SeventyTwoTrillion

Israel Plans to Attack Lebanon Because Israel Is Not Winning Against Hamas

By Naked Capitalism on January 30th, 2024.

TLDR: An Israeli attack on Hezbollah is probably inevitable despite it presenting a truly existential threat to Israel. The failure of the Israeli military in Gaza, and the movement of Israeli settlers away from border areas, is producing a mass psychosis inside the Israeli population that is difficult to analyze currently. Needless to say, Israel is attempting to substitute victory via genocide of civilians for victory via the military defeat of Hamas. A keystone of Israel's strategy has always been to create deterrence and fear in the region - this deterrence has been largely destroyed at this point, and actually reversed, such that Hezbollah and friends are now asserting deterrence on Israel. The introduction of US refueling planes suggests that the US and Israel greatly fears the potential of having their jets destroyed on airfields, which is probably a very justified fear and speaks to the dire situation they are in. Hezbollah has grown exponentially in strength since their victory in 2006, while Israel has more-or-less stagnated, and we've all seen the footage of their godawful fighting abilities within the Gaza Strip, so they might actually be a worse army than they were in 2006. All of this is compounded by the threat of siege by Yemen, Hezbollah, and Iraqi/Syrian groups.

Once in a great while, things so speak for themselves that there is not much point in going on overmuch. Israel is not winning against Hamas. So it plans to take on a much tougher opponent, Hezbollah, which will be the result of executing on its plan to enter and occupy Lebanon up to the Litani River. This is not the way clear-thinking people operate.

But as Alastair Crooke explains (more on this soon), the Israelis recognize that they are no longer feared militarily in their ‘hood. Maintaining that fear is fundamental to Israeli citizen’s sense of security. Proof comes via Israel having had to pull its citizens out of the border to Gaza and Lebanon and not having been able to turn things around so they can return. Although I cannot prove a negative, Crooke and some Twitterati maintain that this effective loss of territory very much puts Israel on the back foot, since Israel historically has used buffer zones as an interim step in increasing the area under its control, and understands the risks when that process goes the other way.

Despite the assumption by many military experts at the start of the Israel campaign in Gaza, that the IDF would prevail given its much greater resources and ease of resupply, here we are, over 100 days in, and Israel is not all that much closer to victory, save in exterminating the Palestinian population in Gaza, as opposed to eliminating or at least crippling Hamas. Israel has not killed any of the leadership of Hamas’ military wing. Israel has not rescued any hostages. It is not clear how many Hamas fighters Israel has killed, but its claim of 10,000 versus the 27,000 dead reported in Gaza seems unreasonably high, particularly given admissions that schemes like flooding the tunnel system have not worked very well. Hamas has been retaking Northern Gaza after Israel claimed to have secured it. And on top of that, as an article in today’s Links pointed out, Israel is having to husband its artillery use in Gaza in light of global shortages. So they plan to take on Hezbollah with less than a full magazine?

There are signs of dissent within Israel over where to go in the war. More and more family members of hostages have been getting sympathetic coverage in the press and support from some officials for their demand that Israel negotiate with Hamas now to get the hostages back. A new story in Christian Science Monitor recounts a key rupture:

The cracks in what had been near universal public unity supporting Israel’s war aims in the conflict’s first few months have even reached the five-person wartime Cabinet tasked with prosecuting the campaign against Hamas. In a bombshell television interview on Israel’s Channel 12 this month, Gadi Eisenkot, a centrist politician and former military chief who joined Mr. Netanyahu’s wartime coalition in October, said the welfare of the hostages had to take precedence. The government, he added, needed to stop “selling fantasies” to the public that their release would be achieved through force alone.

But at this point, with Hamas doing not badly given the givens, it has escalated its demands. Israel meeting its demands for their return would be seen by its citizens as a capitulation:

Hamas offered to return all its hostages in exchange for an end to occupation and apartheid, a release of the thousands of Palestinian hostages held by Israel, and peace. Israel, which says its "waging war to return all hostages", has rejected the deal. Genocide is the point.

