Thursday, August 17, 2006

Hezbollah's Victory Over Israel

By: Shane

Just days after the UN security council completed its resolution to "end the conflict in Lebanon" Hezbollah was claiming victory over Israel. Hezbollah fighters reportedly hugged each other and celebrated with gunfire and fireworks. Hezbollah's leader Sheik Hassan Nasrallah claimed a "strategic, historic victory." Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said Tuesday that Hezbollah has "hoisted the banner of victory" over Israel. All of the Middle East was in celebration at the "defeat" of the Jews. The UN saw the resolution as a success, probably because they would side with terrorist 9 times out of 10 rather than side with Israel.

However, Hezbollah and Iran weren't the only ones claiming victory. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert also claimed victory, saying the offensive eliminated the "state within a state" and restored Lebanon's sovereignty in the south. President Bush also weighed in, claiming that Hezbollah suffered defeat at the hands of Israel. "There's going to be a new power in the south of Lebanon," he said.

So who is right? Israel and the West, or Hezbollah and all of its radical Islamic supporter throughout the Middle East. Sadly, I see little support of the statements that Israel removed the "state within a state" and that "there's going to be a new power in the south of Lebanon." On the contrary, it appears that this "cease-fire" is not a sign of lasting peace in the Middle East, but what every conservative talking head will tell you it is: a chance for Hezbollah and other radical Islamic groups to rearm and regroup.

Just days after the "cease-fire" and shortly after Hezbollah claimed a "historic victory" over Israel, reports came that thousands of "Jihadis" were preparing to leave the "moderate" Islamic state of Indonesia and head for Lebanon to join "a declared Jihad against Israel." The "Jihadis" were reportedly financed by "Muslim businessmen." If this alone isn't evidence enough that the supposed "cease-fire" is a sham, meant to allow Hezbollah to regroup, then I don't know what is.

The day after the "Indonesian Jihadis" story came out, the New York Times did something they had been refusing to do throughout the duration of the Israel-Lebanon/Hezbollah conflict; they acknowledged Hezbollah's presence in southern Lebanon. The New York Times piece praises Hezbollah for all they are doing to help rebuild the "devastated" cities of southern Lebanon. They story says that Iran promised Hezbollah an "unlimited budget" for reconstruction after victory. The story even quotes Hezbollah's leader, Sheik Hassan Nasrallah as saying, "Completing the victory can come with reconstruction."

I'm sorry, we're supposed to believe that there's "going to be a new power in south Lebanon" and that Hezbollah's power structure has been eliminated there when, according to the New York Times, Hezbollah "is already dominating the efforts to rebuild with a torrent of money from oil-rich Iran?" If anything, this is making Hezbollah more respected in the eyes of the people of southern Lebanon. Hezbollah is no doubt not just rebuilding southern Lebanon as a powerful propaganda tool, but also to restore their cover, amongst civilians, for when they restart their Jihad against Israel.

The "cease-fire" wouldn't work even if everyone obeyed it. How can Israel declare victory when Hezbollah is still in southern Lebanon, they didn't get their kidnapped soldiers back, and they didn't get the terms they requested on a "buffer zone" in southern Lebanon? However, the situation is made worse by the fact that Hezbollah is not following the "cease-fire." Hezbollah has refused to disarm, as the "cease-fire" calls for, and Lebanon has done little about it. Rather than demand that Hezbollah disarm, Lebanon has just asked that the terrorist group keep its arms "off the street." Considering they can launch rockets from the roofs of schools and Mosques, that shouldn't be a problem for them.

So, what does Israel get for giving in to "international demands" from liberals around the world? They certainly didn't get a victory. Hezbollah is rebuilding its strength in southern Lebanon, "Jihadis" are flooding in to southern Lebanon from other Islamic states including Indonesia, Israel achieved few of its goals (if any), Hezbollah is not disarming, and the international community still treats Israel like a group of war criminals.

Let's hope that this "cease-fire" is a learning experience for Israel. Let's hope that they learn that there is nothing to be gained from giving in to "international pressure" from liberals in Europe and the UN. Let's hope that they also learn that there is only one way to rid the world of terrorism, and that is to defeat it. Terrorists do not make treaties, do not obey resolutions, and ignore cease-fires. As long as there are terrorists bent on an Islmo-fascist world regime, and freedom loving democracies, there will be fighting in the world. The question is; which side do you support, that of freedom, or that of tyranny?

Shane is a writer for the conservative news blog His other articles can be found here.

No comments: