Stuxnet - An act of war from America on Iran

whiteonion

The US has engaged in cyberwarfare against Iran. http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/US-Israeli-Computer-Program-Slows-Irans-Nuclear-Ambitions-113843929.html This worm was responsible for shutting down a fifth of Iran's nuclear centrifuges. Imagine if Iran had done the same thing against America, would anyone say that it wasn't an act of war then?

RichieC

America and Israel do what they like.

wes

Well, if the US is responsible (and it wouldn't surprise me), then yes it would an act of war, and seeing as its a civilian nuclear program, they could even call it state terrorism if the US were responsible.

Manic Moran

whiteonion wrote: »

The US has engaged in cyberwarfare against Iran. http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/US-Israeli-Computer-Program-Slows-Irans-Nuclear-Ambitions-113843929.html This worm was responsible for shutting down a fifth of Iran's nuclear centrifuges. Imagine if Iran had done the same thing against America, would anyone say that it wasn't an act of war then?

Most sources seem to indicate Israel as the likely source, not the US.

So far everything is speculation.

NTM

BlaasForRafa

whiteonion wrote: »

The US has engaged in cyberwarfare against Iran. http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/US-Israeli-Computer-Program-Slows-Irans-Nuclear-Ambitions-113843929.html This worm was responsible for shutting down a fifth of Iran's nuclear centrifuges. Imagine if Iran had done the same thing against America, would anyone say that it wasn't an act of war then?

If the US and Israel (and the report provides no actual proof, "The report in The New York Times quotes unidentified intelligence and military experts") did this then delaying Iran getting nuclear weapons is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. Its only the usual anti-Israel or anti-US types who would say otherwise.

wes

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

If the US and Israel (and the report provides no actual proof, "The report in The New York Times quotes unidentified intelligence and military experts") did this then delaying Iran getting nuclear weapons is a GOOD thing, not a bad thing. Its only the usual anti-Israel or anti-US types who would say otherwise.

No proof of a active Iranian Nuclear weapons program either btw....

BlaasForRafa

wes wrote: »

Well, if the US is responsible (and it wouldn't surprise me), then yes it would an act of war, and seeing as its a civilian nuclear program, they could even call it state terrorism if the US were responsible.

There are many ways to engage in war without openly declaring it. Iran hasn't supplied Hezbollah with 40k+ rockets to decorate their gardens with, its to engage in a proxy war with Israel at some point (which looks more and more likely should the Hariri tribunal implicate the Imperious leader in the Hariri assassination.

wes

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

There are many ways to engage in war without openly declaring it. Iran hasn't supplied Hezbollah with 40k+ rockets to decorate their gardens with, its to engage in a proxy war with Israel at some point (which looks more and more likely should the Hariri tribunal implicate the Imperious leader in the Hariri assassination.

Iran supplying weapons to Hezbollah is no different than the US supplying arms to Israel. So no real proof of any intent on Iran's part either way. I am sure Iran see's supplying weapons to Hezbollah in much the same way as the US does to Israel, and see's it as a defensive measure.

Manic Moran

It is slightly different. Israel is a legitimate and independent nation state, whilst hezbollah cannot really be considered the legitimate armed force of the state of lebanon. Though the US has certainly never been adverse to providing arms to' unofficial' groups, I am at a loss right now to think of a group it armed which had as their primary target a third country as opposed to an internal struggle.

whiteonion

Manic Moran wrote: »

It is slightly different. Israel is a legitimate and independent nation state, whilst hezbollah cannot really be considered the legitimate armed force of the state of lebanon. Though the US has certainly never been adverse to providing arms to' unofficial' groups, I am at a loss right now to think of a group it armed which had as their primary target a third country as opposed to an internal struggle.

Is it ok that America sells weapons do brutal dictatorships such as Saudi Arabia as well?

EastTexas

whiteonion wrote: »

Is it ok that America sells weapons do brutal dictatorships such as Saudi Arabia as well?

Germany half the size of Texas is the world’s third largest arms dealer and sells to anybody willing to lay down the dough.
In the case of Greece, even to people who clearly don’t have the dough.

That said I would not be surprised if our government is up to shenanigans.
Wouldn’t be the first time.

wes

Manic Moran wrote: »

It is slightly different. Israel is a legitimate and independent nation state,

Who are illegally occupying Palestinian land, and actively colonising it, which is illegitimate.

Manic Moran wrote: »

whilst hezbollah cannot really be considered the legitimate armed force of the state of lebanon.

