• RSS News from Palestine

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS المنار

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • RSS أخبار فلسطين

    • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.
  • web tracker
  • Advertisements

Pentagon studies Hezbollah after zionist defeat in July 2006

Short ’06 Lebanon War Stokes Pentagon Debate
Leaders Divided on Whether to Focus On Conventional or Irregular Combat

By Greg Jaffe
Washington Post
Monday, April 6, 2009; A01

A war that ended three years ago and involved not a single U.S. soldier has become the subject of an increasingly heated debate inside the Pentagon, one that could alter how the U.S. military fights in the future.

When Israel and Hezbollah battled for more than a month in Lebanon in the summer of 2006, the result was widely seen as a disaster for the Israeli military. Soon after the fighting ended, some military officers began to warn that the short, bloody and relatively conventional battle foreshadowed how future enemies of the United States might fight.

Since then, the Defense Department has dispatched as many as a dozen teams to interview Israeli officers who fought against Hezbollah. The Army and Marine Corps have sponsored a series of multimillion-dollar war games to test how U.S. forces might fare against a similar foe. “I’ve organized five major games in the last two years, and all of them have focused on Hezbollah,” said Frank Hoffman, a research fellow at the Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory in Quantico.

A big reason that the 34-day war is drawing such fevered attention is that it highlights a rift among military leaders: Some want to change the U.S. military so that it is better prepared for wars like the ones it is fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, while others worry that such a shift would leave the United States vulnerable to a more conventional foe.

“The Lebanon war has become a bellwether,” said Stephen Biddle, a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations who has advised Gen. David H. Petraeus, head of the U.S. Central Command. “If you are opposed to transforming the military to fight low-intensity wars, it is your bloody sheet. It’s discussed in almost coded communication to indicate which side of the argument you are on.”

U.S. military experts were stunned by the destruction that Hezbollah forces, using sophisticated antitank guided missiles, were able to wreak on Israeli armor columns. Unlike the guerrilla forces in Iraq and Afghanistan, who employed mostly hit-and-run tactics, the Hezbollah fighters held their ground against Israeli forces in battles that stretched as long as 12 hours. They were able to eavesdrop on Israeli communications and even struck an Israeli ship with a cruise missile.

“From 2000 to 2006 Hezbollah embraced a new doctrine, transforming itself from a predominantly guerrilla force into a quasi-conventional fighting force,” a study by the Army’s Combat Studies Institute concluded last year. Another Pentagon report warned that Hezbollah forces were “extremely well trained, especially in the uses of antitank weapons and rockets” and added: “They well understood the vulnerabilities of Israeli armor.”

Many top Army officials refer to the short battle almost as a morality play that illustrates the price of focusing too much on counterinsurgency wars at the expense of conventional combat. These officers note that, before the Lebanon war, Israeli forces had been heavily involved in occupation duty in the Palestinian territories.

“The real takeaway is that you have to find the time to train for major combat operations, even if you are fighting counterinsurgency wars,” said one senior military analyst who studied the Lebanon war for the Center for Army Lessons Learned at Fort Leavenworth, Kan. Currently, the deployments to Iraq and Afghanistan have prevented Army units from conducting such training.

Army generals have also latched on to the Lebanon war to build support for multibillion-dollar weapons programs that are largely irrelevant to low-intensity wars such as those fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. A 30-page internal Army briefing, prepared for the Joint Chiefs of Staff and senior Pentagon civilians, recently sought to highlight how the $159 billion Future Combat Systems, a network of ground vehicles and sensors, could have been used to dispatch Hezbollah’s forces quickly and with few American casualties.

“Hezbollah relies on low visibility and prepared defenses,” one slide in the briefing reads. “FCS counters with sensors and robotics to maneuver out of contact.”

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates is expected to stake out a firm position in this debate as soon as today, when he announces the 2010 defense budget. That document is expected to cut or sharply curtail weapons systems designed for conventional wars, and to bolster intelligence and surveillance programs designed to help track down shadowy insurgents.

“This budget moves the needle closer to irregular warfare and counterinsurgency,” Pentagon spokesman Geoff Morrell said. “It is not an abandonment of the need to prepare for conventional conflicts. But even moving that needle is a revolutionary thing in this building.”

The changes reflect the growing prominence of the military’s counterinsurgency camp — the most prominent member of which is Petraeus — in the Pentagon. President Obama, whose strategy in Afghanistan is focused on protecting the local population and denying the Islamist radicals a safe haven, has largely backed this group.

The question facing defense leaders is whether they can afford to build a force that can prevail in a counterinsurgency fight, where the focus is on protecting the civilian population and building indigenous army and police forces, as well as a more conventional battle.

Gen. George W. Casey Jr., the Army’s top officer in the Pentagon, has said it is essential that the military be able to do both simultaneously. New Army doctrine, meanwhile, calls for a “full spectrum” service that is as good at rebuilding countries as it is at destroying opposing armies.

But other experts remain skeptical. “The idea that you can do it all is just wrong,” said Biddle of the Council on Foreign Relations. Soldiers, who are home for as little as 12 months between deployments, do not have enough time to prepare adequately for both types of wars, he said.

Biddle and other counterinsurgency advocates argue that the military should focus on winning the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and only then worry about what the next war will look like.

Some in this camp say that the threat posed by Hezbollah is being inflated by officers who are determined to return the Army to a more familiar past, built around preparing for conventional warfare.

Another question is whether the U.S. military is taking the proper lessons from the Israel-Hezbollah war. Its studies have focused almost exclusively on the battle in southern Lebanon and ignored Hezbollah’s ongoing role in Lebanese society as a political party and humanitarian aid group. After the battle, Hezbollah forces moved in quickly with aid and reconstruction assistance.

“Even if the Israelis had done better operationally, I don’t think they would have been victorious in the long run,” said Andrew Exum, a former Army officer who has studied the battle from southern Lebanon. “For the Israelis, the war lasted for 34 days. We tend to forget that for Hezbollah, it is infinite.”

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/04/05/AR2009040502235_pf.html

Advertisements

Cluster bombs

Middle East and North Africa: US Cuts Cluster Bomb Supply

US Export Ban Should Spur Countries to Sign Treaty Banning the Weapon

(New York) – A new US law permanently banning nearly all cluster bomb exports by the United States will end a long period of transfers of the weapon to Israel and other countries in the Middle East and North Africa, Human Rights Watch said today. The measure should spur the countries in the region as well as the US to join the international treaty prohibiting cluster munitions, Human Rights Watch said.

The US export ban was included in an omnibus budget bill (HR 1105) that President Barack Obama signed into law on March 11, 2009. Under the law, the US can only export cluster munitions that leave behind less than 1 percent of their submunitions as duds. These duds act like landmines on the ground, exploding when touched by unwitting civilians. The legislation also requires the receiving country to agree that cluster munitions “will not be used where civilians are known to be present.” Only a tiny fraction of the cluster munitions in the US arsenal meet the 1-percent standard.

“US-supplied cluster munitions have caused great harm to civilians in Lebanon, Iraq, Western Sahara and elsewhere in the region,” said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East and North Africa director at Human Rights Watch. “These countries should consider the export ban a first step toward ridding the region of this unreliable and inaccurate weapon that claims civilian lives and limbs for years following its use.”

The 2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions prohibits the use, production, stockpiling, and transfer of cluster munitions, and provides strict deadlines for clearance of affected areas and destruction of stockpiled cluster munitions. A total of 95 countries have signed the convention, including Lebanon and Tunisia from the Middle East and North Africa.

The United States has transferred cluster munitions to at least eight countries in the region, including Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Morocco, Oman, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates. Israel has been a major recipient of US cluster munitions and used the weapons extensively in its 2006 armed conflict in Lebanon (http://www.hrw.org/en/reports/2008/02/16/flooding-south-lebanon ).

The US export ban was first enacted in a budget bill in December 2007, but that law mandated it for only one year.

“The permanent US export ban will prevent the potential transfer of millions of cluster submunitions to Israel and other states in the region,” said Whitson. “But unless governments in the region join the international treaty banning the use as well as transfer of cluster munitions, the threat will remain.”

In December 2008, the Obama transition team said that the president-elect would “carefully review” the new treaty and “work closely [with] our friends and allies to ensure that the United States is doing everything feasible to promote protection of civilians.”

US policy on cluster munitions was last articulated in a three-page policy directive issued by Defense Secretary Robert Gates in July 2008. The directive described cluster munitions as “legitimate weapons with clear military utility” and said that the US will continue to use cluster munitions and, after 2018, will use only munitions with a tested failure rate of less than 1 percent.

Human Rights Watch co-chairs the Cluster Munition Coalition, which it helped found in November 2003. Human Rights Watch and others stepped up pressure for an international treaty to deal with cluster munitions after Israel’s massive use of these weapons in southern Lebanon in July and August 2006. These weapons left large swaths of Lebanon contaminated by the deadly, unexploded submunitions.

Cluster munitions can be fired by artillery and rocket systems or dropped by aircraft, and typically explode in the air and send dozens, even hundreds, of tiny submunitions or bomblets over an area the size of a football field. Cluster munitions cannot distinguish between military targets and civilians, so their humanitarian impact can be extreme when they are used in or near populated areas. Cluster submunitions often fail to explode on initial impact, leaving the duds that act like landmines and pose danger to civilians.

1978 invasion of South Lebanon: facts and numbers

31 years on, we remain steadfast in South Lebanon and the zionists jump from one defeat to another

Photo: Rashaya al-Fkhar village, April 1978

Name of invasion: “Operation Litani”

Alleged justification: Operation Kamal Adwan, in which Palestinian fighters hijacked a busload of ‘israeli’ soldiers who were killed when the zionists opened fire on the bus instead of negotiating the release of Palestinian prisoners kidnapped and thrown into zionist dungeons where they were regularly tortured.

Number of zionists killed and injured in Operation Kamal Adwan: 32 soldiers killed, 82 injured.

Real reasons for the invasion: Destroying Palestinian refugee social and political infrastructure, pushing Palestinian refugees as far away from Palestine as possible, and occupying all of South Lebanon up to the Litani (this being a zionist dream going back to the late 19th century and early 20th century). Another motive behind the invasion was the destruction of Lebanon and its elimination as a potential economic rival in the event of a comprehensive Middle Eastern peace deal, by virtue of its geographical position and human resources.

zionist violations of Lebanese airspace, land, and sea between June 14, 1968 and July 9, 1975: 2655 violations of airspace and 493 sea violations. Shelling by artillery: 4469 times. Air raids: 187 raids. Lebanese military personnel killed and injured: 168 and 167 respectively. Lebanese civilians killed and injured: 443 and 1042 respectively. Lebanese residential units destroyed and damaged: 989 and 1256 respectively.

Date of the start of the invasion: The night of 14-15 March, 1978.

Duration of the occupation: 22 years.

Targeted cities, towns, and villages: 358 villages and towns in Bint Jbeil, Marjeyoun, Hasbaya, Tyre, and Nabatiye governorates.

Area occupied in initial invasion: 1,100 square kilometers and 4 capital cities of governorates: Bint Jbeil, Marjeyoun, Hasbaya and Jezzine.

Number of Lebanese victims: 560 Lebanese civilians killed, 653 injured.

Methods used by the zionist terrorist forces: Indiscriminate bombardment by air, sea, and land.

Villages and towns completely destroyed: Ghanduriye, Abbasiye, Azziyeh, Qantara, Deir Hanna, al-Biyyada, Mazra’at al-Numeiriye, Mazra’at al-Khreibeh.

Number of residential units: 2500 completely destroyed, 620 partially destroyed.

Infrastructure: Water, electricity, communications infrastructure destroyed.

Agricultural lands: Thousands of dunams of destroyed crops, in addition to 150,000 burnt olive and citrus trees.

Schools: 50 schools completely destroyed.

Hospitals and clinics: 10 completely destroyed.

Places of worship: 20 Mosques, Husseiniyas, and Churches destroyed.

Outcome: The creation of a “buffer zone”, a strip of land making up an area of 700 square kilometers containing 55 Lebanese villages and towns. The zone was later expanded in the 1982 invasion. The occupation lasted 22 years.

Massacres perpetrated:

  • Ouzai massacre: Massacre of 26 Lebanese civilians as a result of the ‘israeli’ aerial bombardment of residential and commercial buildings in Ouza’i.
  • Rashaya al-Fkhar massacre: Targeting of a Church with artillery shells, killing 25 Lebanese civilians taking shelter there.
  • Adloun massacre: Targeting of two Mercedes cars full of 20 Lebanese civilians fleeing ‘israeli’ bombardment towards Beirut, killing them all.
  • Khiam massacre: After bombarding the town of Khiam by air and land and turning the houses into rubble, zionists handed over control of the town to militias loyal to them and functioning under their command, which proceeded to massacre the inhabitants. 100 people were massacred, most of them between the ages of 70 and 85.
  • Abbassiye massacre: 80 Lebanese civilians taking shelter in the village’s Mosque killed after zionists bombarded it with their newly-acquired F-15s that they were “testing” for the first time.
  • Mansouri massacre
  • Abbasiye massacre: Massacre of 15 civilians from Tyre, 4 civilians from Shhour, 12 civilians from Qadas, a family from Arabsalim who were in Abbassiye when it was bombarded.

