Hezbollah Says It Sent Drone Over Israel

[Purveyor]

BEIRUT (AP) -- The leader of Hezbollah claimed responsibility Thursday for launching the drone aircraft that entered Israeli airspace earlier this week, a rare and provocative move by the Lebanese militants at a time of soaring regional tensions.

Israeli warplanes shot down the unmanned plane, but the infiltration marked a rare breach of Israel's airspace. Hezbollah had been the leading suspect because of its arsenal of sophisticated Iranian weapons and a history of trying to deploy similar aircraft.

"Today we are uncovering a small part of our capabilities, and we shall keep many more hidden," Sheik Hassan Nasrallah said in a televised address. "It is our natural right to send other reconnaissance flights inside occupied Palestine ... This is not the first time and will not be the last. We can reach any place we want" inside Israel, he said.

With a formidable arsenal that rivals that of the Lebanese army, Hezbollah is already under pressure in Lebanon from rivals who accuse it of putting Lebanon at risk of getting sucked into regional turmoil. Confirmation that Hezbollah was behind the drone could put the group under further strain internally as it pursues its longstanding conflict with Israel.

MORE...

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/M/ML_MIDEAST_DOWNED_DRONE?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2012-10-11-14-09-36

[leveymg]

1. Big deal. It's a microlight aircraft guided by a cell phone and an autopilot.

Not militarily significant.

[azurnoir]

2. so well what's Israel going to do about it?

most likely shake its fist, do some low altitude flights over Lebanon of course with sonic booms, oh and talk tough too

[ProgressiveProfessor]

3. If they combine the two...then there might be problems...

[azurnoir]

4. actually I listed 3 things and it would seem Israel has already done those

not to mention the upcoming elections Israeli voters might have a problem with any actual overt military action on IDF's part, unless a overwhelming military victory could be claimed without any significant losses to Israel, we'll just have to see, but do keep your fingers crossed

[sabbat hunter]

5. Why isn't the Lebanese

government doing its job and disarming this illegal milita/terror group. It is something they said they would do/are supposed to do.

[oberliner]

6. Great point

The Lebanese Armed Forces should be the Lebanese Armed Forces. Non-governmental militia groups ought to be dealt with, as per UN agreements.

[shaayecanaan]

13. You seem a bit confused...

There was no "UN Agreement" in the terms of which you speak. Presumably, what you are thinking of is the Taif Accord, which required all militias except Hezbollah to surrender their weapons. Hezbollah was permitted to keep its weapons pursuant to the accord, subject to them being used against Israel rather than other Lebanese sects.

The UN Security Council resolution called upon Hezbollah to "disarm in accordance with the Taif accord" - which of course does not call for Hezbollah to disarm at all.

Of course, the UN has about as much legal authority to ban Hezbollah as it has to ban square dancing. The UN cannot of its own accord ban anything, whether it be white lead or cluster munitions, without the consent of individual sovereign states, who may choose to accept the calls of the UN and ratify international covenants or treaties calling for the banning of these things.

[oberliner]

14. So do you

Not thinking of the Taif Accord. Thinking of UNSC resolution 1701 which contains the following:

"...there will be no weapons or authority in Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese state."

This resolution was unanimously approved by the United Nations Security Council.

Also, the Lebanese cabinet, which at the time included two members of Hezbollah, unanimously approved the resolution.

Per CNN:

The two Hezbollah members of the Lebanese Cabinet said Saturday the militia wanted to keep its weapons south of the Litani River -- a zone the U.N. resolution calls for demilitarizing.

Yet the Cabinet unanimously approved the resolution. Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah indicated that the two Hezbollah ministers voted for it in a spirit of national unity.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/08/13/mideast.main/

Presumably the Lebanese cabinet has authority in Lebanon.

It is, after all, one of the only democracies in the Middle East!

[azurnoir]

16. Doesn't 1701 also call for Israel to cease overflights? Both sides break 1701 n/t

[shaayecanaan]

19. The Resolution

merely invokes the decision of the Lebanese cabinet to accept the ceasefire, in the same way that it attempts to invoke the Taif Accords.

Let me explain further.

Many countries have laws explicitly permitting the operation of militias within their territory.

The US Constitution, for example, has a section stating: "A well-regulated militia being the best security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed" (probably a sentiment Hezbollah would endorse, I dare say).

