On October 13, 1990, general Aoun did not have the time to pack his stuff as he fled Baabda wearing nothing but underpants.
He was prime minister at the time and, 16 years later, he continues to believe that all prime ministers terminate their mandate in underpants, with no time to pack.
What a monkey!
I used to think of Aoun as another Hitler.
But now I think of Aoun as another Bozo the clown (Hitler wasn't an idiot!).
Before returning from Stockholm, Siniora should ask "General Aoun, should I stay in Stockholm or it is OK if I return to pack my stuff?"
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Wednesday, August 30, 2006
Stingy Olmert!
Many thanks to Olmert who, rather than helping pay for Lebanon's reconstruction, is continuing to play the tough guy by imposing a blockade on Lebanon. This is to show his public that he has won, to destroy Hezbollah's (not so deserved) prestige, and to obtain the unconditional release of his two soldiers.
I can understand that from a strategic point of view. But Olmert must pay a few billion dollars for the reconstruction of Lebanon. Otherwise, we can continue to see Israel as a pure force of destruction, which it has been for the past 50 years.
After all, the US is paying for the reconstruction of Iraq. So Olmert, call your Jew friends around the world and send us a big check. I think it is fair that you give us this check in return for the two soldiers.
I can understand that from a strategic point of view. But Olmert must pay a few billion dollars for the reconstruction of Lebanon. Otherwise, we can continue to see Israel as a pure force of destruction, which it has been for the past 50 years.
After all, the US is paying for the reconstruction of Iraq. So Olmert, call your Jew friends around the world and send us a big check. I think it is fair that you give us this check in return for the two soldiers.
The Lebanese Army
Some people ask the question "why didn't the Lebanese army try to stop the Israeli invasion?" They left Hezbollah to fight the war alone. But there are many reasons why the Lebanese army could not do much.
1) Hezbollah was occupying the South and never let the army take control. The army could not suddenly show up and start fighting. The routes were anyway destroyed by the invader within a few hours, and the army didn't even have a chance to move logistics to the South (at the eleventh hour, without any prior notice from Nasrallah). Moreover, when you have a militia already fighting, you can't have a third army suddenly showing up and trying to organize the fight. It will become a circus. How do you ensure that the militia and the Lebanese army don't shoot at each other by mistake? Who decides what the tactics are and who controls what? Just imagine you are a soldier stuck between two enemies shooting at each other.
2) Even if the Lebanese army was already established in the South, it is suicidal to fight a superpower like Israel. What did the Iraqi government do against the US invasion? What did Granada do against the US invasion? The more you fight, the more you kill your innocent people. Better not to fight and find another solution. Quite often cowardice is intelligence. What does pride serve you if you lost your family, house and job? When a tiger in the jungle feels threatened, he hides. Many mammal species in Australia were wiped out ten thousand years ago because they didn't know they should hide from invading humans. Who talks about these mammals today except some archeologists and biologists? Survival of the fittest implicitly means that if you're dumb you're history.
3) You may ask "then why was Hezbollah capable of standing against Israel?"
Hezbollah is a guerilla and is quite different from an official army. They are armed civilians hiding in caves. Their logistics are kept to a minimum. They cannot fight wars other than sitting in place and defending, or hit and run type of attack. Their leadership went in hiding and no one knows where Nasrallah is today. Do you think Siniora can afford to run away and hide like Nasrallah (if the army were to get involved)? Who would run the government, the economy, the security, the country?
4) For the same reason that Syria and Iran did not get involved, the Lebanese army did not get involved. Because once you put an official army in the face of Israel, Israel will have an excuse to wipe it out, along with the entire country. They easily won all previous traditional wars. And once things become official, Israel could feel more threatened, or play the victim, and use WMD weapons (chemical, biological, etc).
5) The Lebanese army has limited resources. It could not afford to buy Kornet missiles. The economy of Lebanon is in a disastrous shape, the debt is huge, we have no industries like the US and no oil like Saudi Arabia, and little chance of paying off our debts and coming out of poverty. So the government decided to save the money, invest it in social services rather than buying weapons. Hezbollah, on the other hand, has the luxury of receiving free and sophisticated weapons from an oil rich country, Iran, who likes to play superpower in the region. So Hezbollah is showered with money and weapons, without putting real hardwork to earn them. When things come easy, they go easy.
