Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

War in The Middle East

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Armenian
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East



    Israeli jets clash with German ship near Lebanon

    Two Israeli warplanes and a German navy vessel have clashed off the Lebanese coast, the Defense Ministry in Berlin said on Wednesday without giving further details. Germany daily Der Tagesspiegel earlier on Wednesday quoted a junior German defense minister as telling a parliamentary committee that two Israeli F-16 fighters flew low over the German ship and fired two shots. The jets also released infra-red countermeasures to ward off any rocket attack, the paper quoted him as saying. The minister did not say when the incident happened or what had caused it, the paper said.

    "I can confirm that there was an incident," a ministry spokesman told Reuters on Wednesday. An investigation was underway and he therefore was unable to provide further information, he added. An Israeli military spokeswoman said she was checking the report. Germany assumed command of a United Nations naval force off the coast of Lebanon 10 days ago and has sent a force of eight ships and 1,000 service personnel to join the international peace operation in the region. The naval force is charged with preventing weapons smuggling and helping maintain a ceasefire between Israel and radical Lebanese-based Islamic group Hezbollah.

    Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20061025/..._incident_dc_2

    Leave a comment:


  • Armenian
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East

    Germany says Israel not respecting Lebanon airspace


    BERLIN (Reuters) - Israel is ignoring deals on the policing of Lebanese airspace and is struggling to accept international peacekeepers in the region, a German deputy foreign minister was quoted as saying on Saturday. "That Israel is still trying to control the airspace over Lebanon despite the international presence of French, Italian and other soldiers, runs contrary to every agreement," Gernot Erler told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung. "The Israelis have so far rejected every internationalization of their security. But this is now happening with the UNIFIL mission. It's evidently something the Israeli armed forces take some getting used to." Germany assumed command of a U.N. naval force off Lebanon last month and has sent eight ships and 1,000 service personnel to join the international peace operation in the region.

    Erler's comments, published in a preview of Sunday's edition, follow incidents in which Israeli air force encounters with German forces provoked so-called "misunderstandings". The first, late last month, involved two planes which a German paper said had fired twice as they flew over a German navy ship. It was followed by a separate run-in with the German navy in an area used by the Israeli air force for training. Erler said he had confidence in Israel's assurances that such incidents would not be repeated. If this were not the case, the two sides would need to talk again, he said. The naval force is there to prevent weapons smuggling and hel

    Source: http://today.reuters.com/news/articl...e-C1-topNews-9

    Leave a comment:


  • Armenian
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East



    Iran, Syria rebuild Hezbollah

    LONDON, October 25 (IranMania) - Iran and Syria are rapidly rearming Hezbollah guerrillas in southern Lebanon as an international peacekeeping force has failed to carry out a UN mandate to disarm the Shi'ite militia group, Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shaul Mofaz said, The Washington Times reported. Mofaz, a former defense minister and chief of general staff in the Israeli Defense Force, also warned that time was growing short for the international community to implement effective sanctions to halt Iran's drive for nuclear weapons. "We know the policy of the Iranian regime is to buy time by talking" while it pursues a nuclear bomb, Mofaz said in an interview in his suite at the Renaissance Mayflower Hotel in Washington. "So far they have been very successful."

    The hawkish Mr. Mofaz is the transportation minister under the unity government headed by Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, but he remains a major voice on defense and security issues in Israel. He met with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Director of National Intelligence John D. Negroponte, among others, on a visit to Washington this week in advance of US-Israel security talks set for December. Mofaz said Israel's 34-day war with Hezbollah fighters this summer had dealt the Shi'ite militia a major setback in its southern Lebanese base. But he expressed frustration that the Lebanese army and an enhanced UN peacekeeping force had not disarmed Hezbollah or sealed the border to prevent Syria and Iran from rearming their "proxy."

    "Arms smuggling across the border from Syria has continued after the war," he said. "We know of the activity but we don't know what types of weapons are involved." He acknowledged that Israel's armed forces "did not achieve all our goals" in the Lebanon campaign, failing to crush Hezbollah as a fighting force and to win the release of Israeli soldiers held by the Shi'ite group. But he said the "main issue of discussion" with US officials was Iran.

