From Hezbollah to Hezbollost

By Austin Bay : BIO| 31 Aug 2006 Israel's and Hezbollah's War of the Rockets has entered a new phase: the War of the Wallets, the race to gain political capital by rebuilding southern Lebanon. Diplomats and military analysts continue to debate The War of the Rockets. The conventional wisdom -- or more accurately, the wisdom of first impressions -- said Israel lost the military war and Hezbollah won by surviving. But the emerging "big picture" suggests the War of the Rockets physically punished and politically damaged Hezbollah, despite its media touts of victory. On the other hand, Israel cannot claim a victory -- at least, not yet. What did Hezbollah lose? The Israel-Hezbollah war began with Lebanon as a "hijacked nation state." Hezbollah (supported by Iran and Syria) controlled southern Lebanon and Lebanon's southern border, which put the area in a geo-political limbo. Southern Lebanon was not fully sovereign Lebanese territory. At the moment, Israel exerts more control over Lebanon's southern border than Hezbollah, U.N. peacekeepers or the Lebanese government. That may not be an Israeli win, but it is no victory laurel for Hezbollah's leader, Hassan Nasrallah. Hezbollah still dominates swaths of southern Lebanon and in those areas retains the ability to intimidate Lebanese locals and fire rockets at various current and potential adversaries -- Israel for sure, but also U.N. peacekeepers and the Lebanese Army. However, positioning Lebanese government forces and U.N. peacekeepers in south Lebanon could slowly diminish Hezbollah's military and political capacities. Yes, peacekeepers could end up protecting Hezbollah. However, if the United Nations' military Rules of Engagement (ROE) are robust, Hezbollah's ability to act will be very circumscribed. The United Nations' 1995 failure to protect Srbrenica, Bosnia, is a huge stain that aggressive policing in south Lebanon would help remove. If Turkish troops are part of the U.N. contingent, Hezbollah will face even stiffer political and military constraints. Turkey wants to make the case that its confrontation with the Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK) in northern Iraq is analogous to the one Israel faces with Hezbollah. A Turkish U.N. contingent would be a tough Muslim opponent for Hezbollah. Hezbollah isn't poised to win The War of the Wallets, either. Using Iranian cash, Hezbollah has bought influence in Lebanon by funding social services. Hezbollah announced it will provide funds to rebuild homes destroyed in the war.But the U.S. government has countered with its own "green" strategy, as in greenbacks to rebuild the whole of Lebanon. Amir Taheri, in an August 25 Wall Street Journal essay, has made the most cogent argument that Hezbollah has actually lost the war. And StrategyPage.com and its editor, James F. Dunnigan, started making the case for Hezbollah's looming defeat in late July. Taheri argues that Hezbollah is on the edge of a huge political defeat within Lebanon. "The leaders of the March 14 movement," Taheri writes, "which has a majority in the Lebanese Parliament and government, have demanded an investigation into the circumstances that led to the war, a roundabout way of accusing Hezbollah of having provoked the tragedy." StrategyPage.com noted Hezbollah's political and military failure as it occurred, noting on July 26: "Hezbollah knows, however, that as long as they can launch at least one rocket a day, they can claim victory. This is because Arabs no longer expect to ... defeat Israel militarily, so that if the Arab force is still fighting, it is considered a victory. While ludicrous, this attitude has been widely accepted throughout the Middle East. However, this twisted logic is beginning to fray, and an increasing number of Arabs are questioning it. But in the short term, it still works." And noting on July 25: "While Hezbollah has been able to muster public support throughout Lebanon and the Arab world, they know that in the aftermath of all this, despite declaring a victory, they are already being blamed for causing a disaster, and will suffer substantial losses in the aftermath of this war." We're in the aftermath. Hezbollah experienced a moment of media glory, but that glory has faded. For Hezbollah, the continuing aftermath is anything but promising. Austin Bay is a syndicated columnist and TCS Daily contributing writer.

We need our SecDef now more than ever..

notice the "unbiased" headline to the story. Not "Secretary explains the War" but always portraying Republican officials as bitter and angry men. Nice.. Rumsfeld Lashes Out at Bush's Critics By ROBERT BURNS AP Military Writer SALT LAKE CITY, Utah (AP) -- Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said Tuesday the world faces "a new type of fascism" and likened critics of the Bush administration's war strategy to those who tried to appease the Nazis in the 1930s.In unusually explicit terms, Rumsfeld portrayed the administration's critics as suffering from "moral or intellectual confusion" about what threatens the nation's security. His remarks amounted to one of his most pointed defenses of President Bush' war policies and was among his toughest attacks on Bush's critics. Speaking to several thousand veterans at the American Legion's national convention, Rumsfeld recited what he called the lessons of history, including the failure to confront Hitler. He quoted Winston Churchill as observing that trying to accommodate Hitler was "a bit like feeding a crocodile, hoping it would eat you last." "I recount this history because once again we face similar challenges in efforts to confront the rising threat of a new type of fascism," he said. "Can we truly afford to believe that somehow, some way, vicious extremists can be appeased?" he asked."Can we truly afford to return to the destructive view that America - not the enemy - is the real source of the world's troubles?" Rumsfeld spoke to the American Legion as part of a coordinated White House strategy, in advance of the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, to take the offensive against administration critics at a time of doubt about the future of Iraq and growing calls to withdraw U.S. troops. Rumsfeld recalled a string of recent terrorist attacks, from 9/11 to deadly bombings in Bali, London and Madrid, and said it should be obvious to anyone that terrorists must be confronted, not appeased."But some seem not to have learned history's lessons," he said, adding that part of the problem is that the American news media have tended to emphasize the negative rather than the positive. He said, for example, that more media attention was given to U.S. soldiers' abuse of Iraqi prisoners at Abu Ghraib than to the fact that Sgt. 1st Class Paul Ray Smith received the Medal of Honor.He did acknowledge that the U.S. military has its own "bad actors - the ones who dominate the headlines today - who don't live up to the standards of the oath and of our country." But he added that they are a small percentage of the hundreds of thousands of troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan."Those who know the truth need to speak out against these kinds of myths and lies and distortions being told about our troops and about our country," he said. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was addressing the American Legion convention later Tuesday, and Bush is scheduled to speak here later in the week. On Monday, Vice President Dick Cheney and Rumsfeld made separate addresses to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars in Reno, Nev. Rumsfeld made similar arguments in Reno about doubters of the administration's approach to fighting terrorism, saying too many in this country want to "blame America first" and ignore the enemy. Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., a former Army officer and member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said in an interview Tuesday that "no one has misread history more than" Rumsfeld."It's a political rant to cover up his incompetence," said Reed, a longtime critic of Rumsfeld's handling of the war.Reed said he took particular exception to the implication that critics of Pentagon policies are unpatriotic, citing "scores of patriotic Americans of both parties who are highly critical of his handling of the Department of Defense."Rumsfeld defended the war in Iraq, saying that while U.S. military tactics have changed as conditions on the ground have changed, the administration's war strategy has remained constant: "to empower the Iraqi people to defend, govern and rebuild their own country." In arguing against giving up in Iraq, he said people should know from history that wars are never easy. "You know from experience that in every war - personally - there have been mistakes and setbacks and casualties," he said. "War is," as Clemenceau said, `A series of catastrophes that results in victory."

Those fake Hizbullah staged photo ops...

From David Frum and Stuart Koehl, a reader and professional military analyst, writes: "While a lot of bloggers have posted a lot of reasons as to why the two ambulances could not have been destroyed by israeli missiles, they fail to latch onto the most obvious of all reasons: the damage effects shown on the ambulances is not consistent with that of the missiles used by Israel (or by any extant missile in service, to the best of my knowledge, which includes 27 years as a professional military analyst). The Israel Defense Forces use two types of airborne tactical missile against vehicular targets: the AGM-65 Maverick, and the AGM-114 Hellifire. The former is a large missile weighing between 500 and 670 pounds at launch. The smallest version has a 125-lb warhead, the larger variants carry 300 lbs of high explosive. A supersonic missile designed to kill tanks and other hardened targets, it has so much power that even inert practice rounds have been known to go right through a main battle tank. First supplied to Israel in the Yom Kippur War, the Israelis found it had too much overkill against Arab tanks, which were completely gutted, and thus could not be salvaged for their own use. If even a lightweight AGM-65A or D model had hit a 3000-lb ambulance, there would have been nothing left to display for the photographers. Whatever destroyed those ambulances, it wasn't a Maverick. The other airborne anti-tank missile used by the IDF, the AGM-114 Hellfire was also designed to kill tanks. A lot smaller than the Maverick, it weighs about 100 lbs and carries a shaped-charge armor piercing warhead. A supersonic missile, it uses a pop-up-and-dive trajectory to hit tanks on the turret roof (where the armor is thinest). It is lethal even against the most modern main battle tanks. Assuming one had hit an ambulance, the vehicle would have been blown into pieces just by the impact forces, let alone the effects of the warhead. But, for the sake of argument, let us assume that the ambulances retained their structural integrity. Since the Hellfire uses a diving attack trajectory, there should be a hole in the top of the ambulance, and lo! so there is. But there should also be a corresponding exit hole in the bottom of the ambulances, and there is not. Moreover, the effects of the missile passing through the vehicle should have gutted the area beneath the hole in the roof, and the interior is suspiciously intact. Conclusion: whatever hit the ambulances, it wasn't a Hellfire. There is a remote possibility that the Israelis used an older BGM-71 TOW wire-guided anti-tank missile, which being slower would not have blown the vehicle apart (though its large warhead would have cause a lot of blast and heat damage, also missing from the vehicles). However, most TOW versions use a direct attack trajectory, so any impact area would be on the side, not the top of the vehicle. Whatever hit the ambulances wasn't a TOW."