Reparation payments received from ‘israel’ for deaths, injuries, property loss and damage: None.

Reparation payments from the Lebanese government to Lebanese citizens who lost property during the invasion: None received to this day.

Status of the rental payments owed to Lebanese citizens as a result of the stationing of UNIFIL troops on 700 land plots: First installment, making up 55% of total amount due, was received in 1999. The rest has not been paid to this day, and some owners have not received a single cent of the amount they are owed for the past 30 years.

اجتياح 1978: بدء العد العكسي لزوال الكيان الصهيوني

ا31 عاماً على اجتياح 1978


تختلط المناسبات في آذار، وتضيع ذكرى القديم بالجديد، فتطوف اخرى على سطح الاهتمامات المحلية فيما تغرق اخرى في متاهات السياسات المستجدة.
تاريخ الرابع عشر من آذار لا ينسى إلى ما قبل واحد وثلاثين عاماً ، عندما نفذت اسرائيل تهديداتها باجتياح لبنان فيما عرف يومها بعملية الليطاني التي جاءت اسبابها المباشرة عقب عملية «كمال عدوان».
جاء الاجتياح كما اسلف بعد عملية كمال عدوان بقيادة الشهيدة دلال المغربي نهار السبت 11/3/1978 على الطريق الساحلي شمالي تل أبيب، وأدّت إلى مقتل 32 إسرائيلياً وجرح 82 آخرين، فيما كانت من اسبابها «الحقيقية»، بحسب بيان مجلس الوزراء الإسرائيلي، ضرب قواعد الفدائيين الفلسطينيين وتفكيك البنى التحتية لمنظمة التحرير الفلسطينية، والذي استكمل لاحقا باجتياح 1982 الذي وصل الى بيروت ونتج عنه احتلال ثاني عاصمة عربية بعد القدس.
اما في الواقع كما تبين على مر السنوات، كانت للعدوان الاسرائيلي أبعاد مختلفة أبرزها إلغاء لبنان كمنافس محتمل لاسرائيل على عائد التسوية الشرق اوسطية المحتملة، كون لبنان شكل على الدوام واجهة السوق العربية والمتوسطية، وبعدا مائيا نصت عليه الادبيات الصهيونية منذ نشوء فكرة «اسرائيل» كوطن قومي محتمل لليهود، وبعدا جغرافيا يجعل من اية مساحة لبنانية تتمكن اسرائيل من احتلالها وقضمها مكانا مناسبا للاستيطان.
يشير المؤرخ د. مصطفى بزي الى أن الاجتياح الإسرائيلي للأراضي اللبنانية بعنوان «عملية الليطاني» والذي بدأ ليل 14 ـ 15 آذار 1978 والذي استمر سبعة أيام برا وبحرا وجوا، استهدف 358 بلدة وقرية في أقضية بنت جبيل، مرجعيون، حاصبيا، صور، النبطية، وكانت حصيلته، احتلال 1100 كيلو متر مربع من الأراضي اللبنانية واربع عواصم اقضية هي بنت جبيل، مرجعيون، حاصبيا وجزين، واستشهاد 560 مواطنا، وجرح 653 مواطنا. ودمرت قوات الاحتلال بالمدفعية والطائرات والمتفجرات تدميرا كاملا قرى عدة منها الغندورية، العباسية، العزية، القنطرة، دير حنا، البياضة، مزرعة النميرية، مزرعة الخريبة، وما مجموعه 2500 وحدة سكنية تدميرا كاملا و 620 منزلا تدميرا جزئيا، وتخريب البنى التحتية ولا سيما شبكات المياه والكهرباء والهاتف على مساحة العدوان واتلاف المزروعات على مساحة آلاف الدونمات واحراق حوالي 150 ألف شجرة زيتون وحمضيات، بالاضافة الى تدمير خمسين مدرسة وتخريب عشرة مستشفيات ومستوصفات وتدمير أكثر من عشرين مسجدا وكنيسة وحسينية.
