91热爆

Nick - You interviewed TB recently and put a number of points to him regarding the position 'he' is adopting regarding the war in Lebanon. However the point you did not make then or in your blog is that Isreal is attacking with their enemy with disregard to civilian casulaties - most people regard that as unacceptable - apparently TB does not. The essential point here is that 'Britain' or the British State through the position the Priminister is taking is endorsing this approach. That should not go unchallenged!

Hoping the Americans will press for a ceasefire? Why should they - they are making money out of the arms supply aren't they?

We're told he has not issued words of condemnation because he wants to 'retain influence with the players in this conflict'. What inluence does he have with anyone involved?

"Tony Blair's influence in Jerusalem is limited. His best hope is to persuade the Americans to persuade them."

That's his BEST hope?

Tony Blair's failure to condemn Israel indicates once more that he is following the American line of never criticising Israel no matter what they do or don't do.

His silence is morally reprehensible; and diminishes his stature even further.

How anyone can seriously sit and listen to Bush or Blair鈥檚 views on any war or bombings is beyond me, the killing of innocent civilians worries them does it? Didn鈥檛 worry them when they orders the 鈥淗ollywood named鈥� Shock and Awe bombings of Baghdad did it? How many men women and children have died in Iraq so far?
To watch Blair sit there all Statesmen like giving his opinion sickens me.

Nick,
I find it difficult to see how from this you can conclude that Blair "has moved to end all doubts that secretly he wants Israel to carry on its military campaign until it defeats Hezbollah".

Nick-
Britain, the US and Israel are signalling that they want a cease fire that puts foreign troops into Lebanon, making them responsible for past UN resolutions. But it is not clear how they can tempt any nation into putting its soldiers at risk for Israel. If Israel cannot succeed either in war or peace, then let's stop pampering its reckless politicians. It's way past time to get heavy and press for a ceasefire that moves on the ultimate goal of a 'green line' Palestine, alongside retreat in the Golan to separate a fragile Syria from its debts to Iran and its burdens in Lebanon.

Why is Yo Blair playing with words? Why cant he ask for a straight forward ceasefire immediately? He should know that it will not happen anyway. people have stopped listening to him, as he has stopped listening to them. Of course, he answers only when shouted "Yo Bliar", with a meek, "Yes, master!!" I am ashamed I voted for him!!!

"His best hope is to persuade the Americans to persuade them."

Would anyone believe that Bush will "listen" to his Poodle? He should always consider the pro-Israel forces in the US first. This has been the main reason for the ever continuing conflicts in the Middle East, and will perhaps again rule out any influence from Tony Blair on the US Middle East policies.

Pete Scott says that Israel is attacking with disregard to civilian casualties - this is simply not the case.

In each combat operation so far, civilians have been warned to leave the area ahead of time - and in the process have given hezbolla the opportunity to vacate the area and leave the people to their fate. This "tragedy" at Quna would not have happened if Hezbolla had not used the village as a firing point.

Israel is being expected to do something that no nation would ever do - tolerate attacks on it's citizens without response. If situations were reversed and rockets fell on the UK, I would expect the full force of our armed forces to be used against the attackers.

The widespread revulsion felt around the World, especially for this most recent attack, will not be lost on Israel. A cessation or even a ceasefire is now more likely than it was before, not because of diplomacy or behind the scenes persuasion, but because the acceptability limit has now been crossed.

Tony now needs to be at the head of a chorus of disapproval directed at both sides, the Islamo-fascists who believe they can kill their way into paradise and the Israelis who, more a than any people, should draw the line at the murder of the innocent.

I understand Israel has called a 48 hour pause in aerial attacks. Can we expect a "proportional" response from Hezbollah? Perhaps the 91热爆 will keep us informed, as they have of the weapons shipments from Iran to Hezbollah, and the use of "medical convoys" for such.

What if Israel is persuaded to call a longer term "cease-fire", and Hezbollah just continues as usual? Who will stop them? The UN? Iran? Syria? The Archbishop of Canterbury? The 91热爆, even? Or is Israel expected to endure these rockets as it has for the past 6 years, while Iran ships more powerful weapons to their proxy?