U.S. Warns Syria to Observe Arms Embargo

I guess this makes the 1,736th warning now we have given to Boy Assad. Please.. By ANNE GEARAN, AP Diplomatic Writer Thursday, August 24, 2006 (08-24) 18:32 PDT WASHINGTON, (AP) -- The U.S. warned Syria on Thursday to abide by a United Nations arms embargo meant to stop Hezbollah from resupplying after its monthlong war with Israel. It dismissed Syrian objections to international peacekeepers as preposterous."All countries must obey the arms embargo" under the U.N. Security Council resolution that set a cease-fire this month, said State Department spokesman Gonzalo Gallegos. "It is a singular duty for Syria, as the one country apart from Israel that borders Lebanon, to do so." President Bush welcomed an announcement from France that it will send 2,000 soldiers for an expanded U.N. peacekeeping force in southern Lebanon and spoke by phone Thursday to Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi as the Italians prepare to lead the international force. Syria is a Hezbollah benefactor that was largely left out of diplomacy during the 34-day war. On Wednesday, Syrian President Bashar Assad called any deployment of multinational troops along his border a "hostile" affront to Syria. "First, this means creating hostile conditions between Syria and Lebanon," Assad told Dubai Television in an interview aired Wednesday. "Second, it is a hostile move toward Syria and naturally it will create problems." The notion that the troops are a threat to Syria "is preposterous," the State Department's Gallegos said in Washington. "We call on the Syrian regime to fulfill its international obligations." Hezbollah is an Islamic militia and political organization rooted in southern Lebanon, where its power eclipsed that of the central government in Beirut before the cross-border war. Hezbollah's political and organizational prowess is again on display as Lebanese begin to rebuild shattered towns, but its military capability and future is unclear. Syria has also indicated it might impose a punitive blockade of Lebanon."They will close their borders for all traffic in the event that U.N. troops are deployed along the Lebanon-Syria border," Finland Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja said after meeting his Syrian counterpart, Walid Moallem, in Helsinki. Finland holds the rotating presidency of the European Union.The Bush administration refused to talk to Syria directly during the negotiations to end the Israeli-Hezbollah fighting. In the complex diplomacy now under way to seal and strengthen the fragile U.N.-brokered cease-fire, the administration is wary of new Syrian efforts to assert control in Lebanon.The United States pulled its ambassador out of Syria last year after the assassination of a Lebanese politician who had sought to steer his nation away from three decades of effective control by Syria."We are working with the United Nations and our partners to ensure the rapid deployment of this force to help Lebanon's legitimate armed forces restore the sovereignty of its democratic government throughout the country and stop Hezbollah from acting as a state within a state," Bush said Thursday. France, along with the United States, helped draft the cease-fire deal allowing for expansion of an existing U.N. force from 2,000 troops to up to 15,000. France's commitment of troops to establish a buffer zone between Israel and Hezbollah guerrillas has been closely watched in other countries.

The latest from the Palestinians..

Captains Quarters blog- bringing it strong as always: Western diplomats have desperately held out Mahmoud Abbas as a partner for peace in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but events over the past week have exposed Abbas as an empty suit in Palestinian politics. My new column in the Examiner explains why: The Fatah leader that the U.S. and the West consider the best partner for peace in the region had to cancel orders to deploy Palestinian security personnel into the northern Gaza region where most of the rocket attacks by Hamas and Islamic Jihad originate. Fatah’s own in-house lunatics, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, refused to stop attacking Israel, demonstrating the lack of power held by the West’s partner for peace. The Jerusalem Post reported that Hamas was the only group that had accepted Abbas’s cease-fire. When his own band of militants refused to carry out Abbas’ orders, the deal fell apart. The lack of influence on Abbas’ part shows a disturbing development in the territories: The lack of mandate for anything short of annihilation of Israel and the lack of authority in the hands of the Palestinian Authority. What options does this leave for the Israelis and the West? Not many, and none of them pleasant. Most of all, the West needs a strong dose of reality when it comes to the political situation among the Palestinians. Peace has no mandate among them, unless one considers the peace of total annihilation an option. Co-existence is a cause that no Palestinian leader will openly support because of the hostility of the Palestinian people to that solution. Whatever else their faults, Palestinian leaders appear to represent the desires of their constituents.

Latest on Iran's "answer" to the EU3..

From Atlas Shrugs: U.S. diplomats at the United Nations tried to organize a meeting for today in New York, but European officials said they have no plans to attend. A purported satellite image provided of the Natanz nuclear facility in Iran. Iran has refused to allow inspectors in its underground facility. GEOEYE / WIA /AP Courtesy NY Sun August 22nd has come and gone. Feel like you're being played? You should. Iran handed over its formal response on Tuesday to "a nuclear incentives offer from the major powers and said it contained ideas that would allow serious talks about its standoff with the West." Three months later their response is they'll talk? Benny Avni in today's Sun writes: Iran yesterday formally rejected an American backed package of incentives that was conditional upon its agreement to suspend all uranium enrichment activities. American officials have said such a refusal will lead to sanctions and other punitive measures. In Tehran, the Iranian nuclear negotiator, Ali Larijani, delivered a document containing the rejection to representatives of the six countries leading the diplomacy on the crisis. When the five major powers met in Paris last month, they said Iran would "suffer sanction and other punitive measures". But Chinese and Russian diplomats are backpedaling saying punitive measures were not included in the final Paris declaration. The hate-filled Iranian mullahocracy may feel strong enough to dispense with even a pretense of pseudo-moderation. The signs point strongly in this direction. As we write, the Associated Press, citing UN officials and diplomats, reports that Iran has turned away UN inspectors wanting to examine its underground nuclear site in an apparent violation of the Nonproliferation Treaty. The refusal is reportedly unprecedented. Coming on the heels of the weekend's events--large-scale Iranian military exercises featuring the firing of 10 short-range missiles--the move is clearly calculated to signal defiance and steadfastness. Which should come as no surprise to anyone who has followed the Iranian issue, especially from our angle--the role of China in fueling conflict and crisis in the context of its aggressive, mercantilist "energy diplomacy" and imperialist foreign policy. Despite China's vote for the weakened Security Council resolution, Iran, like China's vassal, North Korea, is confident that when push comes to shove it can count on both China and Russia to block meaningful anti-Iranian action at the UN--meaning authorization for use of force under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter. [...]The fact that Beijing is bold enough to deepen its ties with Islamist Iran, given the US role in spurring China's spectacular growth is more than disturbing. It is inexcusable. The US is China's largest consumer market; and US investment bankers are still rushing to pour money into booming, rising China. At the same time, Beijing is helping and encouraging and doing business--big business with Chinese characteristics--with America's worst enemies and the world's rogue states, like Islamic-leaning, genocidal Sudan, for instance. And China's nuclear-armed vassal, North Korea ... which was instrumental in Iran's missile and nuclear development programs ... may be preparing to test one of its nuclear bombs after defying the US and Japan with its July 4 missile launchings. China Confidential was one of the first outlets to report that Iranians were present for the provocative test firings; the report was subsequently confirmed by US Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill (a well known dove on North Korea) in testimony at a US Senate hearing. More at China Confidential Here is Thomas Sowell, one of our best and most brilliant minds, spells it out in real time: 'It is hard to think of a time when a nation -- and a whole civilization -- has drifted more futilely toward a bigger catastrophe than that looming over the United States and western civilization today. 'Nuclear weapons in the hands of Iran and North Korea mean that it is only a matter of time before there are nuclear weapons in the hands of international terrorist organizations. North Korea needs money and Iran has brazenly stated its aim as the destruction of Israel -- and both its actions and its rhetoric suggest aims that extend even beyond a second Holocaust."

Thanks to John Bolton...

