Michael J. Totten: Human Shields

July 28, 2006

Human Shields

Caveman (formerly of Beirut) reports that Hezbollah may be using Druze villagers as human shields (after kidnapping a Druze soldier from Israel). This won't be over when it's over...

UPDATE: Hezbollah is doing the same thing to Christians, even shooting civilians who try to flee Israeli fire.

Posted by Michael J. Totten at July 28, 2006 11:23 AM

Comments

The overuse of the term "human shields" is becoming quite aggrivating. That term was a euphemism developed by Saddam Hussein in the runup to GW1 when he forcibly moved foreign nationals into militarily sensitive locations for obvious reasons.

The real meaning of the term should be "hostages" since that is exactly what they are being used as. To continue using the sanitized term above is to allow the enemy to set the propaganda standard.

Posted by: D at July 28, 2006 11:33 AM

Thanks for linking to my post. I wish I could give you more details, but it's still fog of war down there.

Posted by: Caveman at July 28, 2006 11:33 AM

"May"?

Posted by: Joel Rosenberg at July 28, 2006 11:44 AM

Fog of war, Joel.

Posted by: Michael J. Totten at July 28, 2006 11:50 AM

Of course the article in the New York Times was below the fold on page A16. But, at least it was reported.

Posted by: SirGlubb at July 28, 2006 12:10 PM

In June of 1942, Rommel, in Africa, looked around, and said, "hitler is winning. All that's left to do is mop up."

Then, in July 1942, the tides turned. Hitler's troops on the eastern front, against stalin, was supposed to be an easy victory. What did stalin have? He sent troops to the front without ammunition. Sometimes, even without shoes.

Why recap history when the results are known? Even though there's a lot of stuff still unknown. (What part did stalin's cadres, bought and paid for, who worked in America's state department, have to do with applying pressure on FDR to join the war? A joining we did, not in September 1941, when hitler divided his army so he could attack russia; but Pearl Harbor. We didn't declare war until December 7, 1941. The day FDR announced "would live in infamy.") And, then? We didn't head into the Pacific! We headed into the Atlantic!

Dear Michael Totten: Please look at this fact. America entered WW2 by going to fight in Africa. Just as Israel's IDF struck a heavy blow to the arm's build up in Lebanon. Will syria get hit next? I have no idea.

But it's possible that Assad's strangle hold on Lebanon will never be the same. While Lebanon, like Iraq, will always have Shi'as.

Why doesn't Lebanon return the two kidnapped soldiers? What's it got to lose, now? Because it's lost a lot holding onto them.

You know? Again from the history books. When Spain had all the wealth. And, King Phillip built his Armada. To fight against Elizabeth the First. England's queen. Not just a female, and hence, disparaged. But a poor queen. With little money in her treasury.

A long time ago, according to Homer. A king (perhaps Persian?) went to the Oracle and asked? Who wins. And, the answer was "A great man wins."

Well, on advice like that we know the Persian king wasn't the great man. That old war wasn't his to win.

Wars, like the labor of birthing babies, is a dangerous journey. Made easier by medince? Well, at least helped when a woman has fewer kids. But wars are our histories. Pleasant times are the pages that get skipped.

Will it be possible for some of the crazy, religious fanatics to lose some steam? Can women really be freed to choose an education over multiple childbirths? Are we having a clash of ideas like this, now?

The germans were once big boosters, not just of hitler, but of Nietzche. Both dead. And, superman is a cartoon.

Posted by: Carol Herman at July 28, 2006 01:01 PM

Isn´t it still a bit hazy if hizbullah militants are actually using the surrounding civilians as cover? None of this has come up on lebanese national news...

Posted by: Nader Hamadeh at July 28, 2006 04:24 PM

Lebanese news won't report this.

Other things you won't hear on the Lebanese news are FL militants waving Israeli flags, Shia refugees being 'unwellcomed' in non-Shia areas despite the 'national union' propaganda and a car displaying Nasrallah's photo being attacked in Ashrafieh (East Beirut). And there's more.

Posted by: True Lebanese at July 28, 2006 05:01 PM

There are non-political reasons as well - and even more compelling. It is extremely difficult and dangerous to go to any areas in southern Lebanon right now, much more so the towns that sit right on the border. The few journalists who have gone down there have chosen to focus on what they feel to the be the obvious, more compelling story - the humanitarian crisis. Those non-Shia residents who have dispersed fear reprisals (if and when they are lucky enough to return) for traitorously speaking to the media. My wife was initially not happy that I even mentioned the town in my blog, in spite of the obvious injustice of the situation.

Posted by: Caveman at July 29, 2006 06:19 AM

Isn´t it still a bit hazy if hizbullah militants are actually using the surrounding civilians as cover?

No.

http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,,19955774-5007220,00.html

Posted by: rosignol at August 1, 2006 01:02 AM

澳大利亚
 澳大利亚移民
 澳洲移民

压力开关
 压力变送器
 压力传感器
 流量开关
 流量计
 液位计
 液位开关
 温湿度记录仪
 风速仪
 差压开关
 可燃气体检测仪