This is true enough, but Israel is hardly using it weapons in a legitimate manner, seeing as there being used to violate international law, via the constant colonisation of East Jerusalem and the West Bank. Btw, the US has funded Israeli roads in the West Bank:

U.S. taxpayers are paying for Israel's West Bank occupation

The US not only actively arms Israel to help it steal Palestinian land, it even funds the actual theft itself as well.

That is essentially why, I don't see much of a difference. Yes, things aren't exactly the same, but I don't see how any side can claim moral superiority.

BlaasForRafa

Who are illegally occupying Palestinian land, and actively colonising it, which is illegitimate.

And which has nothing to do with the lebanon and Iran's arming of Hezbollah.

That is essentially why, I don't see much of a difference. Yes, things aren't exactly the same, but I don't see how any side can claim moral superiority.

Lets see who starts the next lebanon war.

(Hint: The answer isn't Israel, it needs another Lebanon war like it needs the proverbial "nother hole in the head")

BlaasForRafa

whiteonion wrote: »

Is it ok that America sells weapons do brutal dictatorships such as Saudi Arabia as well?

Those damn americans! Why is it that one never sees criticism of say Russia or China who will arm pretty much anyone.

whiteonion

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Those damn americans! Why is it that one never sees criticism of say Russia or China who will arm pretty much anyone.

Because the Russians and the Chinese don't preach about the values of freedom, democracy etc. No one likes a hypocrite.

BlaasForRafa

whiteonion wrote: »

Because the Russians and the Chinese don't preach about the values of freedom, democracy etc. No one likes a hypocrite.

Ah ok, because they are naturally evil, its ok for them to continue being evil.

Overheal

Manic Moran wrote: »

Most sources seem to indicate Israel as the likely source, not the US.

Don't we have tight political ties to Israel?

RichieC

Overheal wrote: »

Don't we have tight political ties to Israel?

I read that a bunch of the neocons have dual citizenship between Israel and the US and are staunch Zionists.

They're certainly zionists but I cant confirm the dual citizenship part.

Manic Moran

whiteonion wrote: »

Is it ok that America sells weapons do brutal dictatorships such as Saudi Arabia as well?

As long as there are no particular barriers to trade, such as the embargo on South Africa (which the US followed), why not? It's not as if there are any countries at all which have decided to avoid dealing with S.A. on principle; Before the 1990 war the hot favourite to provide the Saudis with armoured vehicles was Brazil. Saudi has since bought Eurofighter, and their upcoming tank purchase is looking like being Spanish.

I don't believe the Saudis are using F-15s and Abrams tanks to conduct their internal brutal dictatorising, are they? Seems they're being used in the correct role of foreign affairs.

NTM

EastTexas

Just saw a brief report on this.
The worm made their centrifuges spin so fast that they self distracted, all whilst the monitoring panels indicated that everything is just fine.
That’s just brilliant if not somewhat comical.

Could not help snickering

Not a single shot fired and no innocent civilians hurt or worse is the real beauty.

RichieC

I'm sure it would be very funny if it was done to your country. :rolleyes:

wes

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

And which has nothing to do with the lebanon and Iran's arming of Hezbollah.

Was replying to a point being made by another poster.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Lets see who starts the next lebanon war.

(Hint: The answer isn't Israel, it needs another Lebanon war like it needs the proverbial "nother hole in the head")

Well, seeing as Israel has violated Lebanon's borders on a regular basis (basically regular acts of war), it may very well be Israel who kicks things off. I know some people like to forget Israel near constant aggression against other people, and make them out to be the victim, but there just as often causing trouble as anyone.

karma_

EastTexas wrote: »

Just saw a brief report on this.
The worm made their centrifuges spin so fast that they self distracted, all whilst the monitoring panels indicated that everything is just fine.
That’s just brilliant if not somewhat comical.

Could not help snickering

Not a single shot fired and no innocent civilians hurt or worse is the real beauty.

This post embodies the typical hypocrisy embedded in the American mindset. Had this been an attack on a US nuclear plant it would be denounced from the rooftops as the greatest attack on American freedom since 9/11. There would have been calls for retaliation and righteous indignation would be prevalent.

EastTexas

karma_ wrote: »

This post embodies the typical hypocrisy embedded in the American mindset. Had this been an attack on a US nuclear plant it would be denounced from the rooftops as the greatest attack on American freedom since 9/11. There would have been calls for retaliation and righteous indignation would be prevalent.