Statement by Ambassador John R. Bolton, U.S. Representative to the United Nations, at the Monthly Meeting on the Situation in the Middle East, in the Security Council, August 22, 2006 Mr. President, It has been 11 days since the passage of Resolution 1701. We believe this Resolution is an important step forward, and when fully implemented, will help lay the foundation for a lasting peace in the region. The United States is now actively engaged with others to turn this opportunity into a reality. The United States takes seriously the imperative of fully implementing Resolution 1701, starting with its call to take immediate steps to extend financial and humanitarian assistance to the people of Lebanon. The United States has pledged $50 million in humanitarian assistance to Lebanon, over half of which has already been distributed. As President Bush announced yesterday, we will increase this humanitarian and reconstruction aid to more that $230 million in the weeks ahead. The President has also announced his intention to work with Congress to extend the availability of loan guarantees to help rebuild Israeli infrastructure damaged by Hezbollah’s rockets. In addition to alleviating the humanitarian problems unfolding in Southern Lebanon, it is imperative that we move as quickly as possible to secure the peace by enhancing UNIFIL, and providing robust rules of engagement. We urge potential troop contributing countries to expedite their internal decision-making processes as we strive to reach our goal of an expanded 15,000-member international force. Delay in this case does not serve the interests of anyone except those who oppose a sovereign, free and democratic Lebanon, one which is no longer used as a base to launch terrorist attacks against Israel, killing its innocent civilians. As we plan for this deployment, we should be encouraged that, broadly speaking, one of the important goals of Resolution 1701 has been achieved -- a cessation of hostilities. We are concerned, of course, by reports of sporadic violence, but we stress that Resolution 1701 guarantees Israel's right to defend itself and its forces. Israel has said that this past weekend's operation in the Bekaa valley was targeted against arms shipments to Hezbollah from Iran and Syria. Such arms shipments are, of course, legally prohibited by the arms embargo established by Resolution 1701 unless specifically authorized by the Government of Lebanon. All states must comply with their obligations observe this embargo, which, if not strictly observed, will significantly enhance the risk of further hostilities. This burden of abiding by the arms embargo, and the world's attention, falls especially on Syria and Iran. Resolution 1701 is not just about a cessation of hostilities. Resolution 1701 correctly emphasizes not only the need for an end of violence, but "the need to address urgently the causes that have given rise to the current crisis, including the unconditional release of the abducted Israeli soldiers." It is impossible, indeed dangerous, to divorce the two issues. If the international community applies only a temporary band-aid solution to the problem and allows Hezbollah to regroup and re-arm, then the suffering of the people of Lebanon and Israel may very well intensify in the near future. But we must keep in mind that responsibility for this conflict rests squarely on the shoulders Hezbollah. As President Bush stated unequivocally last week: "It was an unprovoked attack by Hezbollah on Israel that started this conflict. Hezbollah terrorists targeted Israeli civilians with daily rocket attacks. Hezbollah terrorists used Lebanese civilians as human shields, sacrificing the innocent in an effort to protect themselves from Israeli response." If we are to achieve the goal of a lasting peace in the region, then we must put an end to Hezbollah operating as a state within a state. To do so, of course, requires us to address the backing of Hezbollah by Damascus and Tehran. Their continued support to Hezbollah in the form of financing, training and supply of armaments does not just perpetuate this crisis -- it sustains it. Cutting off these supply lines, as mandated in 1701, is a matter that can no longer be ignored. The United States calls upon Iran and Syria to comply immediately with Resolution 1701. The United States remains deeply concerned with the attitude of Syria and Iran in this crisis -- states whose leaders have both respectively called for the destruction of Israel in recent days. We recognize, as President Bush stated last week, that: "The conflict in Lebanon is part of a broader struggle between freedom and terror that is unfolding across the region." We believe that full implementation of Resolution 1701 will lay the foundation to achieve a lasting peace and realize the goals outlined originally in Resolution 1559 -- a sovereign and democratically elected government in Lebanon, free from coercion by all outside governments. The United States also remains deeply concerned by the ongoing crisis between Israel and the Palestinians, instigated by the June 25 attack by Hamas inside Israel in which two Israeli soldiers were killed, and Corporal Gilad Shalit was kidnapped. The United States is keenly aware of the humanitarian impact of the current crisis, which has been caused by the refusal of the Hamas-led PA government to govern responsibly. Instead, the Hamas government has made a strategic decision to reject peace and continue to embrace terrorism. In order to ease the hardships faced by the Palestinian people due to the intransigent policies of the Hamas-led PA government, we have increased humanitarian assistance to over $270 million, including more than $50 million in response to UNRWA’s Emergency Appeal for the West Bank and Gaza. [they did what?- Atlas]We have also substantially increased our support for democracy and civil society promotion, and private sector development. In the days ahead, we look forward to the continued implementation of Resolution 1701. But we cannot stress enough the urgent need to move quickly to implement fully the obligations imposed on us in accordance with Resolution 1701. The price of failure in this case is to condemn the people of Lebanon and Israel to further violence and tragedy.

Overt and Covert Enemies of America..

I am now back from my two week Annual Tour in the USAF. Here is a good article from Michael Barone: August 21, 2006 "In our war against Islamo-fascist terrorism, we face enemies both overt and covert. The overt enemies are, of course, the terrorists themselves. Their motives are clear: They hate our society because of its freedoms and liberties, and want to make us all submit to their totalitarian form of Islam. They are busy trying to wreak harm on us in any way they can. Against them we can fight back, as we did when British authorities arrested the men and women who were plotting to blow up a dozen airliners over the Atlantic. Our covert enemies are harder to identify, for they live in large numbers within our midst. And in terms of intentions, they are not enemies in the sense that they consciously wish to destroy our society. On the contrary, they enjoy our freedoms and often call for their expansion. But they have also been working, over many years, to undermine faith in our society and confidence in its goodness. These covert enemies are those among our elites who have promoted the ideas labeled as multiculturalism, moral relativism and (the term is Professor Samuel Huntington's) transnationalism. At the center of their thinking is a notion of moral relativism. No idea is morally superior to another. Hitler had his way, we have ours -- who's to say who is right? No ideas should be "privileged," especially those that have been the guiding forces in the development and improvement of Western civilization. Rich white men have imposed their ideas because of their wealth and through the use of force. Rich white nations imposed their rule on benighted people of color around the world. For this sin of imperialism they must forever be regarded as morally stained and presumptively wrong. Our covert enemies go quickly from the notion that all societies are morally equal to the notion that all societies are morally equal except ours, which is worse. These are the ideas that have been transmitted over a long generation by the elites who run our universities and our schools, and who dominate our mainstream media. They teach an American history with the good parts left out and the bad parts emphasized. We are taught that some of the Founding Fathers were slaveholders -- and are left ignorant of their proclamations of universal liberties and human rights. We are taught that Japanese-Americans were interned in World War II -- and not that American military forces liberated millions from tyranny. To be sure, the great mass of Americans tend to resist these teachings. By the millions they buy and read serious biographies of the Founders and accounts of the Greatest Generation. But the teachings of our covert enemies have their effect. Of course, this distorts history. We are taught that American slavery was the most evil institution in human history. But every society in history has had slavery. Only one society set out to and did abolish it. The movement to abolish first the slave trade and then slavery was not started by the reason-guided philosophies of 18th century France. It was started, as Adam Hochschild documents in his admirable book "Bury the Chains," by Quakers and Evangelical Christians in Britain, followed in time by similar men and women in America. The slave trade was ended not by Africans, but by the Royal Navy, with aid from the U.S. Navy even before the Civil War. Nevertheless, the default assumption of our covert enemies is that in any conflict between the West and the Rest, the West is wrong. That assumption can be rebutted by overwhelming fact: Few argued for the Taliban after Sept. 11. But in our continuing struggles, our covert enemies portray our work in Iraq through the lens of Abu Ghraib and consider Israel's self-defense against Hezbollah as the oppression of virtuous victims by evil men. In World War II, our elites understood that we were the forces of good and that victory was essential. Today, many of our elites subject our military and intelligence actions to fine-tooth-comb analysis and find that they are morally repugnant. We have always had our covert enemies, but their numbers were few until the 1960s. But then the elite young men who declined to serve in the military during the Vietnam War set out to write a narrative in which they, rather than those who obeyed the call to duty, were the heroes. They have propagated their ideas through the universities, the schools and mainstream media to the point that they are the default assumptions of millions. Our covert enemies don't want the Islamo-fascists to win. But in some corner of their hearts, they would like us to lose.

The "moderate" Iranians..

Not too much different from the "radical" Iranians: From Gateway Pundit "Top Iranian Cleric Warns US to Learn From Lebanon A member of Hezbollah admitted to the Russian news service Izvestia on Thursday that Iran and Syria helped with the "victory" over Israel.Meanwhile, at Friday prayers in Tehran...Iran's former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani delivered his threats during Friday prayers in Tehran August 18, 2006. (REUTERS/Raheb Homavandi) The former Iranian president warned the US not to confront Tehran but to learn from the War in Lebanon:"We expect America to have learned enough (from the Israel-Hezbollah war) not to enter another game and upset the security of the region," Rafsanjani said in his Friday prayer sermon carried live on state radio. The former president said the United States would be wise to try and resolve its nuclear standoff with Iran through negotiations. Washington said Thursday it will move quickly for UN Security Council action on sanctions against Iran if Tehran refuses to halt its sensitive uranium enrichment work by August 31, as demanded by a UN resolution. The United States and other Western countries suspect that Iran is enriching uranium to use in nuclear weapons. Iran insists the program is to make fuel for civilian reactors.Elsewhere in the region, Kurds have fled their homes in the northern frontier region of Iraq after four days of shelling by the Iranian army.

Blogger memorial for 9/11 heroes..

I signed up to be a part of the 2,996 project. We bloggers will be paying our respects and honor to those lost on September 11, 2001. My hero is: Jean Marie Wallendorf, age 23. Place killed: World Trade Center. Resident of New York, N.Y. (USA). Jean Marie Wallendorf will be honored by Jarred Fishman at the blog Air Force Pundit. This was the 1913th blogger to sign up for the 2,996 Tribute project. She was a physically beautiful woman, and I am sure a beautiful woman on the inside as well. There will be much more about Jean Marie in the next few weeks.

Some of Hollywood supports Israel and the war on terror..

Big props to these Hollywood actors and producers/directors who are making a stand for a better world. Some big names here. We need more of them..

Ties between 9/11 and latest British plot..

