AMIR PERETZ BLAMES PREDECESSORS FOR WAR'S FAILURE

Because he was cited as being part of the problem in the Winograd report, Amir Peretz has now given a press conference in which he says that his predecessors in the defense ministry are responsible for the failure of the 2nd Lebanon war:

Peretz stated that his predecessors should have been held accountable for much of the failings revealed in the war, pointing the finger particularly at former Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz and former Defense Minister and current Labor Chairman Ehud Barak.

"There are tough questions regarding the six years prior to the war. This needs to be investigated further. Mofaz remained silent and did not alert about the failings (during his term in office). I have paid a heavy political price for years of failed policy.

"These questions should be presented to those who stated that the IDF needs to be a small and clever army, and thus jumpstarted the dynamics that led us to this catastrophe; and to those who decided that Israel could withdraw from Lebanon without an agreement, while abandoning our Christian allies and creating a vacuum that drew Hizbullah in."

Well, I'm glad he's pointing out that his two predecessors also have blame to shoulder. Because even Mofaz and Barak cannot be allowed to escape blame for their own negligence.

IN ISRAEL, EVEN POLITICIANS HAVE TO TAKE RESPONSIBILITY

Shortly before the Winograd report was published, Michael Oren in the Wall Street Journal has something to say in relation:

The war began on July 12, 2006, when Hezbollah gunmen ambushed an Israeli border patrol, killing eight and kidnapping two. Mr. Olmert's response, a large-scale campaign intended to crush Hezbollah and secure the soldiers' release, was supported by most Israelis until serious mismanagement of the war surfaced. While receiving inadequate or faulty equipment -- my rifle literally fell apart in my hands -- Israeli forces were denied permission to invade Southern Lebanon and neutralize the katyusha rockets that were pummeling Israeli cities. Instead, Israeli jets bombed the Lebanese routes through which Syria resupplied Hezbollah and destroyed the organization's Beirut headquarters.

These attacks obliterated much of Hezbollah's infrastructure and killed a fourth of its fighters, but they also laid waste to a large part of Lebanon, killing civilians and squandering Israel's initial international backing. Hundreds of rockets, meanwhile, continued to smash into northern Israel, displacing a half-million civilians. Only on Aug. 13, after a month of fighting and with a U.N. ceasefire already approved, did the government authorize a ground offensive into Lebanon. The operation achieved nothing, either militarily or diplomatically, and cost the lives of 33 Israeli troops.

In another country, perhaps, such blunders might result in the resignation of senior officers but not necessarily elected officials. In Israel, though, no one is above blame. Accountability for decision making is a tenet of the Zionist ethos on which the Jewish state is based and, unlike most nations, Israel has a citizens' army in which the great majority -- politicians included -- serve. Most uniquely, Israel confronts daily security dangers and long-term threats to its existence. Israelis can neither condone nor afford a prime minister who passes the buck to their army or shirks the onus of defense. The person who sends us into battle cannot escape responsibility for our fate.

And that person is mainly Ehud Olmert.

WINOGRAD COMMITTEE SLAMS EHUD BARAK

What a surprise for him too, I'm sure. The former prime minister has just gotten a very rude awakening:

(IsraelNN.com) The Winograd Committee has sharply criticized Defense Minister Ehud Barak, whose order for a hasty withdrawal from Lebanon when he was Prime Minister is cited as leaving a vacuum for Hizbullah to exploit, journalist Yoav Yitzchak reported on his Hebrew NFC website. Barak also is chairman of the Labor party, and a negative report on his policies may hinder his previously stated plan to quit the coalition after the report is issued.

Winograd Committee member Prof. Ruth Gabizon reportedly described a direct connection between the withdrawal in 2000 and the subsequent stockpiling of weapons by Hizbullah. The committee has said it will release its final report by the end of the year without laying blame on individuals for the failures of the government and military in the Second Lebanon War.

This is likely to be a blow to Barak's influence, and damage his reputation, deservedly so.

HEZBOLLAH ALLY, IRANIAN PROXY MAHDI ARMY PRESENTS MAJOR PROBLEM FOR POST-SURGE SCENARIOS

Danger Room has a roundup of the post surge scenarios that are available to the Coalition. One major problem:

Garton Ash believes that "capacity to intervene" will diminish as Basra increasingly comes under the sway of extremist elements. AlterNet concurs: "Should British forces decide to venture back, they will inevitably face a den of Mahdi Army fighters," according to their analysis: The militia is said to number 17,000 in Basra alone and is divided into 40 company-size military units, according to a senior Iraqi security official. ... They control multiple units in the 14,500-strong police force, and hold sway in hospitals, the education board, the university, ports and oil terminals, and the oil products and electricity distribution companies.

Or as we like to call them, the Hezbollah allied Mahdi army:

“We teach each other,” i.e. cross-pollination. The traffic’s not one way, either; follow that last link to refresh your memory. As far as I know, it still hasn’t been conclusively established that Sadr is Iran’s chief proxy in Iraq, although the collusion with Hezbollah and the fact (again, per the Independent) that thousands of JAM members have trained in camps in Iran indicates a high level of nuance to the relationship. Traditionally SCIRI was Iran’s arm inside the country but they seem to have drifted towards the American side in the past year, possibly as a reaction to Sadr’s coziness with the regime. Michael Totten, on the ground in Baghdad, seems pretty clear on what’s what, though: The Mahdi Army is Iran’s major proxy in Iraq. It is, in effect, the Iraqi branch of Hezbollah.

Hey, remember when the US kept the IDF on a short leash because they didn't want to destabilize Sinoria, even at the risk of not uprooting Hezbollah? Apparently - according to the oh-so-brave State Department Director Alberto Fernandez - Lebanon's government wasn't responsible for Hezbollah even though Hezbollah was part of the Lebanese government. Good to see that's working out.

[Cross-posted to Mere Rhetoric]

HEZBOLLAH'S NEW MUSEUM - shows no gratefulness to the USA for leashing Israel

Here's the really unseemly thing about these vicious, genocidal Islamic lunatics - total ingrates:

A menacing picture of Condoleezza Rice announces that "This war is part of birth bangs [sic] of the new middle east [sic]," while a jester-like George W. Bush assures viewers that "[o]ur nation is wasting no time in helping the people of Lebanon." Former Israeli Defense Minister Amir Peretz, in Israel's crowning moment of the war, gazes pensively through capped binoculars. "Hassan Nasrallah won't forget the name Aameer Peretz [sic]," quotes the caption under his larger- than-life portrait.

What does a misguided American administration have to do to get some love from these people?

They kept Israel leashed during the entire war - no attacks on Lebanese infrastructure being used by Hezbollah, no attacks against Hezbollah infrastructure that was connected to the government, etc. Israel couldn't get Nasrallah while he was in Beirut because Israeli attacks on Beirut were - wait for it - being strongly condemned by the State Department. And still nothing. There are some particularly zealous anti-Israel leftists who really, really wish that Hezbollah had achieved a great military victory. You know what the problem with that is? The part of history when Nasrallah was crawling to Arab leaders begging them to have the US call the IDF off.

[Read an extended version of this post at Mere Rhetoric]