Netanyahu, who also has his own survival to consider, is fiercely maintaining that defeating Hamas remains the priority, and the release of the hostages will follow from that. Mind you, there are recent reports of negotiations between Israel and Hamas over the release of the hostages. With Tony Blinken involved, I didn’t see much reason to be optimistic (how many deals has Blinken said were imminent, like Egypt accepting Palestinian refugees in bulk, that came to naught?). Alastair Crooke, who has long-standing, high-level contacts all over the Muslim world, didn’t see fit to dignify them in his recent presentations. A new report in the Times of Israel suggests they are not going anywhere. The subhead:

Terror group appears to pour cold water on mediators’ latest offer after Qatari PM says ‘good progress’ made; Israel said open to lengthy truce but refuses to end war

On top of that, Israel is telegraphing its intent to go into Lebanon, despite the Anglopshere media not taking much notice. Israel first engaged in the lame pretext of “negotiating” with Lebanon to pull back to the Litani, as in cede a habited area to Lebanon for the benefit of Israeli settlers near the border. Israel is housing these families at what is reported to be non-sustainable cost. The border residents have said they won’t return until they can’t see Lebanese from their homes. Quite the ask, and Israel has said it will deliver. It has promised these border denizens they will return. The initial promise was by the end of January, which is clearly na ga happen. But Israel is signaling it plans to move soon. From the Times of Israel over the weekend:

The IDF said Saturday it was further increasing its preparedness on the northern border, publishing footage from recent “intensive” training exercises carried out by the 226th Reserve Paratroopers Brigade, as Hezbollah-led forces in Lebanon continue to launch attacks on Israeli communities and military posts along the border… The drill by the health system this week dealt with a variety of potential scenarios involving the operation of hospitals, health maintenance organizations’ community clinics, medical evacuations, and the provision of support to chronically ill people in need of immediate assistance.

Yes, Hezbollah has been shelling the border area, but in tit for tat attacks. Crooke contends that both sides so far have been somewhat careful, hoping to goad the other side into a disproportionate reaction they can use to justify a larger attack. But reminiscent of the Great Ukraine Counteroffensive, Israel is committed to Doing Something, and is making that awfully clear in advance too.

Without belaboring the issue, there is no reason to think Israel will win against Hezbollah. It was eventually beaten in 2006. Hezbollah is a much better fighting force than then while Israel is no better and perhaps worse. Among other things, Israel is betting on the US entering the conflict and saving its bacon, when Scott Ritter has warned that recent war game have shown Israel to lose against Hezbollah even when the US saddles up. And those didn’t factor in the Houthis interfering with ship getting to Israel’s ports. On top of that, the US has brought aerial refueling planes after the supposed drone attack on an outpost in Jordan that killed three service members. Many observers claim that means the US feels it needs to keep its jets in the air so as not to have them destroyed on the ground. That would have to complicate air support for Israel in Lebanon.

I've found that Juchebux are currently the best way to earn a decent amount of money from being an America-hating woke tankie. Unfortunately Kim Jong Un has personally asked me to cast overseas votes for Trump 85 times so our efforts will cancel out

I've been mulling it over for an hour and I just don't think we have enough information to know exactly what's going on. Some of my ideas:

Idea 1: It is literally as they claim - Iraqi Hezbollah will stop attacking American troops and bases in order to facilitate a deal between Iraq and the US that will eventually lead to a withdrawal of US troops, after being asked by the Iraqi government to do so.

Idea 2: It is a little more complicated - Iran and the US have been talking in back channels and have agreed that the US response strike will be reduced in magnitude in exchange for a cessation of strikes against the US for the time being.

Idea 3: Iraqi Hezbollah want to continue striking and nobody has asked them to back down, but they have received intel from Iran or Iraq about the intended location of the strikes and they are deemed significant enough to warrant focussing on moving equipment around instead of conducting further strikes, and are just managing expectations when strikes on US bases cease.

Given the nature of these groups and their commitment to the Palestinian cause, I very much doubt that it was because they were just really scared of the response or whatever.

For what it's worth, it seems that other Iraqi Resistance groups have put out statements that suggest they are not backing down, so it could just be the Iraqi Hezbollah that has decided to back down.