    "Iran poses the biggest threat not only to the state of Israel but to the countries of the West as well," he said. "Under the umbrella provided by a nuclear capability, Iran might be more involved in harboring, supporting and financing terror." Olmert told reporters last week that Iran would have a "price to pay" if it rejected international offers to stop its suspect nuclear programs. But Mr. Mofaz yesterday put greater stress on multilateral efforts to pressure Iran, calling for strong sanctions against Tehran if it refuses to cooperate. "The time has come for effective sanctions after three years of dialogue without any achievements," he said.

    The North Korea nuclear test earlier this month has heightened the need for a tough stand against Iran, Mr. Mofaz said. North Korea has sold Iran missiles that can deliver nuclear warheads, and Mr. Mofaz said Pyongyang's test of a nuclear device means it could now transfer "nuclear assets" to Iran as well. On Syria, Mofaz dismissed as a "ploy" recent offers by President Bashar Assad for direct peace talks with Israel, saying Damascus continues to support Hezbollah and militant Palestinian groups battling Israeli forces in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank.

    "We believe it is not [Syria's] intention to have a real negotiation," he said. "When we see real intentions for peace in Syria, then we can have a different approach."

    Olmert is expected to travel to Washington next month for talks, and the Bush administration is pressing for new movement on peace talks with the Palestinians. But Mr. Mofaz said the bloody internal standoff in the Palestinian territories between the Hamas government, which refuses to recognize Israel, and the Fatah party of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas leaves Israel with no effective negotiating partner.

    Source: http://www.iranmania.com/News/Articl...rent%20Affairs

    Leave a comment:


  • Armenian
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East



    French tanks obstruct Israeli tanks over suspected Hizballah robbery of Israeli weapons store

    The south Lebanese village of Merwahin was the stage Thursday, Sept 28 of the first near-showdown between UN and Israeli forces. DEBKAfile publishes here the first photo of an encounter between 4 French Leclerc (see picture above) and at least 5 Israeli Merkava tanks in that Lebanese village. Despite the photographic evidence, Israel officially denies the incident. DEBKAfile reports the French force sought to prevent the Israeli unit from combing through the Hizballah-dominated village in search of the raiders who crossed into Israel and broke into the IDF’s Kibbutz Shomera arms store last week. They made off with a large quantity of side-arms, anti-tank weapons, LAU rockets and hundreds of combat grenades, which the Israeli force was determined to recover. American and German correspondents who witnessed the incident report that the two tank units held menacing positions 50 meters apart for about half an hour, after which the French tanks broke off contact and turned tail. The French commander claims the Israel tanks retreated first. DEBKAfile’s military sources note that this was the second incidence of French backing for Hizballah. On Sept 22, French fighter jets were seen cruising in Beirut’s skies above the podium of Hassan Nasrallah’s “victory speech.” He boasted then that he was not afraid to address the masses directly instead of through armored glass.

    Source: http://www.debka.com/headline.php?hid=3324

    Leave a comment:


  • Armenian
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East



    Israel Quits Lebanon Leaving Hizballah Back in the Saddle under UN Auspices

    DEBKAfile’s military sources saw the Iast Israeli soldier quit Lebanon before dawn of Oct. 1, Yom Kippur eve, leaving in captivity Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, the two soldiers whose abduction by Hizballah provoked the 34-day Lebanon war on July 12. Only one third of the 15,000 international peacekeepers the UN Security Council pledged for an expanded UNIFIL has in fact been deployed in South Lebanon. And even that paltry force has made no effort to stop Hizballah restoring its presence and replenishing its stocks of rockets and missiles to points in South Lebanon within firing range of Israel. In most ways, therefore, UN Security Council Resolution 1701 of Aug. 14 is a dead letter. While withdrawing the bulk of its force gradually, Israel kept the last units behind in a futile effort to persuade UNIFIL commanders to uphold key provisions of the resolution. They refused even the minimal demand to restrict Hizballah’s military movements along the Israeli border. They claimed they could only act with the permission of the Lebanese government. By finally giving way on this point, the Israeli government accepted the determination that UNIFIL is the instrument of the Lebanese government - not the enforcer of UN resolutions or Israeli security.

    This concession makes nonsense of the claim that the most important gain of the Lebanon operation was the removal of Hizballah’s fighting forces from access to the Israeli border. This claim was made in a desperate attempt by Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert, defense minister Amir Peretz and chief of staff Lt.-Gen Dan Halutz, to justify the war and its losses. Looking slightly further ahead, Israel’s policy-makers had better hurry up and form a plan to meet an exacerbated threat from Lebanon, the possible displacement of the Fouad Siniora government in Beirut with a pro-Syrian, Hizballah-dominated administration. This further deterioration in Israel’s national security situation is far from being a remote hypothesis.

    Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah used the war to forge alliances with the Lebanese parliamentary speaker Nabih Berri, head of the rival Shiite movement Amal, and the Christian Maronite strongman Michel Aoun. This bloc intends to make a bid to install a pro-Syrian government after Ramadan is over next month. Our sources in Beirut report a last-minute US-French initiative to frustrate this development. Siniora had his interior minister Ahmed Fatfat posted decree No. 2403 for Lebanon’s five intelligence and security agencies to pool their intelligence data and so provide his government and national army with the means of asserting control over national security. Two pro-Syrian officers, General Security chief Wafic Jezzini, and Director-General of Internal Security forces, Maj.-Gen Ashraf Rifi, stamped hard on this decree. The Siniora government was thus denied a key resource for dominating the country at large, not just the South, and is more vulnerable than ever to a hostile push.

    As for Israel’s policy-makers, their handling of the bargaining with UNIFIL was as muddled, vacillating and feeble as their conduct of the Lebanon war itself. By accepting the Aug. 14 truce, they agreed to handing over the Lebanese-Israeli border to an international peacekeeping force without teeth; its rules of engagement are so constrictive that without Lebanese government authorization its members may not fire a single shot - even when necessary to prevent Hizballah moving back to its former aggressive positions or smuggling in fresh supplies of weapons – both of which are out-and-out violations of the same Resolution 1701 which mandated its own deployment. By removing its troops in keeping with that same resolution, Israel has bargained away its last option for extracting information about the fate of the two soldiers seized by Hizballah; Red Cross access has brusquely refused.

    In the view of DEBKAfile’s political sources, the last IDF units were kept in Lebanon after the truce for no discernible military or diplomatic purpose but to lull the Israeli public into not looking too closely at their leaders’ feeble negotiating stance and assuming Israel was still a strong player on the Lebanese scene. By Yom Kippur eve, most people were caught up in seasonal pursuits and less inclined to continue their painful in-depth calculation of the war’s net results. Those results can be summed up in four negative developments which the Olmert government failed to thwart:

    1. The wholesale smuggling through Syria of fresh weapons supplies to Hizballah from Syria and Iran, which neither the Lebanese army nor UNIFIL is lifting a finger to stop despite an explicit UN embargo. The heads of Israel’s government neglected to draw lessons from the failed deal on the Gaza crossings and the Philadelphi route, which never prevented arms flowing freely from Egyptian Sinai to Palestinian terrorists, notably the ruling Hamas. Syria stays technically in the clear of the UN arms embargo by setting up huge arms dumps on its border with Lebanon, ready to be pushed across at a moment’s notice by land.

    2. Expanded UNIFIL, which Israeli foreign minister Tzipi Livni did her best to present as a force with teeth, rather than monitoring Hizballah’s movements and disarming its combatants, is busy monitoring the feuds of Lebanese political and military factions. 3. These international units refrain from entering S. Lebanese villages. There is therefore no hindrance to Hizballah re-occupying those villages and restoring its strongholds within range of the Israeli border. The UN force is not setting up checkpoints to control banned traffic in the South. At best, the units are using makeshift roadblocks which go up for an hour at most before being removed and leaving Hizballah a free field for moving around the South.

    4. The naval blockade against illegal arms imports, purportedly maintained by French, Italian, German and Greek war vessels, is about effective as UNIFIL’s ephemeral roadblocks. Their governments consented to the vessels being barred from entering Lebanese territorial waters. And so a strip of ocean 12 miles wide up to the Lebanese coast remains wide open for Hizballah’s arms ships to freely ply the route between Syrian and Lebanese ports. Anxious to turn disaffected popular attention away from Hizballah’s recovery under the benign auspices of the UN’s European contingents, Israeli ministers and military chiefs have been debating out loud the need to carry out a major ground operation in the Gaza Strip, whence Qassam missiles continue to be fired into Israeli communities and where the Palestinians are building up their arms stocks, unhindered by international monitors and Egyptian police.

    Source: http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1215

    Leave a comment:


  • Armenian
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East



    Hizballah Shuts Reoccupied S. Lebanese Bases to Lebanese and UN forces

    On Yom Kippur, Oct. 2, 24 hours after the last Israeli soldier left South Lebanon and the day before UNIFIL published its rules of engagement, Hizballah placed roadblocks on all the approaches to the central sector of the South and the entrances to the towns and villages reoccupied by its forces and their rocket units. These enclaves were declared “closed military zones.”