You’re absolutely correct, no disagreements here.
But that doesn’t take away from how clever the worm was/ is, hence the snickering on my part.
Not that it is known by any degree of certainty whether the US or Israel was the actual perpetrator.

That said, we are under an ongoing cyber attack of a different sort with Julian Assange passing his time under house arrest poring over a massive amount of stolen classified documents in a British mansion, ankle bracelet attached, whilst his alleged facilitator is complaining about the lack of pillows in his cell and awaiting military court proceedings.

You couldn’t make this stuff up.
Tom Clancy will have to up the ante if he wants to be even remotely interesting; given how much more riveting reality has become compared to fiction.

karma_

EastTexas wrote: »

You’re absolutely correct, no disagreements here.
But that doesn’t take away from how clever the worm was/ is, hence the snickering on my part.
Not that it is known by any degree of certainty whether the US or Israel was the actual perpetrator.

That said, we are under an ongoing cyber attack of a different sort with Julian Assange passing his time under house arrest poring over a massive amount of stolen classified documents in a British mansion, ankle bracelet attached, whilst his alleged facilitator is complaining about the lack of pillows in his cell and awaiting military court proceedings.

You couldn’t make this stuff up.
Tom Clancy will have to up the ante if he wants to be even remotely interesting; given how much more riveting reality has become compared to fiction.

It does not matter where he worm originated, nor how clever it was.

As for wikileaks and Assange, I fail to see any similarities between these 2 incidents, nor do I recognise how one justifies the other. Whistle-blowing is a world away from sabotaging a nuclear power plant.

BlaasForRafa

karma_ wrote: »

It does not matter where he worm originated, nor how clever it was.

As for wikileaks and Assange, I fail to see any similarities between these 2 incidents, nor do I recognise how one justifies the other. Whistle-blowing is a world away from sabotaging a nuclear power plant.

The worm wasn't used to sabotage a nuclear power plant. It was used to damage centrifuges used for uranium enrichment. We're not talking about three mile island or something here :rolleyes:

BlaasForRafa

wes wrote: »

Well, seeing as Israel has violated Lebanon's borders on a regular basis (basically regular acts of war), it may very well be Israel who kicks things off. I know some people like to forget Israel near constant aggression against other people, and make them out to be the victim, but there just as often causing trouble as anyone.

I know the default state with some on this forum is "blame Israel" but one has to look at the circumstances as they pertain now. The Lebanon is on a knife-edge at the moment over the Hariri tribunal because it looks like Hezbollah/Iran will be blamed for the assassination of the former Lebanese head of state.

If the Lebanese government refuse to be browbeaten by Iran/Hezbollah and refuse the Saudi/Syrian deal and publish the report then theres a high possibility that Hezbollah will start rocketing northern israel to deflect world attention away from their implication in the killing, the presumption being that if Israel retaliates then it will be easy to manipulate opinion to "blame Israel" again.

tricky D

Manic Moran wrote: »

Most sources seem to indicate Israel as the likely source, not the US.

So far everything is speculation.

NTM

Speculatively, Unit 8200 provided the tech.

wes

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I know the default state with some on this forum is "blame Israel" but one has to look at the circumstances as they pertain now.

I didn't blame Israel, just pointing out that they are just as likely as anyone to kick things off, as they do actually regularly violate Lebanese air space from time to time for example. Something like that could easily kick things off. Any side doing something stupid could start something, and Israel does regularly do stupid things just like Hezbollah.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

The Lebanon is on a knife-edge at the moment over the Hariri tribunal because it looks like Hezbollah/Iran will be blamed for the assassination of the former Lebanese head of state.

If the Lebanese government refuse to be browbeaten by Iran/Hezbollah and refuse the Saudi/Syrian deal and publish the report then theres a high possibility that Hezbollah will start rocketing northern israel to deflect world attention away from their implication in the killing, the presumption being that if Israel retaliates then it will be easy to manipulate opinion to "blame Israel" again.

I doubt Hezbollah are that stupid. They are part of the government and they do need support from there Shia base, who would bear the brunt of any conflict with Israel. Pissing off your base, is a sure fire way, to make yourself irrelevant.

Now, I don't doubt Hezbollahs capacity for doing something stupid (just as overtly stupid and pointless as deliberately starting a war), but it would probably be something, that they wouldn't expect a huge reaction from Israel, and I also think the opposite is possible, with Israel doing something they have gotten away with in the past in regards to violating Lebanon's terrirtory, and getting a massive response from Hezbollah. I doubt etiher side will intend to kick things off.

