US Administration Considering Lebanese Troop Deployment?

#1
Another anonymous "an important guy told me so" report. I have no idea whether there's any truth to it. For the sake of the USA I hope it's false.

...a well-connected former CIA officer has told me that the Bush Administration is in fact considering exactly such a deployment.

The officer, who had broad experience in the Middle East while at the CIA, noted that NATO and European countries, including England, have made clear that they are either unwilling or extremely reluctant to participate in an international force. Given other nations' lack of commitment, any “robust” force—between 10,000 and 30,000 troops, according to estimates being discussed in the media—would by definition require major U.S. participation. According to the former official, Israel and the United States are currently discussing a large American role in exactly such a “multinational” deployment, and some top administration officials, along with senior civilians at the Pentagon, are receptive to the idea.


"Could U.S. Troops End Up in Lebanon?"
Posted on Wednesday, July 26, 2006. By Ken Silverstein.
http://harpers.org/sb-source-bush-admin-lebanon-1153936109.html
 
#2
Plan "A" has gone tits skywards then.
 
#3
Christ I sure as hell hope not.
Israel and the United States are currently discussing a large American role in exactly such a “multinational” deployment, and some top administration officials, along with senior civilians at the Pentagon, are receptive to the idea.
Rummy?
 
#4
Not_Whistlin_Dixie said:
According to the former official, Israel and the United States are currently discussing a large American role in exactly such a “multinational” deployment, and some top administration officials, along with senior civilians at the Pentagon, are receptive to the idea.
Meanwhile everyone in uniform in the 5-sided wind tunnel on the Potomac who has even the slightest understanding of what this would entail is no doubt either sat with their heads in their hands, or bouncing off the walls, ready to rip the sack off whoever dreamed up this idea (which for my money was probably the same guy who came up with the 2-in-1 barbecue and ammo box).
 
#5
I think this is plan C are D maybe E not B.

You have five choices as I see it for a ceasefire.

One status quo with Hizbolla sitting on border with Isreal agitateing situation constantly. Both US and Isreal have said they wont accept this outcome any longer.

Two increase UN force in area. The problem with this is UN force has been a total failure up tell now and a larger force wont acomplish any more then current force unless ROE are changed and its doubtfull UN is willing to make those changes.

Three Send a Nato force with better set of ROE. Problem here is no one in europe wants to fight a war in Lebanon.

Four send Lebanons army to secure border. This is only real longterm option but it risks restarting Lebanons civil war.

Five Send a US marine division from Iraq to Lebanon. Problem here is Hizbolla would soon wish to be fighting Isreal instead. The very dark humor of marines trained for combat in Iraq instead being sent as peacekeepers to Lebanon when every single marine sent would be looking for payback agianst Hizbolla for 1983 barracks bombing makes me smile though.

If we look at five options you have to rate there likelyhood on there acceptability to all partys involed.

One acceptable to Hizbolla and Lebanon not acceptable to Isreal
Two acceptable to Hizbolla Lebanon and UN not accepable to Isreal.
Three acceptable to Lebanon and Isreal not acceptable to Europe are Hizbolla
Four acceptable to Isreal not acceptable to Hizbolla. ???? if it is acceptable are not to Lebanon.
Five acceptable to Isreal and US not acceptable to Lebanon and Very Very Very Not Acceptable!!! to Hizbolla.

I consider US offer as more of a bluff to push partys towards option three are four I think everyone on planet can agree that sending US troops back to Lebanon would be a very bad idea.
 

Glad_its_all_over

ADC
Book Reviewer
#6
My guess would be that we can expect to see some Italians and Spaniards and Frenchmen on the ground, assuming the Israelis have any faith whatsoever in them, which might be doubtful. The Germans are next up, but, well, Germans, armed, next to Israelis, armed.....? Christ, just think of the risk of one dimwit on one side or the other doing something stupid.
 
#7
Until there is a ceasefire there wont be any peacekeeping force in Lebanon. There wont be one until Israel is good and ready. Meaning they wont be quitting until hizbollah is severely degraded.
 
#8
tomahawk6 said:
Until there is a ceasefire there wont be any peacekeeping force in Lebanon. There wont be one until Israel is good and ready. Meaning they wont be quitting until hizbollah is severely degraded.
Well, they had the better part of two decades to sort it out before. How far did that get them?

My guess is that hitting oil refineries, bridges, power stations and Lebanese infrastructure in general isn't going to help much either.
 
#10
Glad_its_all_over said:
My guess would be that we can expect to see some Italians and Spaniards and Frenchmen on the ground, assuming the Israelis have any faith whatsoever in them, which might be doubtful.
And then you also run into the problem that France, as the past colonial master, might not be all that popular with some of the locals either. I've got no idea what sort of quality Italian and Spanish troops are like, anyone with any past experience working with them like to chip in?

Glad_its_all_over said:
The Germans are next up, but, well, Germans, armed, next to Israelis, armed.....? Christ, just think of the risk of one dimwit on one side or the other doing something stupid.
There's already a fairly lively ongoing debate about this due to things like past from what I read in this article. Personally I fall into the they should send some troops camp since I mean how long can they be held hostage to past generations misdeeds?

Another idea someone mentioned a while back and that I'd thought of was how about inviting Turkey to donate a large part of the force? They're a predominantly Muslim country yet also have good ties to Israel so that might make them more palatable to the involved parties. Although there is the whole Sunni/Shiite thing and they could be considered a bit too westernised for the extremists.
 
