Winning, Losing and One-Upsmanship

People are apparently attempting to quantify the Israeli-Lebanese-Hezbollah conflict in terms of winning and losing. And if push comes to shove, in those terms, I would offer:

Israel has "lost." Hezbollah has "won." And President Bush is, unfortunately, incorrect when he states that Israel "won."

Israel has won nothing but a guarantee for future conflict and more dead Israelis.

Allow me to place the cards directly on the table, face-up:

The Israelis were (and will be once again) fighting Iran by proxy, nothing less -- with Syria thrown in for good measure. It is a given that roughly a quarter of Hezbollah troops were eliminated. But that has in no uncertain terms guaranteed any lessening of Iran's goal of the complete eradication of Israel -- even though Admadinnerjacket appears to be on Mike Wallace's "New Best Friend" list. After all, "it's all our fault."

The Syrian army is massing at the border.

And the passion is boiling in Israel, some saying that the Ehud Olmert government must go. Aaron Klein, WND's Jerusalem post, wrote:

Officials say the IAF was still restrained from targeting key positions close to the Syrian border in the Bekaa Valley from which intelligence officials say Hezbollah received regular shipments of rockets and other heavy weaponry originating in Iran and transported via Syria. Israel bombed roads in the area a few kilometers from Syria, but many weapons smuggling routes at the border remained intact.

While Syria placed its military on high alert, Olmert told reporters several times Israel had no intention of bringing Damascus into the war.

Klein writes a chilling paragraph:

And terrorists in the West Bank and Gaza are foaming at the mouth. Today, Abu Aziz, second-in-command of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, told WorldNetDaily that Hezbollah's victory leads him to believe the end of Israel is in sight. He said he realizes now is the time to "attack Israel from all directions."

Carolyn Glick, a columnist for The Jerusalem Post said she believes the Israeli government is finding itself unable to understand the true extent of the threat. She wrote:

The resolution represents a near-total victory for Hizbullah and its state sponsors Iran and Syria, and an unprecedented defeat for Israel and its ally the United States. This fact is evident both in the text of the resolution and in the very fact that the US decided to sponsor a cease-fire resolution before Israel had dismantled or seriously degraded Hizbullah's military capabilities.

There aren't the 62 necessary votes available in the Knesset to force a "no confidence" vote in the Israeli government, though protests are sparking all over the country, with people frustrated over the "holding back" of the Israeli IDF. Many believe the Olmert government is incapable of defending its citizens.

In the meantime, Hezbollah is certainly abiding by the ceasefire -- by hurling rockets. Even today AP News writes: "Hezbollah guerrillas fired at least 10 Katusha rockets that landed in southern Lebanon early Tuesday" at the IDF. The ceasefire is clearly phony.

ONE-UPSMANSHIP?

Hezbollah's Nasrallah, a Shiite, has the current upper hand in terms of propaganda and "face." OBL, a Sunni, had his plan to detonate aircraft over the Atlantic shattered, but experts agree that isn't the "big one." Bin Laden is planning a larger strike yet, possibly involving nuclear weapons, some believe.

This entire plot revolves around Iran's Ahmadinnerjacket simply trying to Teflon himself out of world focus on his nuclear program. And how wonderfully it has seemed to work.

Everyone knows how to hurl the propaganda -- except Israel and the United States.

Oh, and a few bombs and missles thrown back wouldn't hurt either.

BZ

P.S.

And oh -- what about the candidates willing to fight come our 2008 elections? Do they even exist?