it entails eliminating Hezbollah somehow.

This makes it d*mn near impossible to tell what is going on. At some point the Israeli people's focus on this issue will flag such that their goverment will resume calling the shots, but when that happens won't be discernible save in hindsight, IMO. And Israel's enemies will certainly be able to fire up the Israeli people again, and over and over. "The enemy has a vote."

So we're into the realm of uncertainty here.

Israelis better get rid of Olmert and Halutz. 7 civ. dead today. Kadima is finished.

Olmert strikes me as Israel's Dan Quayle.

#33 Tom,

From what I gather reading blogs and corresponding with Israelis, one of the things I hear is that Hizbollah will not be finished until the Bekaa Valley is taken.

So my fantasy may come true after all. Just not out of a smart plan but out of citizen's desire.

I could win the bet after all.

How ironic.

Simon

And yes you are correct. The people are fully in control. They are willing to go on despite the blitz and they demand nothing less than total victory.

Did I mention that I saw in the J Post a few days back a suggestion by the Americans that Israel start a war with Syria? Didn't book mark it. Sorry. It was one or two sentences at the bottom of the article. The author obviously down playing its significance.

Michael Oren said Israel Should bomb Syria. around 20 July.