In short, what can those who are calling for a cease-fire from Israel offer it that is worth more than a piece of paper?

Israel may have to agree as the situation threatens to leave Bush and Blair completely isolated. As Christopher Meyer observed last week, the real special relationship is between the USA and Israel, its policeman in the Middle East. But a policeman that runs amok can be a liability too and one that is undermining what remains of the US/UK position in Iraq, as the Shia may withdraw their tacit support for the occupation. Bush and Blair have shown all too clearly how hypocritical their declared aim of supporting democracy in the Middle East really is: the governments of Lebanon and Palestine have seen that support depends on voting the way they want.

I'm interested to know how strong the new Lebanese government is at this point, and if there is any danger of a split within its army as Hezbollah's influence seems to be growing daily?

Pete Scott, are you uninformed regarding Israel's active policy of informing civilians of attacks?

Civilians dying is tragic, and helping those that cause those civilians to die is even more horrific. Let's make no mistake: those causing them to die are Hezbollah and everyone who plays into their game is helping them. This is a media war, wake up and be responsible and firm, stand up for those who believe in life and freedom...and are willing to fight for it, instead of 'pretending' that in this world we can just 'observe and report'.

Yes, we must ask the question to the 91热爆, why are you acting as the arms and legs to the Hezbollah?

Just as the Lebanese PM is doing so (instead of mobilising his country against Hezbollah), just as all the others speaking like him are doing, so too the 91热爆 in their own way are doing this - and they needn't. We should all be sending messages of hope and peace and most of all STRENGTH to the Lebanese PM to have the RIGHT reaction to this crisis. The lack of THIS approach is THE human tragedy which feeds Islamic hate, instead of helping the Arab world to see their problem; Like the 'good' friend who always consoles their bully friend that 'they were in the right'.

The Prime Minister is trying to stand for those who fight for life and freedom and should be proud of it.

Nick, all it takes for evil to take place is for good men to do nothing. You are a good man, who is in the position to do something, please..the dead children of Lebanon and of Israel and indeed of all the world..their souls are surely crying to the Almighty creator of us all that you see the truth and that you speak it clearly.

If the world united for life we would not have to experience all this pain in this world. Be strong!

You seem to be missing a point here - what good will it do for TB or anyone else to call for a ceasfire, how can you possibly get a one sided ceasfire? Hizbollah are quite happy to send thier rockets into Israel. Do you think they will stop if Isreal restrains from targetting them? Who is mediating with them.? and what terms do you think they want? The total destruction of Israel maybe. If people cannot see this conflict in the real world then all this endless talk will not acheive anything.

The innocent casualities seem to be the non-involved intellectual community who seem to think that there is no relationship between the Hezbollah warriors and the families that nurture them in Lebanon. The Lebanese have made an unfortunate pact that is now explaining its unfortunate nature. It is easy to scream 'meat in the middle, I am, I am' but Hezbollah could not accomplish its mission without the willing participation of the Lebanese. It only takes bullets to clean out Hezbollah and the Lebanese Army has those bullets but lacks the will to use them.

"Tony Blair's influence in Jerusalem is limited"?

Tony Blair's influence ANYWHERE is limited. Ditto his credibility. Could we pay more attention to the real players in this, please, and less to Blair just because he's (I shudder to say it) our PM?

Its time for Tony 'yo' Blair and his new labour cronies, to be voted out so we can save this nation from being part of group of three nations that are the most dispised on earth.

Those planes flying from the usa via uk to israel show the reality of the situation, the uk isnt an honest broker anymore it is well entrenched on the israeli's side, and totaly spent as a united force in the middle east.

Bush wants the war to continue until Hezbollah is defeated. Immediate ceasefire means 'stop now' and so this must have been said in error. Ceasefire a.s.a.p means 'stop when we think it is best to stop' which is clearly what Bush wants. Sorry, did I say 'Bush'? I meant to say 'Blair'.

