Israel–United States relations and associated politics

[Blackhawk]

One big difference being that Lebanon isn't completely isolated from their allies. Supplies can get in, refugees can get out, allies can support them directly, etc.

[Kurth]

I think it’s on in Lebanon.

[Blackhawk]

As to the effects of Israel's sabotage, Iran's Guards ban communications devices after strike on Hezbollah.

I do expect that this is going to change the way a lot of nations look at their technology, too.

[Max Peck]

It seems likely that IDF ground forces will need to make incursions into southern Lebanon in order to satisfy Israel's stated goal of enabling evacuated civilians to return to northern Israel in any kind of safety, since air strikes and pager bombs alone probably can't get the job done. That seems like it would involve an unequivocal escalation into a full-on war with Hezbollah and Lebanon (and whatever other Iranian proxies are involved). If it happens, would it constitute an October Surprise that could shift the momentum in the US elections?

[Unagi]

I think it’s on in Lebanon.

It's LebanON


Sorry. I just had to do that.

[Max Peck]

I clearly need more coffee and/or sleep. It took me a second to realize that you weren't correcting the spelling.

[Unagi]

Apparently, emergency and municipal authorities, who were briefed by the Israeli military weeks ago in preparation for possible Hezbollah strikes, were told to expect 4,000 missiles and rockets each day and to prepare for possible daily casualties in the thousands.


source:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ba ... f3f8&ei=21

[Max Peck]

At the moment, it doesn't really matter what Hezbollah does or does not do. Israel is pressing ahead with the attacks until they achieve the goal of being able to return the evacuated civilian population in the north.

Israel's foreign minister rules out US-French ceasefire proposal saying 'There will be no ceasefire in the north'

Israel’s foreign minister Israel Katz has ruled out Israel accepting a US-French proposed 21-day ceasefire between Israel and Hezbollah, saying: “There will be no ceasefire in the north.”

In a message posted to social media, Katz said: “There will be no ceasefire in the north. We will continue to fight against the terrorist organization Hezbollah with all our might until victory and the safe return of the residents of the north to their homes.”

Benjamin Netanyahu’s office also appeared dismissive of the proposal, saying “The news about a ceasefire – not true. This is an American-French proposal, to which the prime minister did not even respond.”

Netanyahu’s office said, instead, that “the prime minister instructed the IDF to continue the fighting with full force”. Over 600 people have been killed and thousands wounded in Lebanon since Israel began an intense bombing campaign on Monday.

About 60,000 Israelis have fled their homes in northern Israel due to continual fighting between Israel, Hezbollah and other anti-Israeli forces based in Lebanon. On the Lebanese side of the UN-drawn blue line that separates the two countries, tens of thousands of Lebanese have also been internally displaced.

Earlier Israel’s hardline far-right finance minister, who has previously described it as his life’s mission to thwart the creation of a Palestinian state, also rejected the idea of a ceasefire. Bezalel Smotrich said “The campaign in the north should end in one scenario – crushing Hezbollah.”

Israel’s military claimed that overnight it struck “approximately 75 terror targets belonging to the Hezbollah terrorist organisation” in Beqaa and in southern Lebanon. Authorities in Lebanon reported at least four more people killed this morning, and that 23 Syrians, mostly women and children, were killed by an Israeli strike on Younine in Lebanon during the night.

The US and France had called for a temporary ceasefire to make way for broader negotiations. The joint statement issued by US president Joe Biden and French counterpart Emmanuel Macron said: “It is time for a settlement on the Israel-Lebanon border that ensures safety and security to enable civilians to return to their homes. The exchange of fire since October 7th, and in particular over the past two weeks, threatens a much broader conflict, and harm to civilians.”

The Jerusalem Post earlier reported that community leaders of northern Israel are unhappy with the prospect of a ceasefire, with one regional council’s chairman saying “There is a time for negotiations, this is not the time. This is a time for war.”

[Isgrimnur]

Apparently, emergency and municipal authorities, who were briefed by the Israeli military weeks ago in preparation for possible Hezbollah strikes, were told to expect 4,000 missiles and rockets each day and to prepare for possible daily casualties in the thousands.


source:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/ba ... f3f8&ei=21

Damned hospital industrial complex!

[El Guapo]

Certainly not a military expert, but I'm curious what needs to happen for it to be safe for the displaced Israelis to return to their homes in the north. One way is for Hezbollah to agree to pull their forces north in Lebanon (which apparently they agreed to in 2006 and which was supposed to be policed by the U.N., but which has been ignored). Actually doing that would presumably amount to a borderline surrender / major defeat for Hezbollah. Not totally out of the question given that it seems like they've taken a major beating recently, but seems unlikely.

Another would be to degrade their missile capacity through airstrikes and sabotage and the like. As good as the IDF and Mossad are, since Israel can't blockade Lebanon it's hard to see Israel being able to destroy Hezbollah's missiles faster than they can be replaced.

Another would be to re-occupy some portion of southern Lebanon. In some ways this is probably the most reliable in terms of limiting missile strikes because the IDF could reliably clear out missile launchers from that area. But obviously that would be incredibly painful for Israel to maintain, and that would likely need to be indefinite.