    DEBKAfile’s exclusive military and Western intelligence sources report that neither the Lebanese army which moved south nor the international peacekeepers of UNIFIL venture to set foot in these enclaves. Nor did they raise a finger to block the first broad-daylight consignment of advanced Iranian weapons to be delivered in Lebanon via Syria since the August 14 ceasefire. This coordinated Hizballah-Iranian-Syrian ploy has brought into question the point of UN Security Council Resolution 1701 which was to prevent the resumption of hostilities and Hizballah’s rearmament while helping the Beirut government and army assert its sovereignty in the South. It has also made a mockery of the UN Force and its missions. These developments effectively assign UN Security Council resolution 1701 to the same dustbin as resolution 1559 which ordered Hizballah disarmed.

    It is especially noted that the Israeli government has made no military or diplomatic response to these violations, or even informed the public that Hizballah has redeployed in the precise positions from which it blitzed Haifa, Nahariya, Carmiel, Acre and W. Galilee for more than a month. Tuesday, Oct. 3, after Hizballah completed its redeployment, the southern commander who orchestrated the rocket bombardment of Israel, Sheikh Nabil Qauq, made his first appearance since the war. He announced that his forces had regrouped, fully armed and in command of rocket supplies, in exactly the same positions facing the Israeli border as they had occupied when they went to war on July 12. This statement is fully confirmed by DEBKAfile’s military and W. intelligence sources which locate the enclaves Hizballah has cordoned off as closed military zones:

    1. Majdal Zoun south of Tyre, from which Nahariya, Acre, Carmiel and Western Galilee were bombed. The Nasser rocket brigade has returned to its posts there with a fresh supply of rockets, as well as the launchers and crews which escaped Israeli counter-attack.

    2. Jouaiya, the strategic village occupied by the IDF during the war, has been roped into the Majdal Zoun “military area,” providing Hizballah with full military control of the Tyre district and the ability to bombard UNIFIL headquarters and bases.

    3. Siddiquine south of Kana.

    4. Deir Amess.

    5. The road approaches to the large village of Tebnin in the central sector of the South are blocked.

    Our military experts explain that control of Sidiquine, Deir Amess and Tebnin afford Hizballah’s military deployment command of the strategic Jabel Amel mountain region, and its focal points of Haris, Kafra and Aita e-Zott villages. From there, Hizballah fired rockets at Haifa. They were also the centers of the advanced electronic sites from which Hizballah tracked Israeli troop movements across the border and eavesdropped on their signals. DEBKAfile’s sources also provide detailed information on the Iranian-Syrian arms supplies sent openly into Lebanon on Oct. 2.

    In early September, DEBKAfile began reporting on the 25 Hizballah arms dumps maintained for easy access on the Syrian side of the Lebanese border. Damascus was thus technically complicit with the 1701 arms embargo. The Syrian Al Qusayr air base south of Homs and opposite the Lebanese town of Hermel was given over for the use of the forward Iranian Revolutionary Guards command. Since the ceasefire, Iranian air transports have been landing arms for Hizballah at this facility almost daily. Saturday, Sept 30, Syrian military supplies and maintenance units at this air base prepared a convoy of six trucks for a trial run to test the response. Two were fully loaded with miscellaneous rockets, including Katyusha, anti-air and anti-tank missiles, four with mortars, heavy machine guns and ammunition.

    This convoy crossed the border at a central road junction connecting the Syrian village of Qusayr with Mt. Lebanon, and headed southwest to Hermel. Another two arms convoys stood by on the Syrian side of the border, waiting to see if the first one was allowed through. Since both the IDF and UNIFIL sat on their hands, the next two will soon follow. What the international forces did next on Tuesday night Oct. 3 was to publish its rules of engagement These are the main clauses: The force's commanders have sufficient authority to act forcefully when confronted with hostile activity of any kind. UNIFIL personnel may exercise the inherent right of self-defense, as well as "the use of force beyond self-defense to ensure that UNIFIL's area of operations is not utilized for hostile activities."