Of course, when Blair said 'immediate' it looked like the action would be over in a few days, with Israel being the clear victors. Now it looks like an Israeli victory in this conflict could take weeks or even months - if victory is gained at all.

Nick, I think TB's position on this crisis is clearly poodling to Bush. This position continually alienates Britain from the muslim community.

It surprises me that we are not talking to Syria and Iran, the two principal actors accused of aiding hezebollah. The Rome meeting last week failed completely simply because the major actors were excluded.

We are calling on hezebollah to implement 1559, while Israel sits on countless UN resolutions. All parties in this conflict must be treated equally, mutually, and with respect. The international community must be seen to be transparent in doing these.

As a matter of urgency, we must also resolve the Israel-Palesteine question.

We need an international conference where all parties in this conflict (Syria, Iran, US included) should sit down and trash out their differences openly. And any proposed deal must have something in it for each party. This is the way forward.

It sounds impossible, but it remains the only thing we haven't done in this mid-east crisis.

Once again, TB reveals where his true loyalty lies. If there was ever a time to truly see this "puppet" for what he is, it is indeed now.

A true lapdog of the US, and it's current Neo-conservative masters, indeed.

I was wondering the same thing about the wording of TB, today. Thanks for your blog coverage. It's invaluable and unique.

Nick, thanks for your coverage of this. I'd like to ask you, though, because I haven't seen you really go into detail on this: all this talk of a rift in the cabinet, and TB changing his tune. Doesn't that all presume we're/they're only interested in how their response reads at home? When you're in government, you have different priorities and you have to do 'grown-up' politics. That's what TB and the cabinet are engaged in. They're far more concerned with doing things behind the scenes that have a real effect than with media soundbites for home consumption. Of course, how it reads at home is important too, so Kim Howells and Jack Straw can make their positions known, but that doesn't mean they're different from the positions of others in the government. TB can't express those views, though, because when you openly start taking sides, you lose influence. Could you not write something on how difficult it is for people in power to express their real opinions because of the nature of their jobs rather than just focus on 'TB has changed his view' or 'people in cabinet disagree'?

For once I agree with Blair on this issue. Leaping up and down and condemiing Israel makes great headlines but in reality does absolutely nothing. This is one case where posturing is probably more unhelpful than anything else.

And let us not forget, Hezbollah and Hammas are extremist organistations who would like to see not just the end of Israel, but of Jews. Hammas sponsored schools teach young children that Jews are devils.

Israel may seem to be using a sledgehammer to crack a nut and not caring a jolt about the civilian casualties, but the other sides care probably less.

It makes the situation far more complicated than a simple case of a kidnapped soldier. Yes, a ceasefire makes sense, but is it achievable by simply yelling at the combatants?

Maybe this is one case where us vocal members of the public and some equally vocal members of the press should admit that we really don't know what the hell we are talking about!

I think Blair's stance is completly right. A 'ceasefire' can only work if both sides are willing. Hezbollah started these latest troubles (speaking in broadest brush-strokes) and we might note that, in the big scheme of things, neither they nor Hamas ever seem to offer any serious proposals for peace. Israel is a tiny strip of a country surrounded by hostile Arab nations, some of whom we now know have been funding and actively encouraging parties like Hezbollah - why is Israel always made out to be the villain?

Civilian deaths and casualties are disgusting. But we will only see tens of thousands more if factions like Hezbollah are not neutralised. Or, as I would prefer to say: 'destroyed'.

Nick - I admire your objective and penetrating reporting.

Err...The Lebanese are'nt really combatants with this conflict - its Hezbolah actually, so talking to the Lebanese wont solve the fundemental issue here....

If Hezbolah wont disarm (and it is crowing from the rooftops today that it never will!), the Lebanese Army certainly wont/cant disarm them, and an international force cant either...
So what then...?

Sure we might be able to stop the bombing + rockets for now,
but what when Hezbolah re-arms and starts shooting over the UN forces again? (or even worse, from just behind them..?).