From Captain Quarters blog: "German authorities are investigating a possible link between the captured terrorists of the recent airliner plot and a key figure in the Hamburg cell who worked with Mohammed Atta on the 9/11 attacks. Said Bahaji, a computer expert who helped plan 9/11, may have provided the same assistance to these suspected al-Qaeda terrorists: German authorities are investigating contacts between a Briton being questioned over the alleged plot to blow up transatlantic airlines and a key figure in the September 11, 2001, terrorist cell. Intelligence sources said that, at Britain’s request, they were examining possible links between the suspect and Said Bahaji, the computer expert in the Hamburg cell that planned the suicide hijackings in 2001. Bahaji shared an apartment in Hamburg with Mohamed Atta, the lead hijacker, and Ramzi Binalshibh, the planner of 9/11. He fled Germany for Pakistan a week before the attacks in New York and Washington and has never been caught. Bahaji's name came up in the 9/11 Commission report, at least briefly. Bahaji was an odd duck in the Hamburg cell. For one, he was the only German citizen in the group. Bahaji spent five months in the German Army before getting a medical discharge. He had only limited knowledge of Islam despite his Moroccan heritage, but eagerly volunteered for violence. His assistance to Atta and Ramzi Binalshibh went beyond enthusiasm, however. He gave them access to the Internet for their research, and investigators later found disks and documents showing the Internet surfing done by the terror leaders. While Atta traveled to Afghanistan for training, Bahaji maintained a false front in Germany, covering their absence in order to throw off suspicion. He has long since fled Germany. Bahaji flew to Pakistan days ahead of the 9/11 attacks, thanks to Khalid Sheikh Mohammed's warning to the Hamburg cell that the date of the attack was quickly approaching. He bought his tickets to Karachi and left on September 3rd. American authorities would love to get their hands on Bahaji, and now it looks like the British would also want a crack at him. The financing of the scheme has also been coming under more scrutiny. According to the Times of London, the Crescent Relief charity may have laundered some of the money that fueled this terror cell. The charity's founding trustee, Abdul Rauf, is the father of Rashid Rauf, whom the Pakistanis now hold in connection to the plot. Another of Rauf's sons, Tayib, was among those arrested last week in Britain. Crescent Relief and Pakistan-based Jamaat-ud-Dawa raised large amounts of money, much of it in cash, following the earthquake in Kashmir. Now the British would like to know where it went. This plot looked like an al-Qaeda production from the beginning. If Said Bahaji can be tied to it, that diagnosis looks pretty accurate.

Why Israel has won this battle..

If this was a defeat, the Israelis must be praying for a lot more of them Tim Hames August 14, 2006 UK Times IF ONLY Israel were as effective at public relations as at military operations, the results of the conflict on and around its border with Lebanon would be so much starker. As it is, however, the real meaning of the UN resolution that will start to come into force today is being widely misrepresented. Hezbollah is hailing a “victory” of sorts, albeit one of a presentational character. In a bizarre situation, Israeli politicians on both the hard Left and the hard Right appear to agree with the terrorists. All are profoundly mistaken. What, after all, does this Hezbollah claim consist of? The organisation considers it a triumph that it has not been completely “destroyed” after just four weeks of fighting. It contrasts this with the dismal record of several Arab armies combined in 1967. It has not yet been disarmed and may not be formally neutralised in the near future. Nor has it been discredited on the Arab street, where it has enhanced its popularity. The Hezbollah leader, Sheikh Hassan Nasrullah, thus proclaims himself a “new Nasser”. As victories rank, not being destroyed, disarmed or discredited is not that impressive. It is hardly Henry V at Agincourt. The idea that the Six-Day War represents the military standard for the Arab world is a somewhat humiliating notion. Allowing for the feeble record of the original Nasser, Israelis should not be too disturbed by the prospect of another incarnation. Nor was the Arab street that equivocal about Israel’s existence before these clashes started. The facts now evident on the ground suggest an entirely different assessment. First, the damage inflicted by the Israeli Defence Forces on Hezbollah’s infrastructure and resources is far, far greater than the equivalent harm that it has suffered. A sizeable proportion of Hezbollah rocket launchers and fighters have been eliminated, while the Israeli army has lost no more than a few tanks and, to its regret, about 100 soldiers. For a body that is used to incessant combat, this is not a spectacular setback. Secondly, Hezbollah has deployed a huge percentage of its missile arsenal to very little advantage. Only in the Alice in Wonderland world of the Middle East could it be seen as a “triumph” for a terrorist organisation simply to launch Katyusha missiles in the direction of Israel and roughly 95 per cent of them to hit nothing of any value. It took Hezbollah six years to accumulate a stockpile that, fundamentally, it has wasted. Thirdly, the administration in Lebanon, which had ostentatiously refused to send its soldiers to the south of that country for the past six years, has been obliged to pledge to the United Nations that it will now do so. It will, furthermore, be under the de facto control of a much larger international force than has been assembled in that region before — one that will be judged a success or otherwise by the extent to which it keeps the place quiet. The wider strategic consequences of these recent events are yet more significant. Hezbollah was, until July 11, a problem exclusively for Israel. That dilemma has been internationalised. It is now of paramount importance to the Lebanese Government and the UN Security Council. If Lebanon’s troops cannot pacify Hezbollah then ministers there well know that Israel’s air force will be back over Beirut. The UN will come to appreciate that if it cannot maintain the peace this will be because Hezbollah has broken the ceasefire that the Security Council imposed, and its own authority will be endangered. This is an important breakthrough for Israel. If Ehud Olmert, the Prime Minister, had been told six weeks ago that Hezbollah would cease to be the principal militia in southern Lebanon by the beginning of September he wouldn’t have believed it possible. Further, Israel’s security has been improved more than has been acknowledged. Fewer than three years ago, Israel’s northern border was exposed to Hezbollah, its eastern boundary with the West Bank was so porous that suicide bombers regularly broke through it and its military was engaged in a bitter and often futile attempt to contain Hamas in Gaza. As of now, it can be confident of pushing Hezbollah back beyond the Litani river in Lebanon, the barrier it erected around the West Bank has reduced the number of suicide blast atrocities to the level of an unfortunate irritation and Hamas, whose military command was decapitated by Israel in a series of controversial strikes in 2004, is more likely to engage in a civil war with Fatah than it is seriously to inconvenience Mr Olmert. The final dimension to this saga may, nevertheless, prove the most compelling. The past few weeks have exposed Iran’s pivotal role as the political patron of terrorism as well as the audacity and extent of its ambitions to shape Islam in its image. None of this has taken Israel by surprise. It has been a severe blow to Egypt, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Jews constitute no threat to mainstream Sunni Islam. The Shia challenge is another matter. Once the crocodile tears for Lebanon have dried up (which will take a month at most) and the mood on the Arab street has moved on (which will not take much longer), it will become obvious to Sunni regimes that Israel is an ally against Iran. The rhetoric directed against Israel will not abate, but it will be increasingly irrelevant. That Lebanese civilians with no connection to terrorism have died while all this has occurred is a tragedy of the highest order. Israel relied too much on air power at the start of these exchanges and allowed its opponents a propaganda opportunity. Yet, in the end, Israel’s survival does not depend on Arab “hearts and minds” or opinions expressed by television viewers who live many thousands of miles away. It relies instead on winning crucial battles. If this is a “defeat”, then Israel can afford many similar outcomes.

Lessons from the War..

LESSONS SO FAR- HARD TRUTHS TO LEARN FROM ISRAEL'S WAR ON HEZBOLLAH August 13, 2006 -- ISRAEL'S war against the Middle East's first true terrorist army provides tough military and strategic lessons - old, new, and all too often disheartening. Israel's been winning on the ground. And still losing the war. This bitter conflict - in which most casualties on both sides of the border are civilians - raises troubling questions, too. Some are identical to those confronting us in Iraq. Many have troubling answers. Others have no real answers at all. The elementary fact - which far too many in the West deny - is that our civilization has been forced into a defensive war to the death with fanatical strains of Islam - both Shi'a and Sunni. We may be on the offensive militarily, but we did not start this war - and it's all one war, from 9/11's Ground Zero, through Lebanon and Iraq, and on to Afghanistan. Until that ugly fact gains wide acceptance, we'll continue to make little decisive progress. American or Israeli, our troops are trying. But the truth is that we're really just holding the line. We have not yet begun to fight. And many among us still dream of avoiding this war altogether. It can't be done. Because our enemies - Hezbollah, al Qaeda, Islamist militias, regimes in Iran, Syria and elsewhere - are determined to confront us. We're going to learn the hard way. But we're going to learn. Meanwhile, here's what the latest battlefield has to say to us: Lesson 1: You can win every tactical engagement and still lose at the strategic level. Israel's fought well. But its forces did a polite minuet, while its enemy's danced madly in the streets. The Israeli Defense Forces have done what their government asked of them. But the Olmert government asked them to do the wrong things - and to do too little for too long. On the ground, in the air and at sea, the IDF or our own forces can't be beaten. But without sound strategic planning, our tactical wins will not add up to victory. We have to re-learn this lesson again and again: Vietnam, Somalia, Iraq - and now Lebanon. Lesson 2: The global media can overturn the verdict of the battlefield. Too many politicians and generals still don't get it. This new truth about war slapped us in the face during the First Battle of Fallujah. Now, facing a hostile global media, the Israelis are learning it. Lesson 3: If you start off on the wrong foot in war, you may never recover your balance. This old rule never changes. The Israeli government dreamed of fighting a short, clean war on the cheap. Now they're playing incremental catch-up. It's a formula for stalemate, if not defeat. If you must go to war, go with everything you've got. From Day One. In war, the only bargain at any price is victory. Lesson 4: Technology alone can't win 21st-century wars. You've heard it before and, sadly, you'll hear it again. These asymmetrical, brutal human conflicts require flesh-and-blood solutions - boots on the ground, not just airpower. Lesson 5: Never underestimate your enemy. Another timeless rule. The Israelis did it in 1973, and now they've done it again. They undervalued Hezbollah's preparedness for a serious war, its armaments, its training - and its tenacity. And we ourselves did it after Baghdad fell. This is one of the worst mistakes any government and military can make. Lesson 6: In war, take the pain up front, and the overall suffering will be far less. A policy of casualty aversion - in Israel or in the United States - results in more casualties in the end. Because the IDF wasn't permitted to wage a serious war from the first day (and it remains severely restricted even now), the rockets continued to rain down on Israel - while Hezbollah won the propaganda war. Lesson 7: Terrorism is no longer a limited, diffuse, disorganized threat. Hezbollah has an army, if of a new and innovative kind. Iran and Syria supply, support and succor it. It has strategic depth and startling resilience. With Hezbollah on point, Shi'a terror is now better-prepared to wage post-modern war than Sunni organizations such as al Qaeda. We're witnessing the rise of trans-national terrorist armies. There are many more lessons, especially down at the soldier level. But let's turn to two critical questions: Can a military that relies heavily on reserve call-ups win this new kind of war? For Israel, it's an existential question. My own conclusion is that the IDF, as currently structured, is living on borrowed time. Having seen our own forces operating in Iraq and the IDF at work along the Lebanese border, my frank assessment is that Israel's brave reserve brigades would crumble in fights such as those in Fallujah or Ramadi. This isn't the West Bank anymore. This is war to the death. The IDF must stop looking backward toward its proud heritage and look honestly at the future of war. Can we win "Eastern" wars with Western values? I doubt it. This question is going to eat at our consciences for years to come - even as we learn to do what must be done. Despite media lies about Israeli "atrocities," the IDF has been doing all it can to spare civilians. For example, the Israelis repeatedly risked commando teams deep in hostile territory to take out Hezbollah command-and-control cells - instead of just leveling the crowded apartment buildings where the terrorists were hiding. But, ultimately, all of the special operations in the world will fall far short of delivering decisive, crushing victories. We are going to have to learn to fight by the enemy's rules. And we aren't going to like it. The wars of the future will be won by those with the greater strength of will. And boundless determination is one weapon that Islamist extremists unquestionably possess. Do we? Ralph Peters' new book is "Never Quit The Fight."