#12
Siddar said:
Five Send a US marine division from Iraq to Lebanon. Problem here is Hizbolla would soon wish to be fighting Isreal instead. The very dark humor of marines trained for combat in Iraq instead being sent as peacekeepers to Lebanon when every single marine sent would be looking for payback agianst Hizbolla for 1983 barracks bombing makes me smile though.
USMC division could travel to Lebanon from Iraq via Damascus? :twisted:
 
#13
The big problem is the mandate of any "peace making" force.

The only basis acceptable to Israel is a force that "disarms" Hizbollah.

The only nationality in the world which might be willing to disarm Hizbollah by force - i.e. fight Israel's war themselves, might be the USA, who would need to colonise tyhe lebanon and make a better job oof it that Iraq ;)

The only country which could restrain Hizbollah and be held accountable is - Syria.

That will put us back to where we were before the Syrians withdrew under US and French pressure..
 

cpunk

LE
Moderator
#14
Brick said:
I've got no idea what sort of quality Italian and Spanish troops are like, anyone with any past experience working with them like to chip in?
The troops are very good, but their politicians will never give them the ROE to do a worthwhile job.



Another idea someone mentioned a while back and that I'd thought of was how about inviting Turkey to donate a large part of the force? They're a predominantly Muslim country yet also have good ties to Israel so that might make them more palatable to the involved parties. Although there is the whole Sunni/Shiite thing and they could be considered a bit too westernised for the extremists.
If Lebanon were purely a Muslim country this might work, but it isn't. Apart from the Shia, you also have a Sunni minority, the Druze and not forgetting that somewhere around 39% of the population are Christian.
 
#15
With reference to AJ's thread about the neo-cons thinking (or lack of it), I've just noticed this :

Could U.S. Troops End Up in Lebanon? (Harpers.org)

They cannot be serious 8O I understand that the 82nd is scheduled to be deployed to Iraq later this summer, so this would assume stepping up that timetable but the gut is telling me that it is going to spin out of control. Badly.

It's 1914 all over again......
 
#16
82nd Airborne you say? Funny you should mention it.

This is a link to an unsubtantiated internet rumor so take it for what it's worth (which for all I know could be nothing at all). I don't know who the author, John Robb, is.

82nd Airborne on its way to Lebanon?

With no takers on a peacekeeping force it will be up to the US to save Israel's bacon.
(Sic!) The 82nd Airborne is on tap to be sent.

John Robb's Weblog, 26 July 2006
http://globalguerrillas.typepad.com/johnrobb/2006/07/82nd_airborne_o.html
 
#17
N_W_D, as you alluded to, he runs a website called Global Guerrillas which looks at 4GW and OODA on a global scale. Worth looking at, but occasionally it goes right over my head....

Here's his biog:

John is a highly regarded analyst and speaker, with a focus on the intersection of terrorism, infrastructure, and markets. In this capacity, he has briefed Silicon Valley's technology elite and many of the top hedge fund managers in the world. Audience reactions have been spectacular.

He is currently writing a book on next generation terrorism with Wiley (in editing) while simultaneously building companies as a business architect (definition: a polymath that can integrate/formulate business strategy, organizational design, and information architecture into a cohesive whole for stellar business growth).

Stay tuned for release dates on the book. In the meantime, John wrote an Op-Ed for the New York Times on "Open-Source Warfare" (in 2005) and a long article for Fast Company magazine called "Power to the People" on US security in 2015 (in 2006).

John is best known for his deep knowledge of the technology industry and his very popular weblogs. He has been quoted as an expert analytical source on technology topics well over 500 times in newspapers such as the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal and has been interviewed on the BBC and CNBC.

John has lived, worked, and traveled extensively in Central/South America, Africa, Asia, and Europe.

John's previous experience includes:


* Department of Defense Counter-terrorism. John served in a tier one counter-terrorist unit that worked closely with Delta and Seal Team 6. John participated in global operations as a mission commander, pilot, and mission planner (El Salvador, Panama, Colombia, Egypt, etc.). Numerous medals for exemplary service.

* Top technology analyst. John led the move to cover Internet technologies at Forrester Research. His research provided many of the company's top ideas as the Internet rapidly expanded into a global force. His insight on these topics is sought after by many of the largest companies in technology and was read by most of the top analysts on Wall Street.

* Entrepreneur. John built a company and grew it from $0 to over $23 m a year in revenue and 135 people. The company is a now a global leader in financial performance testing with customers such as Fidelity, JP Morgan, and Merrill Lynch. John also ran a company that was the pioneer in weblogs and RSS (both technologies are remaking the publishing industry). His guerrilla marketing efforts brought these technologies from the hobbyist market and into the mainstream of corporate America.


John's education includes:


* Masters of Public and Private Management, Yale University, New Haven CT (commendation for excellence)
* Bachelor of Science in Astronautical Engineering, The United States Air Force Academy, Colorado Springs CO (honors program)


Other than the AF Academy, the government spent over $2.5 million training John.


* Undergraduate Pilot Training, The United States Air Force, Reese Air Force Base, Lubbock TX

* SERE school. Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape.

* Squadron Officer's School. Mid-level manager training.

* Advanced transport pilot training.

* Advanced low-level night flight training (night vision goggles).

* Advanced interrogation resistance training.

* Terrorism survival course (including advanced driving techniques).

* Covert and clandestine mission training.

* Free-fall parachute training.

* Advanced training in multiple aircraft.


Other licenses and awards:
Airline Transport Pilot's License, FAA
Eagle Scout, BSA
 

Latest Threads

Top