And before you protest, it happened exactly that way before...
with the PLO before and the Hezbolah re-arming since 2000 - both with UN resolutions...

So what then...?

The Israelis sure wont take attacks on them...UN force in the way or not..so we are back to a right mess again..

Anyways...lets be balanced here...
Why so much action over this war when the UN totally ignored Rawanda (1,000,000 dead - with NO armed forces to fight!) or Sudan (250,000+ dead - with only lighly-armed irreguars to fight!)...

Or are'nt africian lives worth just as much as Lebanese....??

If so why was'nt there 1000 times the effort on these FAR bigger crimes...?

Ahhh...if only justice was truly blind...

Nick鈥擨 think it is very difficult for western leaders to call for an all out cease-fire in the middle east, or anywhere else for that matter, as they have to wrestle with the thorny idea that war, in an abstract sense, is a necessary, though regrettable, tool of diplomacy - now as it has been in the past.

Calling for a cease-fire is the same as taking amoral stance, not only in this awful tragedy but on the very idea of war itself. Politicians, for good political reason, usually avoid making moral judgements in such matters.

If Messer鈥檚 Blair and Bush where to take a moral position on Israel鈥檚 motivations, actions and use of overwhelming military power against predominately civilian and residential areas of Lebanon, then not only would they be limiting their own potential to use military force in the future, but would also have to deal with the difficult issues of civilian casualties that their own actions may have led to in Iraqi etc.

This could possibly hamstring them politically.

Mr Blair cannot call for an out-and-out cease-fire between Hezbollah and the IDF, not because he will lose 鈥榠nfluence鈥� in the region (what influence does he really have at present), but because it would appear to take a moral stance against the legitimacy of the conflict, and particularly the methods employed by Israel in civilian residential areas against a defined 鈥橳别谤谤辞谤颈蝉迟鈥� foe. We therefore find the two highest profile and influential leaders in the western world in the morally uncomfortable position of appearing to give Israel permission to carry out its military campaign in any manner they see fit.

Sadly, it is a plain fact that civilian non-combatants always die in great numbers in a war zone. It may sometimes be necessary, and even appropriate, for our elected politicians to instigate military action and even to view the concept of war in suitably abstract terms, giving campaigns names like 'Operation Desert Storm' or 'Enduring Freedom' but still, it also cannot be denied that war is the subjugation of one population by another by the use of extreme and overwhelming force, and expressed by the ability of each side to kill the other.

What is distressing to most of us, even when we reluctantly admit that war may be a necessary evil in certain cases, is that recent conflicts, like the current crisis in Lebanon, have seemed such one-sided affairs militarily speaking. But rather than this leading to a swift, decisive and positive outcome, it appears to have had just the opposite effect - and has impinged on the civilian populations involved to a disproportionate extent while perpetuating the cycles of violence that the conflicts were intended to diminish.

There are no easy answers here, but the fighting must stop. Civilian deaths and displacements on this scale are not a 鈥榩rice worth paying鈥� for political influence by any civilized standards. Mr Blair and Mr Bush must re-examine the idea of calling for an immediate halt to hostilities, as must the leaders o Iran and Syria etc,. While the fighting continues nobody can possibly start to address the issues that led all sides into the calamitous and chaotic situation in the first place - and without examining those issues this level of violence will only beget even more violence; now and for generations to come.

Are Germany and Canada not proper countries in Nick Robinson's view?

It seems clear to me that Mr Tony Blair has no mind of his own or if even he has one, has no guts to difer from George Bush.

Prime Minister Blair's position is firm and flexible, and pointing in the best direction for the long-term. This, and how he's handling 'comment' is as near perfect as you can get.

We all make mistakes. If the Prime Minister can raise his game there's hope for everyone. By learning from them and moving forward we can achieve. If we can achieve so can the Middle-East.

My own personal vision, for what it's worth, is that a treaty similar to that which founded the European Union would focus attention on better things. It would be hard but so is war, and war is much less profitable.

