The Ceasefire Deception is a Fraud

According to Aaron Klein over at Joe Farah's G2 (PAID ONLY) Syria is being offered a generous incentives package act for an eventual cease-fire between Israel and Lebanon and support internal Lebanese talks aimed at disarming Hezbollah. Ugh.

The word ceasefire is being bandied about as a solution the current Israeli/Islamic war. Once again the Western media ignores the meaning of a ceasefire or hudna.

"What is being touted as a 'cease-fire' is something called a 'hudna.' A hudna [also known as a hudibiyya or khudaibiya] is a tactical cease-fire that allows the Arabs to rebuild their terrorist infrastructure in order to be more effective when the "cease-fire" is called off." -- "Cease-fire?" by Shira A. Drissman More here

Would a hudna mean a step to that dirtiest of a deceptions, peace? An advance toward a nonviolent future? NO, emphatically no. The answer lies in the historical meaning of the Muslim expression,

Hudna has a distinct meaning to Islamic fundamentalists, well-versed in their history: The prophet Mohammad struck a legendary, ten-year hudna with the Quraysh tribe that controlled Mecca in the seventh century. Over the following two years, Mohammad rearmed and took advantage of a minor Quraysh infraction to break the hudna and launch the full conquest of Mecca, the holiest city in Islam. When Yassir Arafat infamously invoked Mohammad's hudna in 1994 to describe his own Oslo commitments "on the road to Jerusalem," the implication was clear. As Mideast expert Daniel Pipes explained, Arafat was asserting to his Islamic brethren that he will, "when his circumstances change for the better, take advantage of some technicality to tear up existing accords and launch a military assault on Israel." Indeed, this is precisely what occurred in Sept. 2000 when Arafat & Co. launched a terror assault upon Israeli citizens. More here at Honest Reporting

Been there, done that. The enemy must be beaten.

Why Israel's Reaction is Right

By Matthias Küntzel, Der Spiegel

The natural reaction to the current violence in the Middle East is one of horror. It's time for a cease-fire, right? Not necessarily. Pacifism would only help the radicals.

When it comes to Israel, public opinion in Europe walks a fine line. Israel's overreaction and use of overwhelming force, say most, is to be condemned and criticized. But in the same breath, Hezbollah's provocation is likewise reviled and rejected as the militant group's unceasing attacks on Israeli civilians are cited. Both sides are judged using the same criteria and both sides come out stained with some blame for the current conflagration.

[...]I disagree -- and have four reasons for doing so.

[...]Islamism has attacked Israel from both the south and the north and Israel has no choice but to react. But there is more to it than that. Israel's military operation is important for the entire Western world. Until 2005, Islamism was able to successfully mislead the West into thinking that the "occupation" of Gaza and southern Lebanon was the cause of the terror attacks carried out against Israel. Now we know better: Islamism isn't out to change Israeli policy in the region, Islamism is out to completely eradicate the country of Israel. The same strategy is being used on a larger scale: The Middle East conflict is not the cause of Tehran's conflict with Western secularism. It is merely a convenient alibi.

[...]Hezbollah, on the other hand, is marching to a different drummer. Their motto is: "You love life, we love death." There is nothing, gushes Hezbollah's patron Ahmadinejad, "more beautiful, holier or more eternal than the death of a martyr." Thus, Hezbollah is not only happy to kill as many Jews as possible, it is not bothered by the deaths of Shiite Muslims as well and has thus strategically based many of their rockets directly in the middle of Shiite residential districts.

 

Third, there is no alternative to Israel's current military operation.

Will Hezbollah ever willingly give up their weapons? Not a chance!

The Jihad against Israel is the foundation of the militant group's very existence. For Hezbollah members, the destruction of Israel is not only non-negotiable, it is a religious duty. Hezbollah only understands the language of violence and Israel's military is the only force that is in a position to effectively confront Hezbollah. A United Nations force would never be able to achieve what Israel could. In 1983, two suicide attacks carried out by Hezbollah were enough to force the US and France from the region. A UN force, which wouldn't be nearly as strong, would have no chance. Only if Israel were able to weaken the terrorist group in the long term would the stationing of a UN force even become an option.

Read it all

Comments

[Stephen M. St. Onge]

        Of course it's a fraud.  Arabs only want cease-fires when they are losing, and the UN is on the side of Hezbollah.

[clyde]

Something tells me Israel will continue doing the job others won't do until it finishes Hezbollah. If that means flattening most of southern Lebanon, so be it. The news last night mentioned the fact that the Lebanese voted a large block of Hezbollah into their government, so they're getting what they voted for. In that case, the Lebanese could think of this as an early Christmas. Or Ramadan.

[TommyG]

Westerners are so anxious to forge a cease-fire because it's so effective - just like the cease-fire between North and South Korea, right?

[Late Pass]

Hizbullaah will never stop until Iran is stopped.

Iran, unlike Syria, is in a RELIGIOUS war against Israel. Iran TRULY believes that if it puts the "Islaamic World" in a bad enough spot, then some 1,200 year old dude will literally reappear on the scene, raise a Sheey`ah Empire and LITERALLY take over the world.

i kid you not.

[Longboat_Al]

When every member of Hezbollah is dead and every support "feel themselves subdued" (in a manner similar to that advoacted in the Qur'an 9:29), there will be no reason for Israel to be in Lebanon.