Posted on 07/30/2006 11:58:14 AM PDT by West Coast Conservative
Despite the events in Qana, the US is decided in its rejection of an immediate ceasefire between Israel and Hizbullah. Minutes after speaking on the telephone with US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice (who currently in Israel), US Under Secretary for Political Affairs, Nicholas Burns, declared that the United States is not interested in repeating former mistakes.
"We need a sustainable ceasefire. We need to ensure that Hizbullah will not remain in a position that allows it to threaten Israeli security and we need to return sovereignty to the Lebanese government. We cannot allow Hizbullah to sit on the border and launch thousands of rockets at millions of Israelis," said Burns in an interview on ABC's show 'This Week'.
Burns emphasized that, in the event of an immediate ceasefire, "Hizbullah will keep firing on Israelis and Israel will stay in Lebanon." He added that efforts to create a multinational force will continue, stating that several nations expressed willingness to participate in such a force, but refraining from naming them explicitly. Earlier, ynet reported that these states were France, Spain, Italy, Poland, Turkey, and India, who had been approached by the US.
Rice to return empty-handed?
Despite the fact the Secretary Rice did not visit Lebanon on Sunday, she conducted a number of telephone calls with Lebanese Prime Minister, Fouad Siniora, in order to advance political initiatives. However, NBC's chief foreign affairs correspondent, Andrea Mitchell, who accompanied Rice to the Middle East, said that the incident in Qana shattered American diplomatic efforts. According to Mitchell, Rice may return to the US empty-handed, causing Israel to pay a heavy price to revitalize a diplomatic process.
In the meantime, Israel has intensified its PR campaign in the US. Senior Israeli spokespersons were sent to appear opposite Lebanese and Syrian representatives on Sunday talk shows. Vice Premier Shimon Peres appeared on CBS's 'Face the Nation' program, along with PM Lebanese Fouad Siniora. Minister Isaac Herzog appeared opposite the Syrian minister of public relations on CNN, while Israeli UN representative, Danny Gillerman, and Israeli ambassador in Washington, Dan Ayalon, spoke on ABC.
Gillerman stated that "it is important to recall that Hizbullah uses civilians as human shields. It shoots from the midst of the population, which proves the need for disarming the organization. They are holding the Lebanese people hostage."
Ayalon argued with Siniora's security advisor, who labeled Israeli operations, "not a war…(but) war crimes," and called for an immediate and sustainable stop to the killing. Ayalon agreed that 'war crimes' was an applicable term: war crimes undertaken by Hizbullah "who position their forces and their rockets in the midst of civilians."
So much for all the hysterical Rice bashers of this morning who accused her of caving in and surrendering!
As it should be. Judgement day is far from over.
So much for all the hysterical Rice bashers of this morning who accused her of caving in and surrendering!
----
It would be good for Bush and Rice if they would take a position early-on, and not appear to be brokering a faux peace. Communications has been short-coming of this administration since 2000. There can be no faux peace, not any more. We know that both Bush and Rice know this. Let us hope they stick to their "guns" -- and show support Israel as the nation fighting for its existence, and its right to exist, that it is.
I'll just bet I can't figure out WHO those were? As predictable as heat in the desert.
Encouraging.
And just WHAT produces the "appearance" that they have any interest in a faux peace? Why not that lil ole Treason Media that we all hate so well?
Even Fox's coverage is piss poor and more of the same as CNN with the hysteria factor turned down slightly.
How does the repeated statement that there will be no call for a "cease fire" which leaves Hizbolla capable of acting militarily get translated into a "faux peace"? Bush could not be any clearer.
So, was Quana a Hezzie attempt to gain sympathy for a cease fire?
She tried and was unsuccessful. It got thrown back in her face.
Rockets were coming from Qana. Israel owes no apology.
Every civilized person hates the loss of human life, but that is what war is. Hezbollah wanted war, and Lebanon allowed this to start on it's own soil. Attacks on Israel had to be met with force. A kiss just will not do.
Is there a rational explaination as to why when hezbollah targets ANYTHING, no one says a word.
When Israel targets a missle launch site, and civilians who had been warned, get killed, it's a huge problem?
Why the glaring double standard?
Then what was she doing Continent hopping if not trying to broker a PEACE DEAL...sampling their local cuisine?
Considering that 85-percent of Lebanese support Hezbollah (according to mainstream media polls), then I am hardly traumatized when and if 85-percent of the Lebanese population is killed in defending those same butcher terrorists.
Either Lebanon is hostage to Hezbollah, or complicit. They can't have it both ways. If they are hostage, then Israel is their liberator. They should be out in the streets doing everything they can to help drive Hezbollah from their stronholds.
If they are complicit, then they are complicit in Hezbollah's crimes, and complicit in their own destruction. Israel warned them to vacate the zone. They didn't. Decisions have consequences.
Rice has stood tall against Appeasing Eurotrash. Meantime, anyone who thinks that the Hezzies didn't know that the Qana thing wasn't going to happen ought to ask how this big Condi poster, mentioning the Qana "massacre", got published so fast.