Either way it's not terribly concerning, the major fronts throughout the Middle East are still active and if anything getting more active by the week

@carpoftruth@hexbear.net commented about a video Simplicius posted on how shitty US air defense actually is, which I encourage you to have a look at. I thought I'd post the rest of his piece as it pertains to Israel/Palestine; the Russian bits are also somewhat interesting but given the slow territorial progress it's not really as important right now.

SITREP 1/28/24: US Troops Suffer Fatalities in Strikes as Escalation Grows

From Simplicius' substack. I am generally not going to post the photos there and won't be quoting the full article.

I get tired of saying “things are heating up” but…things continue to really heat up. The first direct troop deaths have finally begun rolling in as warhawk voices in the US cry out for total war...

There seems to be some major disagreement or deliberate obfuscation on US’ part as to where the troops were hit, exactly. The above resistance statement says multiple bases were hit. Most are assuming the fatalities were in al-Tanf base in Syria—the illegal base the US uses to facilitate ISIS and train terrorists to agitate against Assad, as well as to block the all important Syria-Jordan border-route to keep Syria isolated and economically stifled. But in fact the US claims the hit was not at al-Tanf, but just over the border at a base called ‘Tower 22’ on the Jordanian side.

It’s understandable how things could get so confusing, what with so many illegal American bases strewn about like candy wrappers, and all. But in reality, this is likely an attempt to downplay and conceal US’ al-Tanf activity and give the appearance of legality by misdirecting everyone to the Jordanian base which US actually has legal permission to be in—unlike al-Tanf. But before we go on, I’d like to remind everyone of this report. I may have posted it long ago—it’s from an Iranian attack in 2021. But it is an absolute must watch. I strongly, strongly urge everyone to watch this below and see if you don’t come away with a different opinion of the ‘invincible’ US military as portrayed by Hollywood.

Not only are there no working air defenses to speak of, but the troops and generals themselves leave much to be desired. Can you even imagine these people on the frontline against Russia in Ukraine? The majors and generals in the video are brought nearly to tears by a few Iranian bottle rockets, with the base commander desperately urging his troops to abandon the base and spread out in the desert. A lot of people clinging to the old Hollywood stereotypes of American supremacy are really out of date and have no idea what the American military is currently like—nor have ever had any idea of what some of America’s most vaunted weapons truly performed like in real combat settings: [Headline from 1992: New Study Cuts Patriot Missile Success Rate To 9 Percent]

And for those who think “How could this be? The US was invincible during the Iraq War in 2003”—well, I have some news for you. There was no war, it was a total sham pysop operation, which I covered in depth here... If that wasn’t bad enough, US troops are even taking casualties on the Texas front...

Now there’s “rumors” that Israel is gathering on the Lebanese border and is getting ready to launch a huge invasion up to the Litani River, of which we wrote about here long ago. If there’s any truth to that, then we can surmise any such escalations with Iran as this new strike could potentially even be a falseflag—whether of the USS Liberty variety, or of the Pearl Harbor variety where something is “let through” on purpose. Or it could simply be Iran drawing Israel and the US into a war it wants because it knows it can win it through its vast proxies. There are many possibilities as yet. Hard to imagine, though, that Israel really wants a piece of Hezbollah given their inability to even put a dent in Hamas:

The only thing that’s certain is election year has just begun and things are already melting down faster than anyone could imagine. To be quite honest, it’s difficult to imagine how this situation could resolve without either a total US withdrawal from the Middle East or a new major war. The problem in both scenarios:

1. If the US withdraws, it will be viewed as the mother of all failures and weaknesses for the Biden administration, akin to the Afghan withdrawal x 100. I have no idea why it should be viewed that way, when in reality it’s a giant win for Americans to disentangle their country from globalist and MIC pursuits, but that’s how it will be spun by the totally compromised media which is the enemy of humanity. Most Republican warhawks will of course agree and stoke this interpretation as well, as they’re on the MIC payroll.

2. If Biden escalates and orders major strikes on Iran itself as Lindsey Graham and others are now cheerleading for, it could lead to an escalatory cascade that would shut down the entire region by engulfing it in flames, crashing the world economy to new levels, which would be a massive shock to any establishment re-election chances this year.