SamHarris

whiteonion wrote: »

The US has engaged in cyberwarfare against Iran. http://www.voanews.com/english/news/middle-east/US-Israeli-Computer-Program-Slows-Irans-Nuclear-Ambitions-113843929.html This worm was responsible for shutting down a fifth of Iran's nuclear centrifuges. Imagine if Iran had done the same thing against America, would anyone say that it wasn't an act of war then?

Technically they have been at war since the Embassy seige. If you wanted to really trace an act of war, that would be the first.

Jonny7

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I know the default state with some on this forum is "blame Israel" but one has to look at the circumstances as they pertain now. The Lebanon is on a knife-edge at the moment over the Hariri tribunal because it looks like Hezbollah/Iran will be blamed for the assassination of the former Lebanese head of state.

If the Lebanese government refuse to be browbeaten by Iran/Hezbollah and refuse the Saudi/Syrian deal and publish the report then theres a high possibility that Hezbollah will start rocketing northern israel to deflect world attention away from their implication in the killing, the presumption being that if Israel retaliates then it will be easy to manipulate opinion to "blame Israel" again.

I don't think you are getting the point..

If China planted a worm in US nuclear power stations you would most likely not support that am I correct?

If the US planted a worm in Iran nuclear power stations you would most likely support this (from your other posts)

How would you feel about Norway planting a worm in French nuclear power stations? ...

If there is bias in your answers then..

..making statements about other people being biased isn't really gonna wash now is it. Heres a little example, when I used to criticise GW Bush on here I got accused of being anti-American, I now have a very strong feeling that those same people wouldn't say I am anti-American for criticising Obama.. its about sides.

Wee bit hypocritical dont you think


All that legal internet debate jargon out the way, personally, this stuff goes on all the time, I wouldn't call it a game, but its low level "warfare/subterfuge", no one is innocent, "we" can play just as dirty as "them (or dirtier), no matter what tv/movies portray

SamHarris

karma_ wrote: »

This post embodies the typical hypocrisy embedded in the American mindset. Had this been an attack on a US nuclear plant it would be denounced from the rooftops as the greatest attack on American freedom since 9/11. There would have been calls for retaliation and righteous indignation would be prevalent.

Actually there are routine attempted cyber attacks on American institutions. It is usually ignored by nations because 1./ Its hard to trace and 2./ its embarrassing if it actually succeeds.

SamHarris

Jonny7 wrote: »

I don't think you are getting the point..

If China planted a worm in US nuclear power stations you would most likely not support that am I correct?

If the US planted a worm in Iran nuclear power stations you would most likely support this (from your other posts)

How would you feel about Norway planting a worm in French nuclear power stations? ...

If there is bias in your answers then..

..making statements about other people being biased isn't really gonna wash now is it. Heres a little example, when I used to criticise GW Bush on here I got accused of being anti-American, I now have a very strong feeling that those same people wouldn't say I am anti-American for criticising Obama.. its about sides.

Wee bit hypocritical dont you think


All that legal internet debate jargon out the way, personally, this stuff goes on all the time, I wouldn't call it a game, but its low level "warfare/subterfuge", no one is innocent, "we" can play just as dirty as "them (or dirtier), no matter what tv/movies portray

This makes the assumption that all countries are equal. No one believes that. Never has been, nor will it ever be how countries view each other.

Jonny7

SamHarris wrote: »

This makes the assumption that all countries are equal. No one believes that. Never has been, nor will it ever be how countries view each other.

Yeah but who judges the standard..

In fact anything negative you say about country X, I can just retort with "you just hate country X" which on its own is bad, but ontop of that if I am saying negative things about country Y..

then.. hypocrisy

BlaasForRafa

wes wrote: »

I doubt Hezbollah are that stupid. They are part of the government and they do need support from there Shia base, who would bear the brunt of any conflict with Israel. Pissing off your base, is a sure fire way, to make yourself irrelevant.

Now, I don't doubt Hezbollahs capacity for doing something stupid (just as overtly stupid and pointless as deliberately starting a war), but it would probably be something, that they wouldn't expect a huge reaction from Israel, and I also think the opposite is possible, with Israel doing something they have gotten away with in the past in regards to violating Lebanon's terrirtory, and getting a massive response from Hezbollah. I doubt etiher side will intend to kick things off.