The law that operates within the United States is United States law. It does not matter if the UN passes a law calling for the dismantlement of all militias within the United States. International law governs relations between states, but the UN has neither the capacity nor the ability to dictate how a state should govern within its sovereign territory.

The only way that militias can become illegal is if the UN adopts a convention banning all militias, the US signs that convention, and then ratifies that convention by enacting legislation within its own state banning same.

Presumably the Lebanese cabinet has authority in Lebanon.

It is, after all, one of the only democracies in the Middle East!

It does indeed, and the law that deals with such matters is the Taif Accord. According to Lebanese law, Hezbollah is permitted to keep and use its weapons against Israel.

[oberliner]

33. Your ignorance about Lebanon is startling

It would probably be better if you left those discussions to the people who actually know something about it.

I am always impressed with your knowledge of big words and ability to write really sharp cutting quips and insults. Maybe you should stick with that.

[shaayecanaan]

36. u mad, bro?

You certainly have been throwing some haymakers tonight, haven't you?

"It would probably be better if you left those discussions to the people who actually know something about it."

Well, forgive me for sullying the otherwise impeccably high standards of debate around here. No doubt if I absenced myself from the board, a hundred flowers would bloom and this forum would suddenly become a bastion of serious and high-minded discussion.

Alternatively, if I annoy you that much, perhaps you might prefer to talk to your budgerigar. Or your teapot. You might also like to throw cornflakes at your television while shuffling around with your feet in tissue boxes, Howard Hughes style. At the end of the day, its all about exercising the mind, particularly as we grow older.

Otherwise, I guess I'll see you here tomorrow, same time, same place. After all, we've been here a few years now, and you probably spend more time talking to me than to at least some of your own relatives.

Go in peace.

[oberliner]

38. Apologies

That was rude and disrespectful - I apologize for my post above. Sometimes these debates can get frustrating for all of us I'm sure. No offense intended. I take your comments very seriously.

[bemildred]

39. +1. Happen to anybody.

[shaayecanaan]

40. None required

I take your comments very seriously.

I don't. Nor yours, nor anyone else's.

One must remember: the stakes are very low.

[oberliner]

42. Word to live by

Thanks for the metaphorical splash of cold water.

[King_David]

41. I hardly ever talk to you,

But it is still more than I do with my relatives

[Mosby]

47. 1701 doesn't just reference taif

It references 1559 and 1680 both of which state that hezbo needs to be disarmed and disbanded.

The gov response at the time to why they won't disarm hezbo is just stupid parsing, I think we all know the reason why.

[bemildred]

23. That bolded line is delightfully general and ambiguous.

And that is no accident.

[azurnoir]

7. Hezbollah is part of the Lebanese government n/t

[bemildred]

8. Shhh. I understand many of them are Lebanese natives too, get to vote and stuff. nt

[King_David]

9. So every party that is part of the government should have a private thuggish militia ?

Ha,

That makes sense...

[bemildred]

10. Militias are the norm, Sir, they are everywhere.

Look around, read the news, everybody is very fond of them, as long as they control them, and otherwise not. Have you heard of the National Guard? The Nicaraguan Contras? The Shatila Massacre? Those are all militias that we are or were fond of at the time.

I can assure you that the last thing the Lebanese military wants is to have Hezbollah removed from the region between then and Israel. They see them, quite rightly, as protection.

Militias come out of the long tradition of citizen soldiers, and they have more real legitimacy than any mercenary army ever has.

[eyl]

12. Which is fine up until

said militia begins making national policy on its own.

You say that the Lebenese government rightly sees Hizbullah as protection, but Hizbullah ahs already dragged Lebanon into one war and several other attacks...

[bemildred]

21. The militia is part of the government, and making policy is what governments do.

Also, as you know, Hezbollah exists because of a war, and has always existed in a state of war, so I'm not sure what you want them to do. Should they just give up? Commit suicide? What? Do you think that is a likely sort of thing for them to do?

[eyl]

31. Making policy is the job

of specific parts of the government. Your average Army grunt is part of the government, but he certainly doesn't set any policy.

If the Texas National Guard began launching raids into Mexico, you'd say it was legitimate because as part of the government they have the right to say policy?