واستمرت تداعيات الاجتياح إلى ما بعد ذلك بكثير وبالتحديد حتى ايار 2000، بعد أن أبقت القوات الإسرائيلية على شريط محتل فاصل بلغت مساحته حوالي 700 كلم مربع وشمل 55 قرية وبلدة لبنانية، وقد وسعت إسرائيل الشريط بعد اجتياح 1982.
مجازر متنقلة بالجملة
وارتكبت القوات الإسرائيلية خلال اجتياح 1978 عدداً من المجازر، كانت أكبرها مجزرة الاوزاعي التي وقعت في اليوم الأول للاجتياح العسكري الإسرائيلي للأراضي اللبنانية عندما قصفت المقاتلات الحربية الإسرائيلية منطقة الاوزاعي . واستهدف القصف وحدات سكنية ومؤسسات تجارية وأسفر عن استشهاد 26 مواطنا. وتلت مجزرة الأوزاعي مجزرة راشيا الفخار حيث قتلت قذائف المدفعية الإسرائيلية 15 لبنانيا لجأوا إلى الكنيسة، ثم مجزرة عدلون حيث حشر 20 فردا من آل قدوح وآل الطويل في سيارتي مرسيدس هاربين من جحيم القصف الإسرائيلي متجهين إلى بيروت. وتأتي مجزرة الخيام في الترتيب الرابع بعدما انتقمت قوات الاحتلال «الاسرائيلي» على نحو فظيع من بلدة الخيام. وما ان استكملت القوات الإسرائيلية ضربة النار للبلدة برا وجوا وحولت منازلها الى أنقاض حتى سلمتها الى ميليشياتها التي فتكت فتكا ذريعا بالسكان كما روى ريتشارد غروس مراسل وكالة «اليونايتد برس» الذي زار البلدة يوم 20/3/1978. وفي 19/3/1978 نشرت «السفير» مقابلة أجرتها فاديا الشرقاوي مع عدد من الناجيات من هذه المجزرة وجاء في الصحيفة «مجزرة الخيام التي ذهب ضحيتها أكثر من مئة ضحية تتراوح أعمار أغلبيتهم من الـ 70 الى الـ 85 سنة».
وفي العباسية اعتقد الاهالي ان دور العبادة تشكل ملجأ امينا لهم، لكن مقاتلات الـ أف ـ 15 الأميركية الصنع التي كانت إسرائيل تختبرها للمرة الأولى قامت بشن غارة جوية على مسجد البلدة ما ادى الى تهدمه على من فيه، فسقط ما يزيد عن ثمانين شهيدا وجريحا. يضاف الى هذا الرقم اعداد الضحايا في مجزرة المنصوري و15 مواطنا من مدينة صور، واربعة أشخاص من بلدة شحور، و 12 مواطنا من بلدة قدس واسرة من عربصاليم وجميعهم كانوا في العباسية أثناء وقوع العدوان عليها، هذا عدا عن مئات الجرحى والمصابين.
ولم يكن اجتياح 1978 بداية الاعتداءات الاسرائيلية على لبنان ولا نهايته، فخلال الفترة الممتدة بين 14/6/1968 و9/7/1975 قام سلاح الجو الاسرائيلي بخرق الاجواء اللبنانية 2655 مرة. وخرقت الوحدات البحرية الاسرائيلية حرمة المياه الاقليمية اللبنانية 493 مرة. وقصفت المدفعية الاسرائيلية الاراضي اللبنانية 4469 مرة. وشنت المقاتلات الاسرائيلية 187غارة على الاراضي اللبنانية. وادت الاعتداءات الاسرائيلية الى استشهاد 168 عسكريا لبنانيا و443 مدنيا وجرح 167 عسكريا و1042 مدنيا وتدمير 989 وحدة سكنية وتصدع 1256 منزلا.
ومقاومة ايضا…
وقد سطر الجنوبيون بتصديهم للعدوان ملاحم بطولية نقلها الصحافيون الاجانب الذين رافقوا الحملة الاسرائيلية.
«انها فيتنام جديدة على بعد نصف العالم»، هو عنوان رسالة تيد نيكو مراسل وكالة «اليونايتدبرس» الاميركية من تل أبيب عن مشاهداته الشخصية في بلدة حداثا اللبنانية برفقة اثنين من المراسلين الأجانب هما ديفد هيرست، ودوغ روبرتس.
يومها كانت الرسالة تقول «إنها فيتنام جديدة على بعد نصف عالم، فعلى مدى يوم مخيف كامل تسنى لي ولمراسلين غربيين آخرين أن نلقي بالصدفة، نظرة على ما يعنيه أن تضبط في الوسط بين قوة غزو إسرائيلية رهيبة وفدائيين فلسطينيين، تحاول هذه القوة أن تطردهم من منطقة الحدود اللبنانية».