Hezbollah aren't part of the Lebanese government anymore, they resigned their posts recently in advance of the Hariri verdict. http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/hezbollah-ministers-quit-over-hariri-probe-toppling-lebanon-government-1.336638

Perhaps I'm not wording it properly. I don't expect Hezbollah to do something by accident or by chance. I think there is a good chance that they will deliberatly attempt to provoke Israel into retaliation. Hezbollah now has rockets that can reach Tel Aviv, if large amounts of rockets are launched at Tel Aviv then Israel would be forced to retaliate.

Israel has kept the northern border pretty quiet since 2006 and has no motive for moving into Lebanon, other than an attack from Hezbollah.

Manic Moran

I don't doubt Hezbollahs capacity for doing something stupid (just as overtly stupid and pointless as deliberately starting a war), but it would probably be something, that they wouldn't expect a huge reaction from Israel,

I seem to recall that the last time they tried something which they didn't think would result in a huge reaction from Israel, they ended up getting a fairly robust reaction from Israel. There have been a couple of rockets lobbed since 2006, but nothing in the last year and a bit. I think they've become a lot more circumspect about the fact that 'just because we think something doesn't mean that the Israelis will agree'

NTM

wes

SamHarris wrote: »

Technically they have been at war since the Embassy seige. If you wanted to really trace an act of war, that would be the first.

I am pretty sure toppling a democratically elected government and putting in your own pet dictator, would also count as an act of war, and pre-dates the embassy siege by a couple of decades.

wes

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Hezbollah aren't part of the Lebanese government anymore, they resigned their posts recently in advance of the Hariri verdict. http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/hezbollah-ministers-quit-over-hariri-probe-toppling-lebanon-government-1.336638

Yes, but they will still depend on there base, next time there are elections. They have actually gotten a lot out of taking part in the democratic process. I doubt they will jepordise the power they have.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

Perhaps I'm not wording it properly. I don't expect Hezbollah to do something by accident or by chance. I think there is a good chance that they will deliberatly attempt to provoke Israel into retaliation. Hezbollah now has rockets that can reach Tel Aviv, if large amounts of rockets are launched at Tel Aviv then Israel would be forced to retaliate.

I doubt Hezbollah will deliberately provoke Israel. There is no reason for them to do so. I can see something escalate due to a mistake or someone doing something stupid on etiher side.

BlaasForRafa

wes wrote: »

I am pretty sure toppling a democratically elected government and putting in your own pet dictator, would also count as an act of war, and pre-dates the embassy siege by a couple of decades.

27 years to be exact. The CIA sure did get around back then, they got rid of Jacobo Arbenz, president of Guatamala not long after that on the prompting of the United Fruit Company.

BlaasForRafa

Yes, but they will still depend on there base, next time there are elections. They have actually gotten a lot out of taking part in the democratic process. I doubt they will jepordise the power they have.

I don't think that Hezbollah are as interested in Power-sharing so much as power-grabbing. Hariri has been badly weakened and he knows that the Sunni faction don't have nearly as much firepower as the Iranian backed Shia/HB do. I think that Hezbollah are still quite a way from the Sinn Fein/IRA model of honestly sharing power equally with their opponents.

I doubt Hezbollah will deliberately provoke Israel. There is no reason for them to do so. I can see something escalate due to a mistake or someone doing something stupid on etiher side.

I don't have as much faith in Hezbollah's motivations.

Athlone_Bhoy

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I don't think that Hezbollah are as interested in Power-sharing so much as power-grabbing. Hariri has been badly weakened and he knows that the Sunni faction don't have nearly as much firepower as the Iranian backed Shia/HB do. I think that Hezbollah are still quite a way from the Sinn Fein/IRA model of honestly sharing power equally with their opponents.




I don't have as much faith in Hezbollah's motivations.

Then why would they stand for an election? Come on surely you seen the crowds that support them.

There was nothing said about Y2K and there will be nothing said about this, sad really if it was the other way around the world would be calling for sanctions.

wes

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I don't think that Hezbollah are as interested in Power-sharing so much as power-grabbing. Hariri has been badly weakened and he knows that the Sunni faction don't have nearly as much firepower as the Iranian backed Shia/HB do. I think that Hezbollah are still quite a way from the Sinn Fein/IRA model of honestly sharing power equally with their opponents.

I don't really trust Hezbollah either. They have been far to quick to resort to the gun imho, and it wouldn't surprise me if they tried something in Lebanon. However, I could see them going the other way as well, and engaging in the democratic process.