Fix is in, folks.
Be Seeing You,
Chris
What a totally stupid thing to say.
Any "ceasefire" with those Islamo-Nazis will only benefit Iran, Syria and their terrorists cohorts. Israel, the US, the UK & other allies are combating the same jihadic enemy no matter the location.
Could it be that the Secretary was trying to negotiate a position where Lebanon agrees to a no hezzies allowed or tolerated?
The Democrats show the most classic indicator of INSANITY..
They wish to repeat an action and expect a different result..
They wish to "negotiate before defeating the enemy" and expect to bring "peace"...
ALL previous "negotiations" with militant Islamists have FAILED.
Peace can NOT be negotiated with Islamists..
Islamists have provided ample proof, they must be killed to achieve a "peaceful state".
The ONLY peaceful state for an Islamist is at room temperature..
Semper Fi
Coule be just what was stated...Rice had hoped to leave the region after concrete progress on ending the fighting between Israel and the Hezbollah militia in southern Lebanon.
I don't see any mention of wanting Lebanon to agree that no hezzies are allowed or tolerated.
...which leaves Hizbolla capable of acting militarily get translated into a "faux peace"? Bush could not be any clearer.
------
Let us hope you are right. I have been around long enough to have watched so MANY U.S. Presidents and Israeli PMs FORCE false peace on Israel with Arafat and his ilk that skepticism and cynicism are very justified when it comes to the term "peace" --- at this point, only seeing is believing. And we shall see.
coule = could
Sometimes I just love the Arabs.
Because to quote Sherlock Holmes, "Crime is commonplace. Logic is rare."
Be Seeing You,
Chris
The peace deal they are trying to broker is the disarming of Hezbollah and a multi-national force to patrol the south until Lebanon proper can do it on their own. Everyone knows it is a non-starter because Hezbollah will never disarm, they will have to be defeated. But you have to be stirring up diplomatic dust so that people are not accusing you of sitting on your hands while women and children die.
I thought President Bush and PM Blair were talking about Lebanon's sovereignty and their words seemed to leave no room for hezzie's in Lebanon's future. I was just wondering if Rice's mission was to get a commitment that Lebanon wouldn't tolerate the presence of hezzies after this was over, or... no ceasefire. Is it that hard to fathom as a possibility?
Just saw Bush and Blair on Fox speaking from their respective countires. They both look wiped out. This is just horrible.
Probably as much as I do. :-)
She is so wrong in this. I don't see her wanting us to sit down with al queada, why should she expect Israel to sit down with hezbollah? A terrorist is a terrorist is a terrorist.
re: your poster comment:
Steyn had a similar insight concerning the Palestinian's penchant for burning flags. Odd, hard to come-by flags, (he actually hinted that perhaps they got them from the UN). Anyway, he said with such initiative and resourcefulness, they would better put to use in start-ups, not the nonsense they do, living in squalor.
Hezbollah never expected this to happen, they've said it themselves. For years whenever they pulled this crap the worst they got for it was the equivalent of a three year old being put in "time out". This must be played out until Hezbollah begs for mercy and surrenders, anything less is a win for them. I have no doubt the Israelis have the stomach for it, they're always damned if they do and damned of they don't. We the U.S. need to have the stomach for it, we're the ones that are going to decide whether or not we hand Hezbollah a win. I hope we're gonna give Israel the win. Doing that sends a very strong message.
WELL worth repeating
Peace can NOT be negotiated with Islamists..
Peace can NOT be negotiated with Islamists..
Peace can NOT be negotiated with Islamists..
Peace can NOT be negotiated with Islamists..
Peace can NOT be negotiated with Islamists..
Peace can NOT be negotiated with Islamists..
Disarming hezbollah?
Hezbollah disarmament not required by Israel for cease fire
Israel says, not true.
But you have to be stirring up diplomatic dust so that people are not accusing you of sitting on your hands while women and children die.
What women and children...hezbollah women and children?
Until Hezbollah acknowledges Israel's Right to Exist, there is nothing to talk about.
Israel needs to stop warning Hez-Ebola where they are going to bomb so they won't know where to put their human shields
Lebanon sovereignty? They have no sovereignty, they handed their country over to hezbollah if not before this started, certainly when Lebanon military fired on Israeli choppers. They've sided with terrorist. They will get what they deserve.
How many at the UN were whining about Lebanon's sovereignity while Syria was occupying it?
I don't believe it's in their genetic makeup to do that.
Let me take a wild guess......0?
Israel has denied this report. I think it still stands that any cease fire will require Hezbollah to disarm. Please show me another link that supports your rebuttal, because the one I followed actually had the title updated to read that Israel denied this.
What women and children...hezbollah women and children?
Any women and children.
The U.S. or Israel need to go medieval on these bastards. Show no mercy.
Did you not read where I said that, my post # 37? Any women and children.
What the hell do I care about terrorist women and children...They are just as likely to strap a bomb to themselves as their menfolk.
I keep my sympathies with the Israeli women and children and what harm is being done to them. You can worry about the terrorist's women and children.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.