6) Why should the Lebanese army engage in a war that was, in part, decided by Hezbollah? Hezbollah triggers wars and then asks for help? I think that the Syrian army and the Iranian army should have come for help, not the Lebanese army. They were happily watching this war and quick to brag about how they can resist Israel via a proxy militia.
1) Hezbollah was occupying the South and never let the army take control. The army could not suddenly show up and start fighting. The routes were anyway destroyed by the invader within a few hours, and the army didn't even have a chance to move logistics to the South (at the eleventh hour, without any prior notice from Nasrallah). Moreover, when you have a militia already fighting, you can't have a third army suddenly showing up and trying to organize the fight. It will become a circus. How do you ensure that the militia and the Lebanese army don't shoot at each other by mistake? Who decides what the tactics are and who controls what? Just imagine you are a soldier stuck between two enemies shooting at each other.
2) Even if the Lebanese army was already established in the South, it is suicidal to fight a superpower like Israel. What did the Iraqi government do against the US invasion? What did Granada do against the US invasion? The more you fight, the more you kill your innocent people. Better not to fight and find another solution. Quite often cowardice is intelligence. What does pride serve you if you lost your family, house and job? When a tiger in the jungle feels threatened, he hides. Many mammal species in Australia were wiped out ten thousand years ago because they didn't know they should hide from invading humans. Who talks about these mammals today except some archeologists and biologists? Survival of the fittest implicitly means that if you're dumb you're history.
3) You may ask "then why was Hezbollah capable of standing against Israel?"
Hezbollah is a guerilla and is quite different from an official army. They are armed civilians hiding in caves. Their logistics are kept to a minimum. They cannot fight wars other than sitting in place and defending, or hit and run type of attack. Their leadership went in hiding and no one knows where Nasrallah is today. Do you think Siniora can afford to run away and hide like Nasrallah (if the army were to get involved)? Who would run the government, the economy, the security, the country?
4) For the same reason that Syria and Iran did not get involved, the Lebanese army did not get involved. Because once you put an official army in the face of Israel, Israel will have an excuse to wipe it out, along with the entire country. They easily won all previous traditional wars. And once things become official, Israel could feel more threatened, or play the victim, and use WMD weapons (chemical, biological, etc).
5) The Lebanese army has limited resources. It could not afford to buy Kornet missiles. The economy of Lebanon is in a disastrous shape, the debt is huge, we have no industries like the US and no oil like Saudi Arabia, and little chance of paying off our debts and coming out of poverty. So the government decided to save the money, invest it in social services rather than buying weapons. Hezbollah, on the other hand, has the luxury of receiving free and sophisticated weapons from an oil rich country, Iran, who likes to play superpower in the region. So Hezbollah is showered with money and weapons, without putting real hardwork to earn them. When things come easy, they go easy.
6) Why should the Lebanese army engage in a war that was, in part, decided by Hezbollah? Hezbollah triggers wars and then asks for help? I think that the Syrian army and the Iranian army should have come for help, not the Lebanese army. They were happily watching this war and quick to brag about how they can resist Israel via a proxy militia.
Sunday, August 27, 2006
Ahmadinejad, The Traitor
While Lebanon was being bombarded, Ahmadinejad warned Israel that any aggression on Syria will be considered an aggression on Iran, and Iran will retaliate.
Why didn't Ahmadinejad consider the aggression on Lebanon as part of the same aggression on Iran?
He is a traitor.
He left the poor Shiites of South Lebanon to die while he promised to help the Sunnis of Syria.
I think it is time for Hassan Nasrallah to explain to Assad and Ahmadinejad that he has done his part of the job, that his people have paid a very high price, and that the next war should be directly between Syria and Israel, or between Iran and Israel, how ever they wish, but no more involvement of Lebanon.
I think Ahmadinejad will appreciate this kind of honest comment by Nasrallah.