Bojinka II terror attacks thwarted by MI5..

LONDON — America may have been just days away from another Sept. 11, Department of Homeland Security officials said. That dire assessment came hours after British police swooped in and arrested 24 people in London Thursday, busting up an alleged terrorist plot to blow 10 packed U.S.-bound jetliners out of the sky over the Atlantic.The plot was foiled when an undercover British agent infiltrated the UK-based group, and passed information to authorities, FOX News has learned. Early Friday, the names of 19 of the 24 suspects accused in the plotting were made public by British officials.And it became clear information that played "a very important role" in the subsequent arrest of the 24 in London was provided to Pakistani officials by British nationals arrested in Pakistan in connection with the plot a week ago, according to a government official there. (Full story) Five Pakistanis were arrested Friday on suspicion that they served as local "facilitators" for those two Britons, the official said. British Home Secretary John Reid said his country was grateful for Pakistan's cooperation.The suspects in the plot allegedly planned to smuggle peroxide-based liquid ingredients disguised as sports drinks that could be mixed aboard the flight to produce an explosive compound possibly detonated by a device disguised as a digital camera or audio player, Department of Homeland Security Director Michael Chertoff to FOX News' Bill O'Reilly."I think we were facing the possibility of someone bringing in individual components, each of which would look very innocuous and very common, and literally assembling the bomb in the final minutes on the plane itself," he said.U.S. counterterrorism officials said the suspects targeted United, American, and Continental airlines flights bound for New York, Washington and California. The Bank of England froze the assets of 19 people early Friday and released their names, saying they had been arrested on Thursday. All had Muslim names, many of which are common in Pakistan. The youngest person was 17, the oldest 35. Meanwhile, the DHS raised the terror alert level for commercial flights from Britain to the U.S. to code-red. It's the first time the U.S. has raised the alert level to its maximum since the system was instituted in March 2002. Chertoff said the decision to raise the alert level was made after British officials bumped their terror alert level to their highest. Reid said Friday the British threat level would remain at "critical."Passengers endured long lines and arduous waits as airport security maticulously searched baggage for liquids and gels, which, except for baby food, were barred from all flights in Britain and the U.S.Airport trash bins bulged with everything from mouthwash and shaving cream to maple syrup and fine wine. Click here for full story on new carry-on restrictions and procedures.There was no word on how long the heightened security measures would last, but Chertoff said that once authorities are able to get their hands on the devices, reverse engineers may be able analyze them and then recalibrate detection equipment to identify such devices in the future. "While we are doing that, we are going to be safe rather than sorry ... and that's why we are putting this measure in effect about screening all liquids out," Chertoff said.A senior U.S. counterterrorism official said authorities believe dozens of people — possibly as many as 50 — were involved in the plot, and that more arrests were expected. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation."We think the British succeeded in disrupting the plot ... but their judgment was that, given the haste in which they had to move, they could not be a hundred [percent] sure that they scooped up everybody nor were they sure that there weren't other affiliated parts of the network still at large and still capable of carrying out a bombing," Chertoff said.Tariq Azim Khan, the Pakistani minister of state for information, said about the suspects that "these people were born and brought up in the United Kingdom. Some of them may have parents who were immigrants from Pakistan." The raids were based partly on intelligence emanating from Pakistan where authorities detained three other suspects several days ago. British and U.S. intelligence officials decided to move quickly after learning the plotters planned to stage a dry-run within two days, with the actual attack expected just days after that, U.S. intelligence officers said on condition of anonymity.Raids were carried out at homes in London, the nearby town of High Wycombe and in Birmingham, in central England. Searches continued throughout the day, and police cordoned off streets in several locations. Police also combed a wooded area in High Wycombe. British authorities said they were "urgently" seeking the arrests of up to 10 more suspects.At least one martyrdom tape was found, a federal law enforcement official in Washington said. Such tapes, as well as the scheme to strike a range of targets at roughly the same time, are hallmarks of Al Qaeda plots.A U.S. congressman briefed by intelligence officials, who did not want to be identified because of the sensitivity of the investigation, said U.S. intelligence had intercepted terrorist chatter and British intelligence helped thwart the plot through undercover work. "If this plot had actually occurred, the world would have stood still," Mark Mershon, assistant director of the FBI, told the AP in New York. Although American, British and Pakistani authorities repeatedly referred to Al Qaeda, all of them stop short of directly accusing Usama bin Laden 's terror network. The plane bombings could have come just ahead of the fifth anniversary of Sept. 11. "In terms of scale, it was probably designed to be ... a new Sept. 11," said Jean-Charles Brisard, a French private investigator who works with lawyers of many Sept. 11 victims. "It involved the same tools, the same transportation tools and devices." President Bush called the plot a "stark reminder" of the continued threat to the United States from extremist Muslims."It is a mistake to believe that there is no threat to the United States of America, and that is why we have given our officials the tools they need to keep Americans safe," Bush said.Plots to blow up airliners using liquid explosives are not new. In 1995, officials foiled a plan by terrorist mastermind Ramzi Youssef, whose uncle Khalid Shaikh Mohammed oversaw the Sept. 11 attacks, to blow up 12 Western jetliners simultaneously over the Pacific. The alleged plot involved improvised bombs using liquid hidden in contact lens solution containers. Yousef is now an inmate at the Supermax federal prison in Florence, Colorado. Experts, however, said the nature of the plot could herald a new age of terrorism where attackers have access to explosives that are easy to carry and conceal. Emergency security measures quickly implemented on Thursday provided a stark vision of the possible future of air travel. Mothers tasted baby food in front of airport security guards to prove it contained no liquid explosives. Liquids and gels were banned from flights. Travelers repacked their luggage in airports, stowing all but the most necessary items in the hold. The close call also shifted attention once more to Britain's Islamic community just over a year after the July 7 London transit attacks that killed 52. Three Britons of Pakistani descent and a Jamaican convert to Islam carried out those deadly bombings with a peroxide-based explosive that trained operatives can make using ordinary ingredients such as hair bleach.Homeland Security Deputy Secretary Michael Jackson said his agency had known for several days of the unfolding plot but waited for a signal from the British to announce it.All other flights to and within the United States were put under an orange alert, one step below red, but an escalation from the yellow status that had been in effect.Administration officials sought to reassure the traveling public at the same time they imposed heightened security restrictions."Today, air traffic is safe, and air traffic will remain safe precisely because of the measures we are adopting today," Chertoff said.

Hizballah UAV Further Illustrates Iranian Support

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross The Mirsad-1 UAV. Click image to view. On Monday night, the IAF's F-16 fighters shot down a Hizballah unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) ten kilometers off the coast of Acre. The drone reportedly had the capacity to carry 90 pounds of explosives. Hizballah's drone was a Misrad-1, which is the same model as the Iranian Mohajer. It is also the same model UAV that Hizballah previously launched twice: in November 2004 and April 2005. In late 2004, Stratfor stated, "European intelligence sources say Hezbollah has acquired two to three UAVs from Iran . . . . In addition, Hezbollah has gathered an international team of engineers and scientists to equip the UAVs with a weapons system, enabling it to use the aircraft for a limited combat role as well as reconnaissance. Some reports indicate that later versions of the Iranian Mohajer can be equipped to fire chemical weapons." And Israeli sources provided similar analysis in 2004, stating that "Iran supplied Hezbollah with 8 such drones, and over the past two years some 30 Lebanese operatives have undergone training at Revolutionary Guards' bases near Isfahan to fly similar aircraft." The drone launch comes atop ongoing revelations about the degree to which Iran has managed to build up Hizballah's deadly arsenal. Writing in the Weekly Standard in late July, counterterrorism consultant Dan Darling provided a detailed analysis of Hizballah's arsenal: Hezbollah has deployed a range of extremely sophisticated weapons against Israel. The most notable has been the Iranian C-802 Noor (Tondar) variant of the Chinese Silkworm missile that was used against an Israeli gunship off the Lebanese coast. Four Israeli sailors were killed, and the gunship was put out of commission. The Associated Press reports that "Iran is believed to have supplied Hezbollah with up to 120 Fajr-3 and Fajr-5 rockets, with ranges of 22 miles and 45 miles respectively," noting that it was a Fajr-3 that is thought to have been responsible for an attack on Haifa that killed 8 civilians. More recently, Israeli military officials have sought to destroy sites in Lebanon believed to house long-range Zelzal missiles of Iranian manufacture that they suspect are capable of hitting Tel Aviv. CBN News analyst John Waage also noted that "[t]he Russian made Metis M anti-tank missile, supplied by Iran, is among the most deadly weapons in the Hezbollah arsenal. At least 44 Israeli soldiers have been killed by the missiles, which can punch through the steel of Israel’s highly-regarded Merkava tanks." One cannot understand the current conflict in Lebanon without understanding the degree that Iran has sponsored Hizballah and built up its arsenal. And just as Iran is the key to understanding the present realities of the conflict, so too is its sponsorship a critical factor in understanding what Hizballah's future will be after a ceasefire is eventually reached.