Don’t even bother thinking about boots on the ground, if such a thing was possible it would take a year or more of preparation. Remember the Iraq invasion required 6 months just of transporting materiel and assets to the region, staging them, etc. But Iran wouldn’t let you stage them because it has far more sophisticated modern ballistic systems than anything Iraq had, which means large troop concentrations and armor/materiel staging areas could be hit and wiped out long before zero hour. Don’t believe me? Just watch the video at the beginning, the US army general says it himself toward the end: he states the accuracy of Iran’s ballistic missiles was shocking and they hit “pretty much everything they wanted to hit.”

So ground invasion is out—that’s not happening. The only thing they could possibly attempt is a long-spanning aerial campaign. But to even remotely scratch Iran’s capabilities would require a vast campaign lasting minimum 6-12 months and probably much longer. Remember, all of NATO mustered for 3 months against little Serbia with 6 million people and barely managed to destroy anything of worth. Iran has a 90 million population and a country probably a hundred times the size of Serbia, not to mention a far larger military. How long do you think it would take NATO to even put a dent in that from only an aerial campaign?

In short: it would take years, and during those years, Iran would shut down every major maritime and economic chokepoint in the region, crashing the global economy. If you thought a few ships being hit now was bad, wait til you see the nominal Iranian forces rather than Houthis hitting everything in sight—it won’t be pretty. And I’ve beaten the point before about how difficult it would be to even find targets in the decentralized vastness of Iran, just like in Yemen.

Here’s a photo of a secret Yemeni launch site as an example. These can be strewn by the hundreds or thousands throughout the deserts, and no amount of advanced “ISTAR” will locate them.

And as of this writing, rumor has it there are some assets en route:

At least 6 U.S. Air Force KC-135 Aerial-Refueling Tankers, most from March Air Reserve Base in Southern California, are heading Northeast across the United States and preparing to Transit the Atlantic towards the U.K. and Europe. I wonder what kind of Aircraft they are Refueling?

So there is potential for some escalations, though it could merely be precaution as always. I think US will continue looking for a diplomatic solution, as it knows how indigestible both of the options above really are. It will continue looking for ways to de-escalate, perhaps even advancing the talks of withdrawal from the region so as to signal to Iran that it’s backing out, though perhaps dragging their feet in the process to make the ‘pull out’ as drawn out as possible and more symbolic in nature.

The US looks weaker than ever so of course a token strike of a kind is possible, to signal some impotent brawn to its now demoralized partners. But this won’t accomplish anything and will only put US troops in the region in increasing danger. The truth is, the entire current framework looks highly orchestrated between the resistance axis, particularly of Russia, Iran, and perhaps China. The reason is that just as Russia tied up the Empire in Ukraine, Iran began its strangulation maneuver in the Mid East, and look how ‘elegantly’ it’s all working out: Europe is being entirely cut off from cheap energy while Russia and BRICS gain not only some of the most powerful energy producers but also the countries responsible for the most important maritime chokepoints; i.e. Egypt and the Suez/Red Sea; Ethiopia and the Red Sea; Iran and Saudi Arabia for the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, etc.

And thats all assuming iran doesn't have torbedo to sink carrier (probably doesn't, but wildly optimistic assumption to base your strategy on)

Iran has hypersonic missiles, which is one thing

needless to say if an American carrier enters the Persian Gulf, it will very soon be converted to a coral reef, but even American strategists aren't gonna think that's a good idea

can you imagine being a Ukrainian soldier sent to guard the incredibly important strategic defense point of a single half-destroyed outhouse in the middle of Nowhereisvka, Shitfuckosta Oblast, and then being killed by Russian artillery like the past 50 guys who manned that station also were

so fucking bleak

All the iranian recruits I met in Iran were pretty nice, if very dissatisfied by the very low pay, bad food and generally bad conditions in the military. They were quite open about it too.

what year was this, if you don't mind me asking? wonder if it's a consequence of recent sanctions or more of a long-running thing

strikes against targets inside Iran are most definitely not on the table, the US is currently unable to deal with even Yemen