Surely Curlew has it wrong - arming the Israeli army costs the US a huge amount of money in "military aid". The Israelis can't afford to buy that equipment.

Interesting to hear that Blair thinks rhetoric is pointless. Explains why he's spent so much time concentrating on substance rather than spin the past ten years.

Is there no lie this man will not utter?

I am astonished by the number of people who thought that Tony Blair calling for an immediate ceasefire would stop the war. Between him and Dubya, they would have formed a magic rainbow of world love and thrown it out across the middle east to stop all the killing and bring every fluffy bunny that died in Lebanon over the last six years back to life!
All it would do is to salve the consciences of the people who can do nothing about it, so that they can sleep well at night knowing that their leaders condemned violence.

Sarcasm aside, neither side in the conflict would listen to a random declaration that peace is good. Hezbulah haven't respected a single cease-fire to date and the first rocket attack after they said they had would be taken by Israel as one more proof that you cannot negociate with such people. Such a call would just make it harder for a long-term peace to be established.

To made some kind of peace that might possibly last, they have to think it through and put together a reasoned plan of action: through the UN. That can't happen at the drop of a hat and it wont happen just because someone says "killing's bad, M'kay."

President Bush's texan drawl and the quality of the of-line recording has misled everyone; the 'B' was attributed to the wrong word.

Many have said that Israel is acting as a 'recruiting sergeant' for terrorist groups. I think they miss the point that Israel cannot be much more hated in the Arab world than it already is. The Israeli population know that.

Perhaps if the media started reporting some truth in the Middle East it might change.

There is a ceasefire in force in Sri Lanka yet the government has been bombing for four days now.

On this basis the Israelis could announce a ceasefire but carry-on with their childish tantrum.

Nick,
I have oft heard mention of the special relationship between the US and the UK, what is it? We have a history of fighting terrorism, with a great deal of success and yet we follow the US at every opportunity. The doctrine adopted by our armed forces is built on our experiences and, althougth risky, frequently works. Despite all this our brave leader backs the US. I think I am not alone in finding it hard to understand why the wishes of the electorate are so frequently treated as secondary to supporting the wishes of the US administration. Perhaps you can ask Mr Blair to explain our relationship with the US and in particular where it benefits the UK and its citizens?

Keep the UN out of it! What were the UN observers doing when Hezbollah moved thousands of rockets, against a UN resolution, into Lebanon? If the UN and international community had acted then, hundreds of Lebanese civilians might be alive today. It's no wonder the Israelis feel and act as they do, having such little faith in the rest of the world.

How long is it going to take Blair and friend to find that endurable solution to the conflict? Should the war and killings continue whilst they look for thattheir endurable solution? If they know or have those solutions why haven't they solve the problems before then. They seem to have a symplistic view of the problem;Remove Hizbolar and the problem is solved. Plan A. Give Isreal more time to destroy hizbolar. Plan B If plan A does not work, use the UN to do the job. Just have a look at the 3 point plan of Ms Rice.Hizbolar kidnapped soldiers and not civilians. Israel is on record of kidnapping and imprisoning its opponents. What is wrong if her opponents try to kidnap its soldiers and use them them as a bargain to free their brothers from Israeli jails?

Ian Lowe asks what would happpen if the positions were reversed and rockets came raining down on London... well where was he when the IRA bombed civilians in Woolwich, Guildford, Birmingham, bombed the Conservative party in Brighton, killed Mountbatten, Airey Neave, John Wakham's wife, not to mention the wanton destruction of many buildings in the City, Manchester etc etc. And yes I remember there was even a rocket fired at Downing Street. Did we send jets to bomb Dublin? Did we blocade the Irish ports? Did we send missiles to flatten buildings in Shannon and Cork? Did we ask all civilians to evacuate Wexford and Waterford so we could bomb them flat? No, we didn't. So its easy to answer Ian Lowe's question: the rockets came and we did not do what the Israeli are doing becuase what they are doing in morally and pragmatically wrong.