Iran's end game..

August 22 Does Iran have something in store? BY BERNARD LEWIS Tuesday, August 8, 2006 4:30 p.m. EDT During the Cold War, both sides possessed weapons of mass destruction, but neither side used them, deterred by what was known as MAD, mutual assured destruction. Similar constraints have no doubt prevented their use in the confrontation between India and Pakistan. In our own day a new such confrontation seems to be looming between a nuclear-armed Iran and its favorite enemies, named by the late Ayatollah Khomeini as the Great Satan and the Little Satan, i.e., the United States and Israel. Against the U.S. the bombs might be delivered by terrorists, a method having the advantage of bearing no return address. Against Israel, the target is small enough to attempt obliteration by direct bombardment. It seems increasingly likely that the Iranians either have or very soon will have nuclear weapons at their disposal, thanks to their own researches (which began some 15 years ago), to some of their obliging neighbors, and to the ever-helpful rulers of North Korea. The language used by Iranian President Ahmadinejad would seem to indicate the reality and indeed the imminence of this threat. Would the same constraints, the same fear of mutual assured destruction, restrain a nuclear-armed Iran from using such weapons against the U.S. or against Israel? There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers. This worldview and expectation, vividly expressed in speeches, articles and even schoolbooks, clearly shape the perception and therefore the policies of Ahmadinejad and his disciples. Even in the past it was clear that terrorists claiming to act in the name of Islam had no compunction in slaughtering large numbers of fellow Muslims. A notable example was the blowing up of the American embassies in East Africa in 1998, killing a few American diplomats and a much larger number of uninvolved local passersby, many of them Muslims. There were numerous other Muslim victims in the various terrorist attacks of the last 15 years. The phrase "Allah will know his own" is usually used to explain such apparently callous unconcern; it means that while infidel, i.e., non-Muslim, victims will go to a well-deserved punishment in hell, Muslims will be sent straight to heaven. According to this view, the bombers are in fact doing their Muslim victims a favor by giving them a quick pass to heaven and its delights--the rewards without the struggles of martyrdom. School textbooks tell young Iranians to be ready for a final global struggle against an evil enemy, named as the U.S., and to prepare themselves for the privileges of martyrdom. A direct attack on the U.S., though possible, is less likely in the immediate future. Israel is a nearer and easier target, and Mr. Ahmadinejad has given indication of thinking along these lines. The Western observer would immediately think of two possible deterrents. The first is that an attack that wipes out Israel would almost certainly wipe out the Palestinians too. The second is that such an attack would evoke a devastating reprisal from Israel against Iran, since one may surely assume that the Israelis have made the necessary arrangements for a counterstrike even after a nuclear holocaust in Israel. The first of these possible deterrents might well be of concern to the Palestinians--but not apparently to their fanatical champions in the Iranian government. The second deterrent--the threat of direct retaliation on Iran--is, as noted, already weakened by the suicide or martyrdom complex that plagues parts of the Islamic world today, without parallel in other religions, or for that matter in the Islamic past. This complex has become even more important at the present day, because of this new apocalyptic vision. In Islam, as in Judaism and Christianity, there are certain beliefs concerning the cosmic struggle at the end of time--Gog and Magog, anti-Christ, Armageddon, and for Shiite Muslims, the long awaited return of the Hidden Imam, ending in the final victory of the forces of good over evil, however these may be defined. Mr. Ahmadinejad and his followers clearly believe that this time is now, and that the terminal struggle has already begun and is indeed well advanced. It may even have a date, indicated by several references by the Iranian president to giving his final answer to the U.S. about nuclear development by Aug. 22. This was at first reported as "by the end of August," but Mr. Ahmadinejad's statement was more precise. What is the significance of Aug. 22? This year, Aug. 22 corresponds, in the Islamic calendar, to the 27th day of the month of Rajab of the year 1427. This, by tradition, is the night when many Muslims commemorate the night flight of the prophet Muhammad on the winged horse Buraq, first to "the farthest mosque," usually identified with Jerusalem, and then to heaven and back (c.f., Koran XVII.1). This might well be deemed an appropriate date for the apocalyptic ending of Israel and if necessary of the world. It is far from certain that Mr. Ahmadinejad plans any such cataclysmic events precisely for Aug. 22. But it would be wise to bear the possibility in mind. A passage from the Ayatollah Khomeini, quoted in an 11th-grade Iranian schoolbook, is revealing. "I am decisively announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers [i.e., the infidel powers] wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against their whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another's hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours." In this context, mutual assured destruction, the deterrent that worked so well during the Cold War, would have no meaning. At the end of time, there will be general destruction anyway. What will matter will be the final destination of the dead--hell for the infidels, and heaven for the believers. For people with this mindset, MAD is not a constraint; it is an inducement. How then can one confront such an enemy, with such a view of life and death? Some immediate precautions are obviously possible and necessary. In the long term, it would seem that the best, perhaps the only hope is to appeal to those Muslims, Iranians, Arabs and others who do not share these apocalyptic perceptions and aspirations, and feel as much threatened, indeed even more threatened, than we are. There must be many such, probably even a majority in the lands of Islam. Now is the time for them to save their countries, their societies and their religion from the madness of MAD. Mr. Lewis, professor emeritus at Princeton, is the author, most recently, of "From Babel to Dragomans: Interpreting the Middle East" (Oxford University Press, 2004).

Iran will use a nuclear bomb...

Bernard Lewis writes that if (or when) Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it will use them; deterrence and containment are not applicable where Iran is concerned: There is a radical difference between the Islamic Republic of Iran and other governments with nuclear weapons. This difference is expressed in what can only be described as the apocalyptic worldview of Iran's present rulers. This worldview and expectation, vividly expressed in speeches, articles and even schoolbooks, clearly shape the perception and therefore the policies of Ahmadinejad and his disciples. Even in the past it was clear that terrorists claiming to act in the name of Islam had no compunction in slaughtering large numbers of fellow Muslims. ... The phrase "Allah will know his own" is usually used to explain such apparently callous unconcern; it means that while infidel, i.e., non-Muslim, victims will go to a well-deserved punishment in hell, Muslims will be sent straight to heaven. According to this view, the bombers are in fact doing their Muslim victims a favor by giving them a quick pass to heaven and its delights — the rewards without the struggles of martyrdom. School textbooks tell young Iranians to be ready for a final global struggle against an evil enemy, named as the U.S., and to prepare themselves for the privileges of martyrdom. ...A passage from the Ayatollah Khomeini, quoted in an 11th-grade Iranian schoolbook, is revealing. "I am decisively announcing to the whole world that if the world-devourers [i.e., the infidel powers] wish to stand against our religion, we will stand against their whole world and will not cease until the annihilation of all them. Either we all become free, or we will go to the greater freedom which is martyrdom. Either we shake one another's hands in joy at the victory of Islam in the world, or all of us will turn to eternal life and martyrdom. In both cases, victory and success are ours." In this context, mutual assured destruction, the deterrent that worked so well during the Cold War, would have no meaning. At the end of time, there will be general destruction anyway. What will matter will be the final destination of the dead — hell for the infidels, and heaven for the believers. For people with this mindset, MAD is not a constraint; it is an inducement. How then can one confront such an enemy, with such a view of life and death? Some immediate precautions are obviously possible and necessary. In the long term, it would seem that the best, perhaps the only hope is to appeal to those Muslims, Iranians, Arabs and others who do not share these apocalyptic perceptions and aspirations, and feel as much threatened, indeed even more threatened, than we are. There must be many such, probably even a majority in the lands of Islam. Now is the time for them to save their countries, their societies and their religion from the madness of MAD.

Is Hezbollah launching Iran's Armageddon?