I suppose another would be some sort of international agreement. But I can't imagine that any other country would want to put themselves in the role of policing that agreement (and the complete lack of policing of the 2006 agreement demonstrates that).

[Unagi]

But obviously that would be incredibly painful for Israel to maintain, and that would likely need to be indefinite.

And it would need to be supplied.

The U.S. is starting to buckle at the idea of supplying another wholesale / 'no-end-game' / indefinite assault that will likely result in a significant pushback with bleeding heart humanitarians. The election is putting a hamper on real pressure, but I think it will come soon after.

[El Guapo]

But obviously that would be incredibly painful for Israel to maintain, and that would likely need to be indefinite.

And it would need to be supplied.

The U.S. is starting to buckle at the idea of supplying another wholesale / 'no-end-game' / indefinite assault that will likely result in a significant pushback with bleeding heart humanitarians. The election is putting a hamper on real pressure, but I think it will come soon after.

Yeah the international reaction would be another way that a new occupation would be unsustainable for Israel.

I guess to me one big question is whether Hezbollah can be brought to the table to accept a deal.

[Unagi]

Well, I mean Israel is doing everything to publicly signal that it has no interest in a deal, so I imagine that answer is technically no.

Perhaps back-channels would allow for the deal thing to even be on the table, but I don't think it is from what we can see.

[Zarathud]

This is Netanyahu’s gift to Trump, for his own personal benefit. More war means less consequences.

[Kraken]

This is Netanyahu’s gift to Trump, for his own personal benefit. More war means less consequences.

That thought has crossed my mind, but IDK how much of it is my US-centric perspective. Certainly Netanyahu wants trump to win, and I do believe that's a large reason that he won't accept a cease-fire in Gaza. Whether it extends to Lebanon or not, IDK. I don't think war with Hezbollah was planned in the first place, but rather forced upon them when the sabotaged pagers were discovered.

[Holman]

I don't think war with Hezbollah was planned in the first place, but rather forced upon them when the sabotaged pagers were discovered.

I mean, when you secretly place bombs in hundreds of your opponents' pants pockets, you have to expect that they'll be discovered sooner than never. This seems like planning for war, especially when your response to discovery is to immediately set them all off.

[Kraken]

I don't think war with Hezbollah was planned in the first place, but rather forced upon them when the sabotaged pagers were discovered.

I mean, when you secretly place bombs in hundreds of your opponents' pants pockets, you have to expect that they'll be discovered sooner than never. This seems like planning for war, especially when your response to discovery is to immediately set them all off.

I don't think he was planning on making war right now. He no doubt thought he could choose the time. How long were they dormant? Months, a year? Then suddenly it was Go time, like it or not.

[Holman]

I don't think war with Hezbollah was planned in the first place, but rather forced upon them when the sabotaged pagers were discovered.

I mean, when you secretly place bombs in hundreds of your opponents' pants pockets, you have to expect that they'll be discovered sooner than never. This seems like planning for war, especially when your response to discovery is to immediately set them all off.

I don't think he was planning on making war right now. He no doubt thought he could choose the time. How long were they dormant? Months, a year? Then suddenly it was Go time, like it or not.

Not setting them off would have avoided war, and their discovery still would have thrown the enemy into a paroxysm of paranoia.

Choosing to set them off was a choice (and an avoidable one) for war right now.

[Zarathud]

You don’t blow up your enemy without expecting retaliation.

[Blackhawk]

I've come to believe that the only way for Israel to have the kind of 'security' they're wanting would be if the country were to teleport to a different part of the world. Ok, you got rid of Hamas. Now you've gotten rid of Hezbollah. There's a line stretching around the block waiting for their turn. They'd have to turn half of the region into a wasteland before they'd run out of nations wanting them gone.

[Victoria Raverna]

Maybe move Israel to US?

[Kurth]

I've come to believe that the only way for Israel to have the kind of 'security' they're wanting would be if the country were to teleport to a different part of the world. Ok, you got rid of Hamas. Now you've gotten rid of Hezbollah. There's a line stretching around the block waiting for their turn. They'd have to turn half of the region into a wasteland before they'd run out of nations wanting them gone.

Yep. Just give them Rhode Island, amiright???

[El Guapo]

Well, I mean Israel is doing everything to publicly signal that it has no interest in a deal, so I imagine that answer is technically no.

Perhaps back-channels would allow for the deal thing to even be on the table, but I don't think it is from what we can see.

I don't think that's really true. The US-French ceasefire proposal was for a ceasefire along the Israel / Lebanon border. That's essentially the status quo that (as I understand it) doesn't make it feasible for the displaced Israelis to return to their homes in the north. What Israel wants is Hezbollah north of the Letani River in Lebanon, which it already agreed to in 2006 and which would make the Israeli north much safer. The deal:

Israel's UN ambassador, Danny Danon, said Israel does not seek a wider conflict, but it will not allow Hezbollah to continue its provocations. He accused Hezbollah of violating international law.