«دخلنا حـــداثا التي تبعد 12 كيلومترا عن الحدود ظهر يوم الجمعة الماضي بين هجومين إسرائيليين، هجـــوم واحد فقط كان يكفي، غير أن الطائرات والدبابات ومدافــــع المورتر والأسلحة الصغيرة قد قامت بتـــحويل البلدة الزراعية الاسلامية الصغيرة الى ســاحة دمار وموت.
استعملت اسرائيل في اجتياحها هذا احدث اسلحة الجو والبر والبحر بما في ذلك قنابل «النابالم» و «الكانستر» المحرمة دوليا، كما ادخلت في الحرب للمرة الأولى طائرة «اف 15» الاميركية بكل ما حملته من تطور تقني انذاك، كما دخلت دبابة «الميركافا» بجيلها الاول ميدان الخدمة الفعلية في اول حرب لها».
ونتيجة لهذا الاجتياح اصدر مجلس الامن الدولي القرار 425 الذي طالب اسرائيل بوقف عملياتها العسكرية فورا، وسحب قواتها دون ابطاء من كل الاراضي اللبنانية، وقرر إنشاء قوة دولية مؤقتة في جنوب لبنان لتتأكد من انسحاب القوات الاسرائيلية واعادة السلام والامن الدوليين الى سابق عهدها، ومساعدة حكومة لبنان في توفير عودة سلطتها الفعالة في المنطقة. ورغم صدور هذا القرار، ووصول قوات «اليونيفيل» الى جنوب لبنان، لم تذعن إسرائيل للقرارات الدولية، بل أبقت قواتها في مساحة 700 كلم تقريباً، وهي المساحة الإجمالية للشريط المحتل في صيغته الأولى (1978 ـ 1982). كما لم تنعم المناطق الحدودية بالهدوء، فقد ظلت التوترات تجري في فلكها، وأعنفها ما حصل ما بين 14 و 24 تموز عام 1981، حيث تكثفت الغارات الجوية الإسرائيلية على امتداد مناطق واسعة من لبنان، موقعة 200 شهيد و 800 جريح. وبقي القرار دون تنفــيذ حتى ايار 2000 وتخلله ثلاث حروب كبيرة من اجتياح 1982 الى نيسان 93 وتموز 96.
تعويضات في مهب النسيان
ورغم مرور هذه الفترة الطويلة على العدوان التي تجاوزت العقود الثلاثة، الا ان تعويضات مئات البيوت التي تهدمت جراء العدوان لم تصل بعد الى مستحقيها.
ففي مارون الراس مثلا التي تهدم أكثر من نصف منازلها لوقوعها على خط التقدم الثابت للاجتياحات والانزالات الإسرائيلية ما تزال أطلال بيوتها شاهدة على التقصير الرسمي.
ويشير محمد فارس الذي فقد منزله خلال الاجتياح الى عشرات المراجعات ومئات الوعود التي تلقوها من رسميين لم تأت بنتيجة حتى الان وكانت الحجة الدائمة عدم توفر الاموال متسائلا، لقد صرفوا مليارات الدولارات على الاعمار في لبنان ولم يجدوا بضع مئات من الاف الدولارات لتعويض مارون الراس خط الدفاع الاول عن الوطن.
كما وأدى الاجتياح الى اشغال اكثر من 700 عقار من قبل قوات الطوارئ الدولية التي اتت بموجب القرار 425، وما يزال أصحابها بانتظار بـــدلات الإيجار التي تكفلت الدولة اللبنانية بدفعها. ويشير الرئيس السابق لتجمع اصــحاب العقارات المشغولة من الطوارئ حسين سويدان إلى أن «آخر دفعة عن حقوقنا تلقيناها عام 1999، وقد بلغ مجموع ما تم دفعه حوالي 55 بالمئة من قيمة التعويضات، ومـــنذ ذلك اليوم لم نتلق الا وعوداً، فيما غــــابت قضيتنا عن التداول والمتابعة خلال الاحـــداث السياسية التي عصفت في لبنان خلال السنوات الماضية». ويــؤكد سويدان بان هناك العديد من العـــقارات قد جرى اخــــلاؤها بعد التحرير وبعد عدوان تموز 2006 فيما لم يحصل أصحابها على حقوقهم بعد، كما وان هناك عقارات مستأجرة منذ اكثر من ثلاثين عاما ولم تدفع اي حقوق لاصحابها بعد.ا