By Omar Fadhil- Philly News Augst 4, 2006 It's common wisdom to say that the war between Hezbollah and Israel is a regional struggle that also includes Iran and Syria, who have supported and supplied Hezbollah. What seems to be less understood is that this is the first war between the Islamic Republic of Iran and Israel, via Iran's proxy Hezbollah, and that its overarching purpose is to advance Iran's ambitions to export the Islamic revolution throughout the Middle East.Thus, while religion has always played an important role in prior Arab-Israeli wars, this time it has moved to center stage. It is the theological aspect of this conflict that makes it so explosive and could lead to its expansion. As an observer of the conflict from Iraq, I see the signs that Iran may be starting to launch the mullahs' version of an Armageddon, exploiting the religious beliefs of devout Shiites in the region. While this may sound more the stuff of prophecies than international relations, it is important to understand - especially in countries such as Lebanon and Iraq that have large Shiite populations.President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran and the Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr in Iraq are both devout believers in the "Imam" of Shia Islam. Also known as "Imam Mehdi" - hence the name of Sadr's militia, the Mehdi Army - he was the 12th grandson of the Prophet Muhammad. According to certain branches of Shia Islam, the return of the "hidden Imam" must be prepared by his followers, in a particular sequence of events. Chaos and rampant violence in the region are supposed to be among signs leading to the main battle in which the Imam will return to lead Shiites to victory. Whether Ahmadinejad and Sadr personally believe that it is their duty to prepare the ground for the rise of the Imam, or whether they are merely exploiting religious mythology for their own political purposes, Iran and its agents in Iraq are starting to make the connection between the current conflict and the return of Imam Mehdi. In eastern Baghdad, where Sadr's militias are based, there has been a sudden appearance of banners and writings on the walls carrying religious messages that refer specifically to Imam Mehdi. A large number can be seen near the Interior Ministry complex, home to police forces loyal to Sadr. And reports are surfacing that Sadr's militia is recruiting fighters to travel to Lebanon. It is not coincidental that these banners appeared within 24 hours of Hezbollah's kidnapping of the Israeli soldiers. The messages on these banners, with their unstable mixture of religion and policy, are ominous, written in a tone that invokes the rise of the Imam. One reads: "By renouncing sin and by integration for the sake of afterlife, we become the best soldiers to our leader and savior, the Mehdi." Integration is one of those words Sadr often uses in reference to preparations for the afterlife. Throughout Islamic history, rulers have used divine texts to consolidate their power. They did this either by twisting the meaning of the written texts, or by inventing thousands of alleged sayings of the prophet. In this case, it looks like the way is being paved for the "imminent" arrival of the Imam to be announced through the Mumahidoon (those who pave the way for the Imam), which is how Sadr and his followers describe themselves.In the last quarter of a century, Iran's dreams of exporting the Islamic revolution were stopped by the once strong pan-Arab nationalism in the region. No more. Once the mullahs consolidated their power in Iran through their recent "electoral coup," in which they prohibited close to a thousand candidates from running in the last parliamentary elections and thus eliminated the reformist movement from the political scene, they were able to look outward. Now they are positioning themselves to fill the ideological vacuum left by the demise of pan-Arabist socialist ideologies with Islamic fundamentalism. Iran's ambitions present a danger not only to Israel, but also to the free world, whose values are fundamentally opposed to those of radical Islamic fundamentalism. It is therefore critical that the West unite behind a clear strategy to thwart Iran's ambitions.A first step is to recognize that Iran's calculations, which may seem irrational, factor in its potential to exploit deep religious feelings and mobilize Shiite followers to fight in Lebanon, Iraq and elsewhere in preparation for the return of the Savior Imam. It is a wily strategy that must be recognized and addressed by the West, lest Iran's Armageddon Day become a self-fulfilling prophecy. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Omar Fadhil (itmblog@gmail.com) is a member of Friends of Democracy, a Baghdad-based organization to promote democratic values, and cofounder of the blog Iraq the Model (www.iraqthemodel.blogspot.com).

The Truth about the Middle East..

It's not just about land By Victor Davis Hanson http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Despite the claims of terrorist organizations, Israel's current two-front war is not just about land. After all, Hezbollah and Hamas fired rockets from Lebanon and Gaza well after Israel had withdrawn from both places. Indeed, if sacred Arab ground were the driving force of the Middle East crisis, then surely Syria itself would now be willing to risk a shooting war over the all important Israeli-occupied Golan Heights. Meanwhile, Cairo is still perhaps the nexus of virulent Arab anti-Semitism, even though Israel finished handing over Sinai to Egypt in 1982. The world prayed that after the unilateral departure of Israel from Lebanon in 2000 and Gaza in 2005, and the recent elections in Beirut and the West Bank, it was witnessing an incremental evolution toward a lasting peace between rational democratic states. Gradually, Israel was returning to its 1967 borders. In response, gradually, it was hoped, Israel's Arab neighbors would vote into office reasonable statesmen who would renounce terror and get on with the business of crafting workable economies and governments. But all that optimism presupposed a radical change in the Middle Eastern mentality. Unfortunately, that hasn't happened. So, if the most recent war in Lebanon and Gaza is not about land per se, then whence arises the elemental desire to destroy Israel? The answer boils down to Islamists feeling their reputation is at stake. Words like "honor" and "pride" are evoked — in the sense that they need to be regained — by every insecure radical in the Islamic world, from al-Qaida's Osama bin Laden to Hezbollah's Hassan Nasrallah and Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Fist-shaking crowds, fiery mullahs and terrorists all boast of not giving an inch to infidels, and of the restoration of the now sullied honor of the Islamic people. For about the last half-century, globalization has passed most of the recalcitrant Middle East by — economically, socially and politically. The result is that there are now few inventions and little science emanating from the Islamic world — but a great deal of poverty, tyranny and violence. And rather than make the necessary structural changes that might end cultural impediments to progress and modernity — such as tribalism, patriarchy, gender apartheid, polygamy, autocracy, statism and fundamentalism — too many Middle Easterners have preferred to embrace the reactionary past and the cult of victimization. At one time or another, they have welcomed all the bankrupt ideologies that traditionally blame others for prior self-induced failure: fascism, communism, Baathism, Pan-Arabism and, most recently, Islamic fundamentalism. When there is high unemployment, corruption, zero economic growth, endemic illiteracy and no freedom, mullahs, dictators and jihadists of the Middle East always seem to fault the ancient colonial power — Britain, France or Italy (though rarely Islamic Turkey) — that supposedly set them back over a century ago. Or they try blaming the omnipotent United States whose oilmen developed the riches of the Gulf and whose military has saved Muslims from Kosovo to Kuwait. But above all, for decades leaders like Gamal Nasser, Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein, Yasser Arafat and Osama bin Laden have scapegoated tiny Israel. It is the closest Western bogeyman, and its Holocaust survivors transformed a part of desert into a technologically sophisticated Western state. Israel's astounding success is a constant irritant to many nearby Muslims, representing the infidel's ability to fashion a prosperous Middle Eastern society without oil revenues under democratic auspices. Victimization turns out to be the real creed of the Middle East, uniting disparate Shiites, Sunnis, dictators, theocrats and terrorists. "They did it to us" offers an easy explanation of why Islamic states are now weak and offer little hope to millions of their poor, who, ironically, emigrate to the much pilloried West by the millions. American cash aid, Israeli concessions, windfall petrol profits and, most of all, appeasement of radical Islamists can do nothing to alleviate these perceived grievances. Instead, there will be no peace in the general Middle East until Iranians and Arabs have true constitutional government, free institutions, open markets and the rule of law. Without these reforms, they will continue to fail, seeking easy refuge in the shreds of mythical ancestral honor — and this pathetic neurosis of blaming nearby Israel for the loss of it.