Lets have a semantics ceasefire a.s.a.p!The Americans are probably quite happy to proft from selling armaments to the Israelis and let them carry out the dirty work on this alledged terrorist organisation. And Blair has precious little influence over them as evidenced by failure to ratify climate change agreements, the NatWest three, British citizens in Guantanamo and other trade issues.
The fact that he did not ask for an immediate ceasefire is tantamount to colluding with the actions of the Israelis.

If we ,the World people,allow Mr.Bush and Mr. Blair to do whatever they like to do to make this world peacefull place certainly they would order their military to attack and kill all the people of the world who oppose their policy of war no matter where they live.These two men have no hearts to feel and mind to think.These two chaps are not less crual then Hitler.These guys never feel pain or sarrow of losses of inocent children`s life.See Qana there is no single word of condolence from these two chaps for those who lost their life for no cause by the Isariali bombings . These are the the butchers of the world of 21st century.

For all the posturing and political commentary about the Bush vs Blair power to call for a ceasfire, twist Israel's arm etc...the bleeding hearts seem to have forgotten the crucial points.

This war does not exist in a vacum, and beating an enemy who stockpiles its weapons under apartment blocks and hides among civilians (both war crimes in their own right) will unfortunately result in the death of civilians. Which, when it happens should squarely be blamed (again under international law) on the group who were using them as shields in the first place.

Israel has flown thousands of sorties over lebanon, used just as many guided missles and weapons, and yet when one unfortunate and regrettable incident happens, people jump to suggest they must be 'deliberatly targeting' civillians.

The real equivalence of violence should be clear. When Israel kills civilians, it means they missed. When Hezbollah DOESNT kill civillians, it means they missed!

And considering the last international force in Lebanon of 'real' soldiers cut and run in 1982 (after Hizbullah bombed their barracks and killed 214 Americans and over 50 French), leaving the Lebanese to continue their bloody civil war, are we REALLY going to go in and stand up to Hizbullah, Syria and Iran to defend Lebanese sovreignty? Or simply end a small conflict now- and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory?

The reality is, Israel's soldiers and civilians must once again live sacrifice their lives to deal with an enemy that threatens their existance, because the International Community wasn't prepared to back up its promises to Lebanon with teeth.

All wars are crimes. There will always be civilain casualties and these will be compounded if terrorist and military groups use civilian populations as cover.

Hezbollah attacked first. It wants Israel wiped off the face of the earth. The world stood by once while jews were slaughtered before and during the second world war.

We shouldn't wait for a similar thing to happen before taking action. Given half the chance Israels neighbours would wipe it out. We should not permit them the weapons or opportunity to do this.

Israel has spend a lot of money to protect itself from the military point of view. Why haven't they tried to win over all the Arab countries and making the point that life together is possible? For the moment Israel has just choosen to ensure that the big brother (US) is behind Israel against all odds. I don't believe that all Arab countries just want Israel to be destroyed. However I believe that Israels expension policy and foreign policy is rightly upsetting their neighbours.

With Israels agression against Lebanon the way to honest peace talks is again very long. Israel agression backed by US/UK results in hardening of positions and still nothing has been achieved. Nothing except destruction and death and hartred. Also a little feeling that Israels feels safer. But I doubt this. Tony Blair couldn't have asked for immediate ceasefire as this is against the stand of the US goverment. If he would have asked for immediat ceasefire, he would have had to go all the way against Israel and the US plan in the region. His hands are tied.

We urgently need a 'third' party to help as a peace broker, but that can not happen if Israel/US don't want the agression to stop.

The risk of the conflict spiralling out of control is rather high.

Israel, Palestine, Lebanon, Syria and Iran have to overcome their emotions and sit at a peacetable, at the same table. But for the moment I am dreaming. What is the plan for Iraq?
The status quo is absolutely frightening. Anyone got a clue in Washington beside sending more troop?
New ideas are needing and not more bombs.

"Never in the field of human conflict has so much damage been achieved by one person"

Surely it is now time for the PM to step down.