    The peacekeepers also may use force "to resist attempts by forceful means to prevent UNIFIL from discharging its duties under the mandate of the Security Council, to protect U.N. personnel, facilities, installations and equipment and to ensure the security and freedom of movement of U.N. personnel and humanitarian workers." Also the use of force may be applied "to protect civilians under imminent threat of physical violence in its areas of deployment, within its capabilities."

    DEBKAfile notes that all these locutions are open to broad interpretation. For instance, “hostile activity” could apply to an attack from outer space since there is no mention of “Hizballah,” “Syria or “Iran.” The “arms embargo” ordered by Resolution 1701 is another unmentionable. “The civilians” to be protected are likewise undefined. UNIFIL’s commander has full discretion to decide whether or not it is aplicable to a Hizballlah rocket attack on Nahariya.

    Since UN commanders have state explicitly they will only act with the permission of the Lebanese government and army (in which Hizballah holds the power of veto), there is no way that the international force can carry out its duties as mandated by the UN Security Council. The Olmert government fully colludes in reducing this body to the same ineffectiveness as it displayed in the 28 years leading up to the Lebanon War. By their silence and passivity, Israeli leaders hope to hide the true outcome of that bungled campaign from Israeli and world opinion. Foreign minister Tzipi Livni, who proudly held up the UN force’s deployment as the war’s only success and the formula for Israel’s successful exit strategy, has been strangely struck dumb.

    Source: http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1217

    Leave a comment:


  • Armenian
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East


    Jane's: Russian intelligence indirectly helped Hezbollah


    During military operation of Israel in the South Lebanon which proceeded from July 12 till August 14 this year, Hezbollah received intelligence data from the radio interception points that are served by the joint Russian-Syrian personnel, Israeli daily Ha’aretz writes, referring to a report by the Jane's Defense Weekly. According to the magazine, participation of the Russian side in transfer of the intelligence information to Hezbollah was indirect. The data received by secret services of Russia, first were transferred to Syria, as there is an agreement signed between Moscow and Damascus on cooperation of intelligences services and exchange of mutually interesting information. Besides it is marked that the Lebanese insurgents received the information on the Israeli troops from the surveillance centre, located in the Syrian part of the Golan heights and jointly supervised by the Syrian intelligence and Iranian experts. Unlike secret services of Russia with which the Syrian side does cooperate for a long time, arrangement with Iran has been reached only in the past year, adds Ha’aretz. Detailed information on the Russian secret services' ties with the Hezbollah was first published by AIA already in May 2005. Besides that, in Luly 2006, AIA prepared a broad analysis on the Russian-Syrian strategic cooperation, in the context of the Lebanon crisis.

    Source: http://www.axisglobe.com/article.asp?article=1083

    Leave a comment:


  • Armenian
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East


    Lebanon Throng Hails Hezbollah Chief, Who Calls Militia Stronger


    BEIRUT, Lebanon, Sept. 22 — Hundreds of thousands of people stood Friday and chanted “God, God, protect Nasrallah.” It was the moment they had waited for: Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, in person, declaring that his militia was stronger than ever and that no army in the world could force it to disarm. This was Sheik Nasrallah’s first public appearance since the war with Israel started in July, and it was steeped in defiance: at Israel, the United States, Arab heads of state and those political forces in Lebanon aiming to clip Hezbollah’s political and military power.

    If there was any thought the war weakened Hezbollah, Sheik Nasrallah had a different message: “It is stronger.” Even after Israel’s 34-day bombardment of Lebanon, Hezbollah, he said, still has more than 20,000 missiles. “Not a single army in the world will be able to dismantle our resistance,” Sheik Nasrallah said, as he stood beneath a big banner that read “The Victory Rally.” “No army in the world will be able to make us drop the weapons from our hands.”

    The crowd was mammoth, packing every corner of the 37-acre square in the southern suburbs of Beirut. There was a plastic chair for nearly everyone, and a baseball cap for protection from the sun. Hezbollah’s martial choir belted out chest thumping music. The crowds waved flags, wildly cheering for Sheik Nasrallah, who has become a folk hero to many here and throughout the Arab world. The audience came on foot, by car and by bus from the south and the north, and in every case, people said they came because Sheik Nasrallah asked them to.

    “Whatever Sayid Hassan wants Sayid Hassan gets,” said Hossain Zebara, 29, using a title reserved for descendants of the prophet Muhammad. Mr. Zebara said it took him 24 hours to walk from his home in the southern part of Lebanon to be at the rally. “We came to show the American administration, the British administration, the French administration, that the resistance population is increasing, not decreasing.”