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

I don't have as much faith in Hezbollah's motivations.

I have faith in both Hezbollah's and Israel's self interest. i don't think either side (excluding fringe elements) really wants a war, but it may happen regardless.

Manic Moran

Athlone_Bhoy wrote: »

Then why would they stand for an election? Come on surely you seen the crowds that support them.

Yet any time the Lebanese government tries to put its foot down on something to the detrement of Hezbollah, they seem to show very little inclination to work with the government: They only do so insofar as it furthers their own power.

Certainly they have supporters, and enough to gain a noticeable amount of the parliament, a fact that Hezbollah happily use. But their supporters are representative only of Hezbollah supporters, not the nation at large.

NTM

BlaasForRafa

wes wrote: »

I don't really trust Hezbollah either. They have been far to quick to resort to the gun imho, and it wouldn't surprise me if they tried something in Lebanon. However, I could see them going the other way as well, and engaging in the democratic process.

There was a report in Haaretz today about Hezbollah staging a dry run for a coup today, occupying key road junctions etc. Obviously that was just a show for Hariri's benefit but it is blatant intimidation.

Hezbollah are playing a dangerous game at the moment, so far they've gotten away with it but they have to be careful not to push it too far. Its hard to tell if Nasrallah actually believes in democracy in the same way that in this island Adams and McGuinness do (much as I dislike that pair)

wes

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

There was a report in Haaretz today about Hezbollah staging a dry run for a coup today, occupying key road junctions etc. Obviously that was just a show for Hariri's benefit but it is blatant intimidation.

Hezbollah are playing a dangerous game at the moment, so far they've gotten away with it but they have to be careful not to push it too far. Its hard to tell if Nasrallah actually believes in democracy in the same way that in this island Adams and McGuinness do (much as I dislike that pair)

As I said before, I wouldn't surprised either way with Hezbollah.

Athlone_Bhoy

Manic Moran wrote: »

Yet any time the Lebanese government tries to put its foot down on something to the detrement of Hezbollah, they seem to show very little inclination to work with the government: They only do so insofar as it furthers their own power.

Certainly they have supporters, and enough to gain a noticeable amount of the parliament, a fact that Hezbollah happily use. But their supporters are representative only of Hezbollah supporters, not the nation at large.

NTM

After the war if there was a vote to see who would be in government Hezbollah IMO would have taken full control but they knew they wouldn't get money to rebuild the country.

There's no point in them taking full control that's the way they want it. The UN can't order them to do anything and that's the way they like it. Lebanon don't seem to want them to disband or they would try it by force but they know well it would back fire.

Manic Moran

Lebanon don't seem to want them to disband or they would try it by force but they know well it would back fire.

I'm fairly sure the central Lebanese government would be very happy to see Hezbullah disarm (though no reason to disband). But bearing in mind that Hezbullah is armed with the Israeli Defence Forces in mind as an opponent, I don't see the Lebanese Army managing to do it without taking substantial casualties.

NTM

wes

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm fairly sure the central Lebanese government would be very happy to see Hezbullah disarm (though no reason to disband). But bearing in mind that Hezbullah is armed with the Israeli Defence Forces in mind as an opponent, I don't see the Lebanese Army managing to do it without taking substantial casualties.

NTM

Another option would be to absorb Hezbollah into the Lebanese army.

BlaasForRafa

Manic Moran wrote: »

I'm fairly sure the central Lebanese government would be very happy to see Hezbullah disarm (though no reason to disband). But bearing in mind that Hezbullah is armed with the Israeli Defence Forces in mind as an opponent, I don't see the Lebanese Army managing to do it without taking substantial casualties.

NTM

Its not at all certain that the Lebanese armed forces would win against Hezbollah. They don't have the same level of training that the IDF would have plus they have barely any air force or armoured contingent.

Manic Moran

wes wrote: »

Another option would be to absorb Hezbollah into the Lebanese army.

If they have a desire for national service, Hezbollah fighters can presumably apply to join the Lebanese Army just like any other Lebanese citizen.

NTM

wes

Manic Moran wrote: »

If they have a desire for national service, Hezbollah fighters can presumably apply to join the Lebanese Army just like any other Lebanese citizen.

NTM

Yes, they can, but we are talking about a large armed force here, so setting up an agreement to have them all absorbed into the Lebanese army would sort out things in one fell swoop, and you wouldn't have a bunch of young lads with guns and military training with nothing to do, which is never a good thing. Better to have them gainfully employed imho.