Hezbollah’s Iwo Jima Delusion

August 1st, 2006 American Thinker Magazine "Recent dueling essays on The American Thinker have debated whether Israel is following the tactics of British Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery at the expense of Gen. George S. Patton’s methods. James Lewis argued that indeed the IDF’s approach was more Monty than Patton whereas Glen Tschirgi countered that Israel would be better advised to choose a lesser Patton over the “full Monty.” Unfortunately, though both writers make impressive arguments, the appropriate analogy is not found in the Europe Theater of Operations during World War II but rather the Pacific. Hezbollah’s predicament comes closer to the Japanese forces at Iwo Jima than the German Army in Normandy and Western Europe. And as such, Israel’s strategy in part calls for trapping the Hezbollah terrorist forces in their entrenched, fortified positions where Israel will cut them off from re-supply and then tear apart piece-by-piece. The formerly Hezbollah-controlled, fortified hilltop Lebanese border town of Maroun al-Ras was the scene of intense fighting between Hezbollah terrorist-guerrillas and the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF). The IDF claims Maroun al-Ras is under its control, though accounts of subduing nearby Bint Jbeil proved premature. Apparently, hundreds of Hezbollah fighters in Bint Jbeil were holed up in fortified bunkers, and have reentered the town via an elaborate series of interconnected tunnels, or hid amongst the few remaining civilians in the initial days of fighting. The pro-Iranian, Lebanese Shiite terrorist organization has turned a number of southern Lebanese hillsides and towns into fortified death-traps. It has spent the better part of the past six years since the Israeli withdrawal from southern Lebanon turning several hilltop towns into an Iwo Jima-like maze of fortified bunkers, spider holes, pill-boxes, sniper dens, fields of anti-tank mines and IEDs, and interconnected tunnels. An Israeli Army commander, Siman Tov said Hezbollah guerrillas in Maroun al-Ras were “fighting from tunnels, some equipped with above-ground cameras. They are armed with … sophisticated weapons … including longer-range antitank missiles and rocket-propelled grenade launchers. ‘Here we’re dealing with missiles, a little army.’” Hezbollah’s strategy appears geared for a massive Israeli armor and infantry incursion up to and perhaps beyond the Litani River. Hezbollah was counting on a twofold IDF tactic of digging out the entrenched fighters in a costly war of attrition while also moving rapidly into Lebanon, leaving its lines of communications vulnerable to guerrilla ambushes in the rear. The Israelis thus far have not taken the bait. Hezbollah apparently banked on Israel falling for a “rope-the-dope” strategy. Instead, it is Hezbollah that is trapped, like the Japanese Imperial Army on Iwo Jima, in a delusion of its own making. Although the initial Israeli incursions into Hezbollah-controlled southern Lebanon have been cautious, painfully slow, and unfortunately costly, a deeper analysis reveals that this is the IDF’s plan unfolding. One observant writer has noted that the Israeli strategy is more Field Marshal Bernard Montgomery and less Gen. George S. Patton. Some inside and outside of Israel question this strategy; critics contend that the IDF risks losing the initiative while simultaneously and unwittingly boosting Hezbollah’s fighting-prowess image in the Arab world. The Washington Post reports “Israeli news outlets, which had largely lined up behind the army’s conduct of the war, have begun to ask why an army that once defeated the armies of several Arab neighbors in six days was finding it so difficult to push one militia off Israel’s border.” Indeed, the first week of the IDF’s limited ground offensive delivered what appeared to be mixed results. A total of five elite commandos were killed when Hezbollah “ambushed the ambushers” in the first two Israeli ground operations. Since then and as of this writing, several Israeli-manufactured Merkava tanks have been heavily damaged, one completely destroyed with the loss of its four-man crew. Two Apache helicopters have collided, killing a pilot and hurting three others. A third, an Apache Longbow, crashed, killing both pilots. Nine Israel soldiers were killed in fighting on Wednesday, July 26, bringing the total to 33 Israeli soldiers killed in the past two weeks. Even more troubling is the fact that Israel has suffered these losses even though it had barely entered Lebanon, its deepest penetration thus far being no more than three miles. The current incursion into, underway as this article goes to press may well produce more casualties. Many fear that Israel’s difficulties in the current fighting signal a sea-change in the IDF’s fortunes. These drawbacks might give credence to Hezbollah’s charge that IDF military supremacy is a myth. The critics and doom-and-gloom pessimists ought to take a deep breath and appreciate the Israeli strategy.It is Hezbollah that has been outsmarted here, though uninformed, mainstream reporting of the initial results obscure this fact. For in banking on a massive Israeli offensive, Hezbollah apparently posted a sizeable force in the Lebanese border towns that are being picked apart one by one by the IDF. Already there are IDF reports of as many as 230 Hezbollah terrorists killed in Maroun al-Ras and Bint Jbeil. The Bint Jbeil meat-grinder, where Hezbollah appeared determined to make an ill-advised last stand, has done its work. The IDF and the Israeli Air Force (IAF) have destroyed an estimated 1,300 Hezbollah missiles that range from the Katyushas to Farj-3s, Farj5s, and Zelzal-2s. Meanwhile, Hezbollah has expended an estimated 2,000 missiles and has little to show for it. Israeli military officials report soldiers have found and destroyed Katyusha rocket launchers, antitank missile launchers and large caches of ammunition. Few launchers are reported available. Like the Japanese at Iwo Jima, Hezbollah has stored enormous quantities of ammunition in the Lebanese border towns, perhaps planning to wage a hit-and-run guerrilla war on Israel’s supply convoys as the IDF repeats the 1982 invasion. But Israel’s been there, done that, and she is not going to make the same mistake twice. “‘This battle against Hezbollah is going to last,’ Avi Dichter, Israel’s public security minister” informed reporters. “‘We’re not in any hurry.’” Over whatever time remains before the conflict is forced to end, the IDF will take apart the Hezbollah terrorist-guerrillas that made the ultimate error of remaining in fixed positions. It is Hezbollah that is stoked in the passions and delusions of over-confidence. If Hezbollah takes comfort from fighting in fixed positions, they need only brush up on Napoleon, who said “the army that remains in its forts is beaten.” Or perhaps read up on how General Kuribayashi Tadamichi’s Japanese force of 21,000 at Iwo Jima was reduced by the United States Marines to just over 120 POWs (an additional 900 wounded were captured). IDF Brig. Gen. Gal Hirsch, commander of the Galilee Division, summed up Israel’s piecemeal, probing strikes: “When you fight a regular army, it’s different from fighting guerrillas. They are using everything they have extensively. They have been preparing for this for many years, and we are taking action to dismantle all of that. The government has given me plenty of time, and I intend to use it as long as it takes.” Israel’s government called up an additional 30,000 reservists, and is heading into Lebanon right now. Israel will chip away, using her superior firepower, soldiers, and leadership to render Hezbollah a defeated Islamist terrorist group. Quietly, confidently, and assured that they are both fighting for their homeland and backed by more than eighty percent of the Israeli public, the Israeli citizen-soldier will win the day.

Elite Yael unit clears the way for IDF...

Jerusalem Post By YAAKOV KATZ Hizbullah leader Sheikh Hassan Nasrallah promised hell for the IDF on the ground in southern Lebanon. He may not have heard of the Engineering Corps' elite Yael (Ibex) unit. Members of the unit, one of the most classified in the IDF, were the first soldiers to enter southern Lebanon during Operation Change of Direction, days before troops from the Golani Brigade set foot on the other side of the fence. Yael was responsible for clearing an access route for the infantrymen through the hundreds of explosive devices and mines planted there by Hizbullah. On Monday, the unit opened its doors to The Jerusalem Post. Using advanced technological warfare and well-honed senses, the soldiers of Yael have participated in dozens of operations into Lebanon since the fighting with Hizbullah erupted on July 12 following the abduction of two soldiers and deaths of eight more in a cross-border attack. Maj. Ido - the unit's commander - told the Post on Monday that Hizbullah had planted explosive devices along the border, made of high-quality explosives and put together with great expertise. "They build advanced and professional explosive devices," Ido said as his troops were preparing for the night's raid at a community along the northern border. "They are much more professional than the Palestinian bombs which we encounter in the Gaza Strip." In contrast to the infantry brigades which have operated in Lebanese villages a mere few kilometers from Israel, Yael, one of the other officers revealed, was responsible for the demolition of bridges in an effort to impair Hizbullah's mobility. The unit was also responsible for the demolition of several buildings in southern Lebanon, most of them used by Hizbullah. Why not just blow up the bridges and buildings by air? "Our demolitions are more precise and pinpoint and cause less collateral damage," Ido said, explaining that his unit inserted explosives into the buildings, bringing the structures down from inside. Candidates undergo a one-and-a-half year course before they are accepted as members of Yael. In addition to learning how to dismantle mines and demolish buildings, members of the unit are also trained in how to covertly enter enemy territory. As the unit that entered Lebanon first, that skill is what keeps the soldiers, who carry equipment weighing sometimes 70 kilograms, alive. "We know how to move quietly while carrying heavy equipment," Ido said. "Being quiet can sometimes save your life."

US-Israeli defense partnership..

Israel awaits delivery of $4.2bn in weaponry from US defence firms By David Robertson, UK ISRAEL has more than $4 billion (£2.1 billion) in outstanding credit and undelivered orders with American defence contractors. Since 2001 the Israeli Armed Forces have been allocated $10.5 billion in military aid from the US Government, but they have received only $6.3 billion-worth of arms. The remaining $4.2 billion of weaponry will be purchased or delivered over the next few years, although with Israel engaged in attacks on southern Lebanon a number of these orders are being expedited. Since Israel started to bomb Hezbollah targets in Lebanon last month, it has asked for faster delivery of JP8 jet fuel and guided bomb units (GBU28s). The jet fuel order could be worth up to $210 million and the 100 GBU28s, which are better-known as bunker busters, could cost $30 million. Other outstanding deliveries include F16 fighter jets and armoured troop carriers. Israel receives $2.6 billion in foreign military financing from America every year. Three quarters of this aid has to be spent on products sold by US companies, but in reality nearly all of it goes back to American firms. The $4 billion in outstanding credit and orders will be a boon to defence contractors, many of which have reported lower exports as many countries are spending less on large defence projects. American foreign military aid accounts for 20 per cent of Israel’s defence budget and, because it has to be spent in the United States, the Israelis typically use it to buy the most advanced equipment. The Israeli Air Force has ordered 102 F16s from Lockheed Martin in a deal that will eventually be worth $4.5 billion to the American company. Other outstanding orders include a $99 million order for 103 Textron troop carriers made by the Textron Corporation in Rhode Island and a $65 million deal for more than 300 vehicles made by the American Truck Company of Indiana. Israel was in the process of allocating future and outstanding aid when the military campaign against Lebanon started. It is considering purchasing up to 100 F35 Joint Strike Fighters, new transport aircraft and Apache attack helicopters. The decisions have been postponed. The allocation of foreign military aid to Israel is controversial as the equipment is to be used only for defensive purposes. In its assessment of Israel’s request for JP8 jet fuel, for example, the Defence Security Co-operation Agency said: “The jet fuel will be consumed while the aircraft is in use to keep peace and security in the region.” A number of governments have criticised Israel’s attacks on Lebanon, saying that they have gone beyond self-defence. In addition, European defence contractors point out that the aid is effectively a subsidy for US companies. This has formed a point of dispute between Boeing and Airbus. Boeing claims that Airbus unfairly gets launch aid from European governments, including Britain, while Airbus criticises cross-subsidies between civil and military divisions. There are also domestic and political concerns about the America’s armament of Israel. UNDER ORDERS: 102 F16s from Lockheed Martin, Texas. Worth $4.5 billion (£2.4 billion) 100 GBU-28s (bunker buster bombs) from Raytheon in Arizona, Ellwood National Forge Company in Pennsylvania and Kama Dayron, Florida. $30 million 103 Textron troop carriers from Textron Corporation of Rhode Island. $99 million 50 M113 troop carriers upgraded from United Defense Industries. $18 million 900 Armour kits for Medium Tactical Vehicles from Oshkosh Trucks, Wisconsin. $145 million 256 High Mobility Medium Tactical trucks from the American Truck Company, Indiana. 49 trucks with cranes and 10 trucks for training purposes. $65 million £22m Total UK arms sales to Israel in 2005