And Hizbullah isn't really equivalent to the National Guard in terms of its relationship to the government, because Hizbullah's armed wing is not under the command of the government. It's more like if the Republican Party had it's own private army.

[bemildred]

37. And Hezbollah is an elected part of those parts of government.

And you know that, or ought to.

[eyl]

43. So?

That doesn't make whatever a component of Hizbullah does government policy. For that matter, not every Hizbullah member in the government would be making policy on every subject.

Again - if the Republican party had a private army during the Bush administration - which answered solely to, say, Rumsfeld rather than GWB - does that mean that everything said army did was government policy? (actually, this analogy isn't exact because Hizbullah is part of a coalition, and the PM is not not from Hizbullah, rather than the get-the-whole-pot system in the US).

Besides, we generally consider it a Bad Thing when a national army starts making policy, and it goes double for an unaccountable militia.

[shaayecanaan]

22. If not for Hezbollah

Lebanon would be in the same situation as the Syrians and the Palestinians. Israel would still be occupying Southern Lebanon, there would probably be settlements there, and the Lebanese would be sitting around an American negotiating table haggling over how much of their own territory should be returned to them.

Not to put to much of a point on it, but fuck that.

[eyl]

30. When did Israel ever make an attempt

to establish settlements in South Lebanon?

Also, in no small part Israel remained there so long because of Hizbullah.

[shaayecanaan]

32. I suppose thats why Israel is still in the Golan Heights

its because of all the Hezbollah activity there.

When did Israel ever make an attempt to establish settlements in South Lebanon?

I thought the point of my post was that Israel did not make any attempt to build settlements in Lebanon, most likely because such a settlement would have been met with a hail of rockets or truck bombs.

Or are suggesting that Israel refrained from building settlements in Lebanon out of some moral impulse that for some reason did not apply to Syria, Egypt or the Palestinian territories?

[eyl]

34. In the other cases,

there were historical reasons for the settlements, and in two of those cases the areas were only thinly populated. I've never heard anyone even suggesting establishing settlements or a permanent presence in southern Lebanon.

[shaayecanaan]

35. Gaza, the Sinai, the West Bank, the Golan and Lebanon...

As you said, in two cases the area was thinly populated (the Sinai and the Golan, although mainly this was because most of the Syrians fled) but in the other three cases it was not. And frankly I think there is probably more Jewish history in Brooklyn than there is in the Sinai, Gaza or the Golan Heights.

Put it this way, what would be your main reason for not wanting to move to a settlement in Lebanon?

[eyl]

44. Why

would I move to a settlement in Lebanon?

[shaayecanaan]

45. Much nicer place than the West Bank

and lets face it, in the natural beauty stakes, its a much nicer place than most of Israel.

[eyl]

46. I disagree. Matter of taste, I suppose n/t

[sabbat hunter]

18. the national guard

is a legal state run militia/army. The rest aren't

[bemildred]

20. Hezbolllah is entirely legal in Lebanon. nt

[eyl]

11. Should I take it, then,

that you agree with Israel's attacking Lebenese government targets in 2006 in retaliation for a Hizbullah attack?

[azurnoir]

15. what government targets are you speaking of? n/t

[bemildred]

24. I think he means since H is part of the government, the government is responsble for what H does.

Which is quite right, I think. You can't let them play both sides of the table.

[azurnoir]

27. No that much is true enough

but in the case(s) of both Lebanon and Gaza what is generally called civilian infrastructure was destroyed under the heading of being government targets as they could be used to benefit combatants little things like potable water electricity civilian airports....

[bemildred]

29. Yes, there are other ways to construe it.

Perfectly good ones too. That wasn't my first choice, but after a while I settled on it.

[sabbat hunter]

17. This militia/terror organization

is not part of the government. It is completely separate from the government.

[bemildred]

25. The Lebanese government doesn't think so. nt

[fascisthunter]

26. how fucking infantile and stupid

yeah.... just keep whacking that bee hive so we can all get dragged into another fucking war. The right wing controlling Israel is just itching for another reason to go to war, and these idiots acquiesce.

[bemildred]

28. Yes, there has been a lot of loose talk lately.

It makes me wonder if everybody is losing their minds. It's like they are all on crack, the entire region consists of islands of peace in a sea of violence, and everybody keeps making threats and upping the ante.