” Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has accepted an emerging Mideast cease-fire deal and informed the United States of his decision, Israeli officials said Friday.
Olmert will recommend that his government approve the deal in its meeting on Sunday, the officials said on condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to brief journalists on the internal discussions.
It was not immediately clear whether Israel’s expanded ground offensive would be frozen. Defense officials said it appeared the campaign would be halted.”
Of course the UN wants to put in even more “Hezbollah Enablers”, er, “Peacekeepers”, as the AP reports:
“The U.N. Security Council adopted a resolution Friday that calls for an end to the fighting between Israel and Hezbollah, and authorizes the deployment of 15,000 U.N. peacekeepers to help Lebanese troops take control of south Lebanon as Israel withdraws.”
Make no mistake, this is a bad deal - period - if Hezbollah doesn’t disarm and although:
“ritain‚Äôs U.N. Ambassador Emyr Jones-Parry said the resolution gives a U.N. force in Lebanon an enhanced mandate to help coordinate the eventual withdrawal of Israeli troops. But it would ultimately be deployed under Chapter 6 of the U.N. Charter ‚Äî which Israel has previously opposed.
That decision was a key concession to Lebanon and Hezbollah. Israel wanted the force deployed under the Charter’s Chapter 7, which would give the troops more robust rules of engagement.
‚ÄúYou‚Äôll find that the mandate for the force is very robust,‚Äù Jones-Parry said.”
Yeah right, believe it when I see it.
In the meantime I give this move a big NEGATIVE.
iraq Politics News bush war on terror qana middle east lebanon Israel
No Response
lurker9876
August 12th, 2006 at 7:20 am
1Walid Phares believes that Hezbollah will take over the remainder of Lebanon. Even if Hezbollah becomes part of this UNIFIL force, they will resume their attacks against Israel. This resolution gives Israel an open door to respond to those attacks. Once that happens, there’s nothing UN can do because they approved the resolution as written.
The issue at that point is the possibility of the next war escalating to nuclear level.
That’s probably one of the reasons USA, France, Britain, etc., want to refocus on the Iran and NK issues in order to prevent them from obtaining nuclear weapons.
USA must have different ideas about Lebanon at this point. At least I hope that we will jump in to help rebuild Lebanon, especially its democratic government.
Iran has already jumped in.
lurker9876
August 12th, 2006 at 7:23 am
2Oh, unless USA and its allies are smart, this resolution is not expected to work. Which may be the driving force for IDF to forge its way to Litani River as quickly as possible. The Hezzies would end up north of Litani River, firing rockets against the IDF soldiers. What happens then? IDF forging further north?
We’ll see.
Tel-Chai Nation
August 13th, 2006 at 11:10 am
3Israel’s conservative opposition mobilizing to t…..
Although it would seem as if Olmert had decided to give the [belated] go-ahead to the IDF to raid Lebanon and go as far as the Litani river, his acceptance of the “cease-fire” draft in the UN security council is still more or less an act of surrender…
RSS feed for comments on this post · TrackBack URI
Leave a reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Get the Discover® More Card
Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac. Starting at just $149.95 with free shipping.
Tags
2008 Election abortion Acorn Add new tag Bailout Barack Obama Bill Ayers Blagojevich Bush Chris Dodd Colin Powell Conservatism corrupt democrats Corruption democrats economy Election 2008 Election Fraud Elections Financial Crisis Gay Marriage George Tiller GOP Hillary Clinton Iraq Israel Joe Biden Joe the Plumber John McCain Liberals Macranger Show media media bias Michelle Obama News Politics Poll Juice polls Rahm Emanuel Rev. Wright Rick Warren Rod Blagojevich Sarah Palin Tech News terrorismRecent Comments
Archives
Categories
Blogroll