Ok, so we’re not even going to mention the insane cooky conspiracy theories behind involving North Korea with Lebanon. Let’s just concentrate on the delightful irony of this fact: first you invade a country and bomb the shit out of it for no reason whatsoever (and for the third time in less than three decades, if we count only the major attacks), and then you sue for compensation when people resist you bombing the shit out of them… That is possibly even more chutzpah than accusing a complying member of the NPT and the IAEA of pursuing illegal nuclear weapons while you’re sitting on a stockpile of hundreds of them yourself and are NOT a member of either the NPT or IAEA…
‘Thirty Israeli citizens wounded by Hizbullah rockets fired during the Second Lebanon War have filed an unprecedented lawsuit at the Washington District Court against Korean government, it was reported Friday. The complainants in the $100-million lawsuit, also filed against Hizbullah, claim that North Korea helped the guerrilla group by providing military training to the organization’s senior operatives and building a network of bunkers for storing Katyusha rockets fired at Israel from southern Lebanon.’
Of course, the real reason why the Schlomos are so pissed off is because they actually – and at least for them, totally unexpectedly – got the shit kicked out of them instead: ‘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.”‘
None of this seems to be seeping through to the politial level in Washington where, Obama or no Obama, policy makers keep betting on the losing horses, whether they see them as ‘moderate’, ‘compliant’, ‘democratic’ (sic) or simply ‘cheap to buy’. The US ambassador to Lebanon – Michele Sisson, successor to the infamous Jeffrey Feltman, who unsurprisingly seems to have taken over David Welch’s turf in Washington – speaks to (the pro-M14 and pro-US) Naharnet, displaying not a shred of evidence of even the minimal modicum of realism that finally seems to have reached the UK, now in an open dialogue with the democratically elected ‘terrorrists’ of Hizbullah:
‘Q-U.S. envoys visiting Lebanon have not been meeting with members of the opposition, particularly Gen. Michel Aoun and Hizbullah. If the opposition wins the elections, will the U.S. boycott a Hizbullah-led government?
A- By U.S. law, by our foreign terrorist organizations law (FTO), we are actually precluded from dealing directly with Hizbullah. So, no, our visitors and our embassy do not engage with Hizbullah.
Q-What if Hizbullah wins the elections?
A- We anticipate that the shape of the U.S. relationship, the shape of the U.S. assistance program, will be evaluated in the context of the new government’s policies and statements. This is a normal thing. No one has a crystal ball at this point. I think we are eight weeks away from the elections. So I won’t hazard a guess for the 128 seats what the margin will be or won’t be. I think day by day, even those who keep score here are having trouble keeping up with all of the developments. It’s a very interesting time politically here. We have said it before but I’ll say it again: We have a long standing policy in effect. Hizbullah has actually been on the FTO list since 1997. So we do not meet with Hizbullah. Now, should Hizbullah renounce terrorism both in Lebanon and abroad and submit to the rule of authority, the rule of law and the authority of the state and the authority of the state institutions — the army — as the sole bearer of weapon. Then, that would give room for reconsideration of this status. But that’s by our law.’
In Egypt, meanwhile, Mubarak has had 49 people arrested on – hey, this is Egypt, so: on no charges whatsoever – accusing them of preparing for Hizbullah attacks on the country and ‘spreading Shia ideology’: ‘Montassar el-Zayat, a lawyer for some of the defendants, said Shehab’s brother had asked him to represent him but he had not been allowed to see him or attend interrogations. Zayat accused security of bringing politically motivated charges against the suspects. “My impression is that it is a fabricated case created by Egyptian security in the context of bad relations between Hizbullah and Egypt. It is a pressure card,” he said. Egyptian officials accused Nasrallah of fomenting sedition and state media branded him an “Iranian agent.” Egypt, a mostly Sunni Muslim country, has accused the Shiite government of Iran and Hizbullah of conspiring to spread Shiite ideology in the region. The general prosecutor listed “spreading Shiite ideology” as one of the aims of the detained men. Egypt and Iran broke off relations a year after Islamist revolutionaries overthrew Iran’s pro-Western shah in 1979. Iran opposed Cairo’s 1979 peace treaty with Israel and named a street in Tehran after the assassin of Anwar Sadat, the Egyptian president killed by an Egyptian Islamist militant in 1981.’
The Iranians, by the way, display a delicious sense of nasty humour in naming their streets: if you wish to write to the UK’s embassy in Tehran, for example, you are obliged to address your letter to ‘Bobby Sands Street, Tehran’…