And Nasrallah can add that he has decided to invest in biotech, nanotech and fine arts, because he found that the return on investment in Kornet missiles is not great.
Why didn't Ahmadinejad consider the aggression on Lebanon as part of the same aggression on Iran?
He is a traitor.
He left the poor Shiites of South Lebanon to die while he promised to help the Sunnis of Syria.
I think it is time for Hassan Nasrallah to explain to Assad and Ahmadinejad that he has done his part of the job, that his people have paid a very high price, and that the next war should be directly between Syria and Israel, or between Iran and Israel, how ever they wish, but no more involvement of Lebanon.
I think Ahmadinejad will appreciate this kind of honest comment by Nasrallah.
And Nasrallah can add that he has decided to invest in biotech, nanotech and fine arts, because he found that the return on investment in Kornet missiles is not great.
Tuesday, August 15, 2006
Return To The South
It is heartbreaking to watch the poor and innocent Lebanese people so eagerly returning to their homes in the South. If any homes are left.
They do not want to stay refugees, not one minute more. They were often warmly welcomed in other areas of the country and in Syria, and yet they choose to return so quickly.
We can't hear it, but they can hear their land calling.
We can't feel it, but they can feel their roads and schools are waiting, the trees and the streams are lonely.
People of the South, isn't it guns and cannons that shattered your fond memories?
Do not allow the logic of war to hit you ever again. "Never again."
For you deserve peace as much as the inhabitants of the Golan Heights and Haifa deserve it. No more, no less.
They do not want to stay refugees, not one minute more. They were often warmly welcomed in other areas of the country and in Syria, and yet they choose to return so quickly.
We can't hear it, but they can hear their land calling.
We can't feel it, but they can feel their roads and schools are waiting, the trees and the streams are lonely.
People of the South, isn't it guns and cannons that shattered your fond memories?
Do not allow the logic of war to hit you ever again. "Never again."
For you deserve peace as much as the inhabitants of the Golan Heights and Haifa deserve it. No more, no less.
Thursday, August 03, 2006
The Orphan
A family of 5 walking down the street is attacked by an armed gang of 5. The vicious gang is carrying big guns.
Version 1:
The family gives any money they carry to the gang. The gang leaves. The family goes straight to the police and deposit a complaint. With a small chance, the police may recover the money back from the gang.
Version 2:
One of the children in the family is carrying a small pistol. He shoots at the gang. A fight starts. The family runs for hiding. But the father, mother and 2 children are killed. The armed kid is the only one to remain alive, and he's bravely continuing the fight. He even manages to kill one of the gang's members. He declares that a victory and starts jumping out of joy.
That kid is Hassan Nasrallah! He's today an orphan for his entire family has been wiped out. He ain't the brightest kid you can imagine.
Version 1:
The family gives any money they carry to the gang. The gang leaves. The family goes straight to the police and deposit a complaint. With a small chance, the police may recover the money back from the gang.
Version 2:
One of the children in the family is carrying a small pistol. He shoots at the gang. A fight starts. The family runs for hiding. But the father, mother and 2 children are killed. The armed kid is the only one to remain alive, and he's bravely continuing the fight. He even manages to kill one of the gang's members. He declares that a victory and starts jumping out of joy.
That kid is Hassan Nasrallah! He's today an orphan for his entire family has been wiped out. He ain't the brightest kid you can imagine.
Wednesday, August 02, 2006
The Darwin Award
For a definition of the Darwin Award, you could refer to:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_Awards
Hassan Nasrallah made a non-fatal mistake: kidnap 2 Israeli soldiers.
It wasn't fatal because often a mistake can be corrected.
Indeed, Hassan Nasrallah could have, for example, returned the kidnapped soldiers unconditionally.
Or, once the war ignited, he could have asked his soldiers to strategically withdraw from the South and avoid the clashes with the Israeli army... for many reasons:
- prevent the bloodshed of LEBANESE civilians,
- prevent the destruction of the South of LEBANON and many other parts of the country,
- prevent the LEBANESE Shiites from loosing their homes, cars, jobs, savings, schools, hospitals, etc.,
- prevent the LEBANESE Shiites from fleeing to an unknown future,
- prevent his army from being decimated,
- and remain politically strong, backed by a non-decimated army.