"If Hezbollah does not retreat from our border and back to the north of the Litani River through diplomatic efforts, Israel will be left with no choice but to use any means within our rights to defend our citizens and enable the evacuees of the north to return to their homes," he said.

[El Guapo]

Long Atlantic article about the U.S. response over the past year.

Behind a firewall, but The Atlantic is great so you should have a subscription. Not all the way through it yet, but it's an important piece so wanted to share it. I suppose one caveat is that the sources here are heavily in the U.S. government, so that's going to be the main perspective.

[El Guapo]

Israeli strike in Beirut targets Hezbollah's leader.

No official reports on whether he survived that I have seen. Twitter mentions seem convinced that he's dead, but that's not worth much.

[Max Peck]

From the BBC:

Hezbollah sources are telling various news organisations Nasrallah is alive and safe, although we haven't received official word from the group

[El Guapo]

From the BBC:

Hezbollah sources are telling various news organisations Nasrallah is alive and safe, although we haven't received official word from the group

Apparently Israeli intelligence has made a preliminary assessment that he's dead apparently. I assume that's based on intelligence that he was in the bunker and the visible damage to the bunker. I assume if Nasrallah wasn't there or something that Hezbollah would have said something clear about that, which makes me think that he was probably there. Possible that he's seriously injured and it may be unclear as of now whether he's going to make it. We'll see, I guess.

[Kraken]

I've come to believe that the only way for Israel to have the kind of 'security' they're wanting would be if the country were to teleport to a different part of the world. Ok, you got rid of Hamas. Now you've gotten rid of Hezbollah. There's a line stretching around the block waiting for their turn. They'd have to turn half of the region into a wasteland before they'd run out of nations wanting them gone.

Yep. Just give them Rhode Island, amiright???

Da hell do we need with two Dakotas?

[Blackhawk]

Just swap 'em with Texas. The Israelis get their security, and Texas gets their theocracy.

[El Guapo]

Hezbollah has confirmed that Nasrallah is dead. Certainly won't miss the guy. But we'll see what happens next I suppose.

[Max Peck]

At this point, I'd guess that Hezbollah leadership and what they'll do next is largely a "known unknown" given that many, if not most, of the established senior people have been removed from the playing field. My guess is that backing down isn't likely to be the option of choice any time soon (on either side).

[Unagi]

Here comes that point where we learn if taking the head off this creature makes a new one form (or two) that's worse or actually hurts the creature enough to win the fight.

Where would you put your money?


That aside, and to be clear - I'm happy they got their man here.

[Isgrimnur]

Hezbollah has confirmed that Nasrallah is dead. Certainly won't miss the guy. But we'll see what happens next I suppose.

Saw a Spongebob meme where he was roped by Sandy where the last panel was "Wasrallah".

[Blackhawk]

Looking back, the past few weeks have been a powerful opening gambit for Israel, and truly shows the power of their intelligence service.

Here comes that point where we learn if taking the head off this creature makes a new one form (or two) that's worse or actually hurts the creature enough to win the fight.

That might not be so bad in the short term - it could lead to Hezbollah fracturing and infighting. In the long term, you're right - anything could happen.

[Kurth]

I’m very interested to see Iran’s reaction to this. So far, it’s been pretty muted.

[El Guapo]

Israel also did a series of strikes after the Nasrallah strike that were apparently targeted at Hezbollah weapons caches. There are estimates but I don't think anyone really knows how effective these were. I do wonder if they were successful, is there a point at which Israel effectively declares victory in the north?

Of course, another wild card is the possibility that Israel is going to send ground troops into southern Lebanon.

[Max Peck]

I’m very interested to see Iran’s reaction to this. So far, it’s been pretty muted.

So far it's been the usual. They declared 5 days of mourning for Nasrallah and vowed revenge. Apparently they also lost an IRGC general, Abbas Nilforoushan, in the same strike that killed Nasrallah.

[Max Peck]

Israel also did a series of strikes after the Nasrallah strike that were apparently targeted at Hezbollah weapons caches. There are estimates but I don't think anyone really knows how effective these were. I do wonder if they were successful, is there a point at which Israel effectively declares victory in the north?

I'd expect that any strike that hit a sizeable weapons cache would be immediately obvious due to the secondary explosions. All of this seems to be happening in plain sight in built-up populated areas, so there would likely be plenty of eye-witness accounts and video evidence.

[Holman]

Here comes that point where we learn if taking the head off this creature makes a new one form (or two) that's worse or actually hurts the creature enough to win the fight.

Where would you put your money?


That aside, and to be clear - I'm happy they got their man here.

I've seen it pointed out that 23 years ago the USA was hit by a terrorist attack that killed a few thousand people, and we responded by launching two wars that killed scores of thousands and wounded hundreds of thousands. In the end, nothing was fixed and the world was worse.

Now Israel is doing exactly the same thing, and we're expected to celebrate it.

[YellowKing]

In the end, nothing was fixed and the world was worse.

I'd argue not having another mass terrorist attack on US soil in the last 23 years was a pretty big fix.