    That was exactly Sheik Nasrallah’s point — a show of strength to those who would challenge him from abroad, and those who would challenge him at home. In a country of about four million, turning out hundreds of thousands of people in a disciplined, highly orchestrated event, is a sign of strength. But the rally also highlighted some of the deep divisions among Lebanon’s different factions, as the crowd at times chanted slogans calling the Druse leader, Walid Jumblatt, a “worm” and “xxx” and calling for the prime minister to leave office.

    Sheik Nasrallah sought to overcome some of that by calling for unity in a speech that tried to define him as leader who is not just a local force, but a regional force as well. He gave voice to one of the primary feelings that has fueled anger throughout the Muslim world: a sense that Muslims are being victimized in places like Iraq and Gaza, and the world does not care. “How long will it go on that the world keeps quiet?” he asked. And he aimed hard at Arab leaders, criticizing them for not being willing to fight Israel. “These Arab leaders prefer to protect their thrones as opposed to protecting Palestine,” he said, taking a shot at the traditional power brokers, like the Egyptian president, Hosni Mubarak. In Israel, Sheik Nasrallah’s speech was condemned as defying the international community by refusing to disarm.

    Sheik Nasrallah had multiple messages to deliver: He said that Hezbollah would not disarm because the state was too weak to protect the people against Israel. He warned the international force deploying along the border with Israel not to spy on the “resistance.” He castigated Arab heads of state who recently asked the United Nations Security Council to help restart the peace process with Israel. He cautioned the Lebanese people about allowing political differences among sectarian leaders to become sectarian differences that might tear the country apart. And he repeatedly criticized the American-backed government of Prime Minister Fouad Siniora, saying it needed to be replaced by a national unity government, which would in turn give Hezbollah even more power.

    No one knew if Sheik Nasrallah would appear. People here talk about his assassination by Israel as though it is not just a matter of if, but when. The rally, billed as a celebration of the “divine victory,” presented him a chance to re-energize his supporters, to enhance his standing as a pan-Arab leader, and to try to buttress Hezbollah’s domestic political position. When he entered, he stood on a platform and appeared almost regal in finely tailored religious robes and a black turban. He was taken to the stage where he was protected by a wall of blastproof glass. He said that up until 30 minutes before the rally there were still discussions going on over whether he would attend.

    “I couldn’t talk to you from afar,” he said. “I insisted to be with you.”

    Israel began the war after Hezbollah crossed the border and captured two Israeli soldiers. The Israeli onslaught caused heavy damage to the mostly Shiite areas in the south and the north, and cost more than 1,000 lives, mostly civilians. But Hezbollah’s fighters never stopped, shooting hundreds of rockets into Israel, destroying Israeli tanks, an Israeli naval vessel and killing many Israeli troops.

    Judging from the size of the rally, and the remarks of the participants, Hezbollah’s base did not blame Hezbollah for the death and destruction. They blamed Israel and the United States. “This is good, good,” said Fatima Saad, 50, whose son, Kasem, was killed. There was no hint of sadness in her bearing. “I am very proud,” she said as she patted a picture of her son pinned to her chest. He was 20 when he was blown up. Ahmed Hussein, 78, made the trip to Beirut from his southern village of Kafr Kila. He said his house and most of his neighbors’ homes were destroyed, but that Hezbollah gave them tents and water tanks to help them get by. “All of us whose houses were destroyed we came here for Nasrallah, to tell him what we lost is nothing,” Mr. Hussein said.

    While Hezbollah and Sheik Nasrallah have been hailed as heroes throughout the Arab world, the group’s position in Lebanese politics is more complex. They have been attacked by opponents who fear that an empowered Hezbollah would exert even more influence over the country. Some of Sheik Nasrallah’s opponents said they thought the rally might help undermine his chance of reaching out beyond his Shiite base because he said he was comfortable being aligned with Syria and Iran. For his part, Sheik Nasrallah seemed to try to both embrace his benefactors in Syria and Iran and to distance himself from them. He said it made him angry when his detractors charged that the battle with Israel was a proxy war for Iran, or Syria. “We are with the Iranians, we are with the Syrians, but this was our war,” he said, as he thrust his right hand into the air, and the crowd cheered.