But the "non-fatal" mistake became a "fatal decision" once Hassan Nasrallah stood to fight a volcano, a mighty superpower.
Will he deserve the trophy of the Darwin Award in 2006?
It seems Arafat's army in 1982 ran away from the South. That prevented many massacres and it kept the PLO's army in relatively good shape. Arafat outlasted the 1982 invasion by more than 20 years.
Will Hassan Nasrallah be able to outlast the current invasion by 20 years?
Once you hear a volcano roaring, would you sit underneath?
Note that in the above I stressed the words LEBANON and LEBANESE in capital letters. This is to say that if anyone should care about this country and people it should be Hassan Nasrallah rather than Ehud Olmert. The latter couldn't care less since he has no LEBANESE passport.
Once again I reiterate my opinion that the best way to deal with Israel is to give it peace. Hassan Nasrallah chose the war and he is paying a hefty price. Not just himself, but all of his fellow citizens will pay a very big price.
What is Israel paying? A few scratches on some buildings? They will recover any losses in a few months. Lebanon will reel under the destructions for a decade.
Someone gave the example that Hezbollah today can be compared to the Zionist terrorists in the 1940s. They started weak and small but defeated mighty armies and created a superpower in a few decades. However, I don't think this analogy holds. The Zionist terrorists were backed by the brightest brains on this planet. They invented modern science, modern technology and modern art. What are the backers of Hezbollah inventing?
According to Charles Darwin, the fittest or the smartest will survive.
Rather than building bunkers, Hassan Nasrallah should have built schools.
The weapon of the future is education, not Katyusha.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_Awards
Hassan Nasrallah made a non-fatal mistake: kidnap 2 Israeli soldiers.
It wasn't fatal because often a mistake can be corrected.
Indeed, Hassan Nasrallah could have, for example, returned the kidnapped soldiers unconditionally.
Or, once the war ignited, he could have asked his soldiers to strategically withdraw from the South and avoid the clashes with the Israeli army... for many reasons:
- prevent the bloodshed of LEBANESE civilians,
- prevent the destruction of the South of LEBANON and many other parts of the country,
- prevent the LEBANESE Shiites from loosing their homes, cars, jobs, savings, schools, hospitals, etc.,
- prevent the LEBANESE Shiites from fleeing to an unknown future,
- prevent his army from being decimated,
- and remain politically strong, backed by a non-decimated army.
But the "non-fatal" mistake became a "fatal decision" once Hassan Nasrallah stood to fight a volcano, a mighty superpower.
Will he deserve the trophy of the Darwin Award in 2006?
It seems Arafat's army in 1982 ran away from the South. That prevented many massacres and it kept the PLO's army in relatively good shape. Arafat outlasted the 1982 invasion by more than 20 years.
Will Hassan Nasrallah be able to outlast the current invasion by 20 years?
Once you hear a volcano roaring, would you sit underneath?
Note that in the above I stressed the words LEBANON and LEBANESE in capital letters. This is to say that if anyone should care about this country and people it should be Hassan Nasrallah rather than Ehud Olmert. The latter couldn't care less since he has no LEBANESE passport.
Once again I reiterate my opinion that the best way to deal with Israel is to give it peace. Hassan Nasrallah chose the war and he is paying a hefty price. Not just himself, but all of his fellow citizens will pay a very big price.
What is Israel paying? A few scratches on some buildings? They will recover any losses in a few months. Lebanon will reel under the destructions for a decade.
Someone gave the example that Hezbollah today can be compared to the Zionist terrorists in the 1940s. They started weak and small but defeated mighty armies and created a superpower in a few decades. However, I don't think this analogy holds. The Zionist terrorists were backed by the brightest brains on this planet. They invented modern science, modern technology and modern art. What are the backers of Hezbollah inventing?
According to Charles Darwin, the fittest or the smartest will survive.
Rather than building bunkers, Hassan Nasrallah should have built schools.
The weapon of the future is education, not Katyusha.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)