http://www.5million.org

ا5 ملايين دولار من أجل معرفة مكان دفن شهدائنا المفقودين ومصير أسرانا الأبطال.ا

5 million dollars for information on the location of our Martyrs, and the fate of our prisoners in zionist dungeons.

http://www.5million.org

Chas Freeman on the zionist lobby

“The tactics of the Israel Lobby plumb the depths of dishonor and indecency and include character assassination, selective misquotation, the willful distortion of the record, the fabrication of falsehoods, and an utter disregard for the truth. The aim of this Lobby is control of the policy process through the exercise of a veto over the appointment of people who dispute the wisdom of its views, the substitution of political correctness for analysis, and the exclusion of any and all options for decision by Americans and our government other than those that it favors.

I have never lobbied any branch of our government for any cause, foreign or domestic. I am my own man, no one else’s, and with my return to private life, I will once again – to my pleasure – serve no master other than myself. I will continue to speak out as I choose on issues of concern to me and other Americans.”

At last, a courageous American: Chas Freeman slams parasitical zionazi control of the U.S.

Except that only those who have resigned their posts or withdrawn their candidacy are ever allowed or dare to speak the truth about the zionazi tentacles that stretch deep into every aspect of American foreign (and domestic) policy-making. But, at least there are still a few independent and brave minds left in america that dare speak out against zionazi agitation, agitation being one of the many tactics utilized by the zionazis in their quest to maintain their domination of the U.S and the whole world.

U.S. official slams Israel ‘lobby’ after withdrawing from post

Ha’aretz

Charles (Chas) Freeman, who was slated to be picked as the new chairman of the National Intelligence Council, slammed the Israel ‘Lobby’ Wednesday after withdrawing his candidacy for the post the previous day.

“I regret that my willingness to serve the new administration has ended by casting doubt on its ability to consider, let alone decide what policies might best serve the interests of the United States rather than those of a Lobby intent on enforcing the will and interests of a foreign government,” Freeman said in a statement to Foreign Policy.

Freeman’s withdrawal was announced in Washington by Dennis Blair, the director of National Intelligence. Since news of Freeman’s nomination, Jewish organizations have leveled criticism at the pick due to his history of opposition to Israel’s policies in the Palestinian territories.

He added that, “The outrageous agitation that followed the leak of my pending appointment will be seen by many to raise serious questions about whether the Obama administration will be able to make its own decisions about the Middle East and related issues.”

Some lawmakers protested about remarks he made in the past on Israeli “oppression” of Palestinians, and about China.

Freeman’s withdrawal came just hours after Blair defended him in Congress as a man of “strong views, of an inventive mind and the analytical point of view.”

“I think I can do a better job if I’m getting strong analytical viewpoints to sort out and pass on to you and to the president than if I am getting pre-cooked pablum judgments that don’t really challenge,” Blair told the Senate Armed Services Committee earlier on Tuesday.

The intelligence council that Freeman had been picked to head prepares the formal assessments by U.S. intelligence agencies of major issues such as Iran’s nuclear capability.

The council also produced a controversial, and inaccurate, prewar assessment in 2002 that Iraq was continuing its weapons of mass destruction programs. Former President George W. Bush’s main justification for the U.S.-led war he launched in 2003 was the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.

The National Intelligence Council position does not require Senate confirmation.

But Freeman’s past remarks on Israel and a comment seen as condoning China’s Tiananmen Square crackdown, have stirred controversy. He is quoted as saying in 2007 that “The brutal oppression of the Palestinians by Israeli occupation shows no sign of ending,” and “American identification with Israel has become total.”

Freeman’s professional ties had also come under scrutiny from critics. He had served on the board of the China National Offshore Oil Co. and as president of the Middle East Policy Council, a Washington think tank funded at least in part by Saudi Arabia.

Freeman is a former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia and assistant secretary of defense for international security. He was also a senior U.S. diplomat in China in the 1980s.