    NYT: http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/23/wo...rtner=homepage

    Leave a comment:


  • Pantera
    replied
    Re: War in The Middle East

    The silliest thing about Beirut is that they are having problems with themselves. Every body wants to rule, to dominate, to be bossy and every body wants others to listen and follow them…that’s why they fight with each other. They are having a civil war at the moment.
    Strong government and one word in the country is a strong army.
    This is their biggest problem needs to be fixed for now.
    Last edited by Pantera; 11-09-2006, 06:48 AM.

    Leave a comment:


  • karoaper
    replied
    here we go again

    IAEA complains of 'outrageous' inaccuracies in Iran report to House Intelligence Committee
    The Associated Press

    Published: September 14, 2006


    VIENNA, Austria A recent U.S. House of Representatives committee report on Iran's nuclear capability is "outrageous and dishonest" in trying to make a case that Tehran's program is geared toward making weapons, a senior official of the International Atomic Energy Agency has said.

    The letter, obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday outside a 35-nation IAEA board meeting, says the report is false in saying Iran is making weapons-grade uranium at an experimental enrichment site, when it has in fact produced material only in small quantities that is far below the level that can be used in nuclear arms.

    The letter, which was first reported on by The Washington Post, also says the report erroneously says that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei removed a senior nuclear inspector from the team investigating Iran's nuclear program "for concluding that the purpose of Iran's nuclear programme is to construct weapons."

    In fact, the inspector was sidelined on Tehran's request, and the Islamic republic had a right to ask for a replacement under agreements that govern all states relationships with the agency, said the letter, calling the report's version "incorrect and misleading."

    "In addition," says the letter, "the report contains an outrageous and dishonest suggestion that such removal might have been for 'not having adhered to an unstated IAEA policy barring IAEA officials from telling the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program.'"

    Dated Aug. 12, the letter was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra, a Michigan Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. It was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, a senior director of the Vienna-based agency.

    An IAEA official, who asked for anonymity because he was not authorized to comment on the letter, said it was written "to set the record straight."

    The dispute was reminiscent of the clashes between the Vienna-based agency and the U.S. administration over whether Iraq's Saddam Hussein was trying to make weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms. American arguments that Saddam had such covert arms programs were given as the chief reason for toppling Saddam.

    ElBaradei's criticism of the U.S. standpoint on Iraq and subsequent perceptions that he was soft on Iran in his staff's investigation of suspicions Tehran's nuclear activities may be a cover for a weapons program led to a failed attempt last year by Washington to prevent his re-election.

    VIENNA, Austria A recent U.S. House of Representatives committee report on Iran's nuclear capability is "outrageous and dishonest" in trying to make a case that Tehran's program is geared toward making weapons, a senior official of the International Atomic Energy Agency has said.

    The letter, obtained by The Associated Press on Thursday outside a 35-nation IAEA board meeting, says the report is false in saying Iran is making weapons-grade uranium at an experimental enrichment site, when it has in fact produced material only in small quantities that is far below the level that can be used in nuclear arms.

    The letter, which was first reported on by The Washington Post, also says the report erroneously says that IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei removed a senior nuclear inspector from the team investigating Iran's nuclear program "for concluding that the purpose of Iran's nuclear programme is to construct weapons."

    In fact, the inspector was sidelined on Tehran's request, and the Islamic republic had a right to ask for a replacement under agreements that govern all states relationships with the agency, said the letter, calling the report's version "incorrect and misleading."

    "In addition," says the letter, "the report contains an outrageous and dishonest suggestion that such removal might have been for 'not having adhered to an unstated IAEA policy barring IAEA officials from telling the whole truth about the Iranian nuclear program.'"

    Dated Aug. 12, the letter was addressed to Rep. Peter Hoekstra, a Michigan Republican and chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. It was signed by Vilmos Cserveny, a senior director of the Vienna-based agency.

    An IAEA official, who asked for anonymity because he was not authorized to comment on the letter, said it was written "to set the record straight."

    The dispute was reminiscent of the clashes between the Vienna-based agency and the U.S. administration over whether Iraq's Saddam Hussein was trying to make weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear arms. American arguments that Saddam had such covert arms programs were given as the chief reason for toppling Saddam.

    ElBaradei's criticism of the U.S. standpoint on Iraq and subsequent perceptions that he was soft on Iran in his staff's investigation of suspicions Tehran's nuclear activities may be a cover for a weapons program led to a failed attempt last year by Washington to prevent his re-election.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X