Adding a new kind of male to the sigma-alpha-beta-gamma male hierarchy: the Melenchon Male. Where you promise that when you go out, you're not gonna start entering fervent conversations with random people about unionizing and worker co-ops and various organization strategies, but a mere 2 hours into the night, you're already telling a security guard about how they could form a co-op

The US helping to create and then utterly destroying the Iranian reformist movement is a fascinatingly bizarre and counterproductive historical event, honestly. I have trouble even wrapping my head around it. I think I mused last year, or maybe in 2022, that Trump taking down the JCPOA would be perhaps the single most impactful part of his legacy and his single greatest mistake - and recent events only reinforce this now that Zionism is the closest it has ever been to collapse, while Iran appears ascendant. Imagine what the Middle East would look like right now if Trump had never done that. I suppose this does in fact mean that we aren't living in the worst possible reality, because there's always that one.

The updates are AWOL but I am cooking something, hopefully. I've also been trying to expand the literature below, so I (and others) can become true Geopolitics Understanders, though this will also take a little while too.

The Country of the Week is Iran!

As mentioned in the preamble, feel free to post or recommend any material related to Iran, whether from a thousand years ago or yesterday. You can post it anywhere in the thread, but you can also reply to this comment if you wish.

If you're feeling particularly ambitious and want homework, you could take on any or all of these questions (no reward, but I'll be very proud of you):

• Who are the main political actors? Are they compradors, nationalists, international socialists, something else?
• What are the most salient domestic political issues; those issues that repeatedly shape elections over the last 10, 20 years. Every country has its quirks that complicate analysis - for example, Brexit in the UK.
• What is the country's history? You don't have to go back a thousand years if that's not relevant, and I'm counting "history" as basically anything that has happened over a year ago.
• What factions exist, historically and currently? If there is an electoral system, what are the major parties and their demographic bases? Are there any minor parties with large amounts of influence? Independence movements? Religious groups?
• How socially progressive or conservative are they? Is there equality for different ethnic groups, or are some persecuted? Do they have LGBTQIA+ rights? Have they improved over time, or gotten worse?
• What role do foreign powers play in the country’s politics and economy? Is there a particular country nearby or far away that is nearly inseparable from them, for good or bad reasons? Is their trade dominated by exports/imports to one place? Are they exploited, exploiters, or something in between?
• If applicable, what is the influence of former colonial relationships on the modern economy and politics?
• Is the country generally stable? Do you think there will be a coup at some point in the future, and if so, what faction might replace them?

The previous country was New Zealand.

This is our Geopolitics Reading List so far! Please chime in with suggestions!

General Theory:

• Super Imperialism, by Michael Hudson.
• Imperialism in the Twenty-First Century: Globalization, Super-Exploitation, and Capitalism’s Final Crisis, by John Smith.
• Superexploitation and the Imperialist Drive of Capitalism: How Marini's 'Dialectics of Dependency' Goes beyond Marx's 'Capital', by Andy Higginbottom.
• Capital Volume 3 Lecture Series, 32 videos, 10-15 minutes each, by Andy Higginbottom.
• World-Systems Analysis: An Introduction, by Immanuel Wallerstein.
• Geopolitical Economy: After US Hegemony, Globalization and Empire, by Radhika Desai.
• Capitalism, Coronavirus and War: A Geopolitical Economy, by Radhika Desai.

Canada:

• Canada in the World: Settler Capitalism and the Colonial Imagination, by Tyler Shipley.

Chile:

• 1000 Days of Revolution: Chilean Communists on the Lessons of Popular Unity (I cannot personally find an online version).
• Santiago Boys Podcast, analyzing Allende's government and Cybersyn.

Lebanon:

• A History of Modern Lebanon, by Fawwaz Traboulsi.

United States:

• Drug Cartels Do Not Exist: Narcotrafficking in US and Mexican Culture, by Oswaldo Zavala.

Venezuela:

• Objective Conditions in Venezuela: Maduro’s Defensive Strategy and Contradictions Among the People, a longform article by Steve Ellner.

Next thread here.

@TomboyShulk
@DuckNuckem
@SapGreen
@Zangief
@scumlord
@COMMENT
@Antisocial_Socialist
@DOPESMOKERDENG