The word “escalation” is ordinarily used to describe a
quarrel between two parties – call them A and B – that take turns to increase
the intensity of the blows they deliver to each other. Such blows can be verbal,
physical or they could involve firearms.
What applies to individuals also applies to gangs and to
nation-states whose relations can deteriorate to reach the level of war or
something close to it. This is how things tend to evolve naturally but like
always, there is an exception to the rule. And more often than not, the
exception turns out to be an activity that's related to the Jews or to Israel .
You can see an example of that when you go over the article
that came under the title: “The Problem of the Lebanese Army,” written by
Elliott Abrams and published on February 23, 2017 on the website of the Council
on Foreign Relations.
At its core, the issue that Abrams is discussing involves Lebanon and Israel . These two are the A and B
of the story. Ever since the decade of the 1970s when Israel used the real or
imagined excuse of Palestinian indiscretions in Lebanon to invade that country
and steal its water and farmlands, a set of parallel activities has escalated
not between A and B, but between A and C.
In this case C represents the United States of America . And while
the invasion of Lebanon has
involved military activities, the activities that Israel
has unleashed on America
involve a collection of other moves. To understand this part, we need to recall
the reality that Lebanon
is a small country that never had a military to speak of.
When Israel
invaded it, the Lebanese civilians found themselves without the protection of
the state, and without the means to defend themselves. They did what they could
to stay alive but vowed that never again will they be caught defenseless and
disarmed in the face of an enemy whose savagery made the Palestinian
indiscretions – whatever they were – look like heavenly endeavors.
The outcome of that vow was the formation of a Lebanese
militia defense force. Calling itself Hezbollah, that force recruited young men
and women eager to defend their country. The force armed them with the weapons
it could procure on the black market, or whatever it obtained by other means
from anywhere. In terms of destruction, however, what these weapons could do
was negligible compared to the destruction done by the weapons Israel received from America on a regular basis.
With the passage of time; with the deepening of Hezbollah's
involvement in Lebanese political and social life, and with the repeated
Israeli incursions into Lebanon ,
Hezbollah took on the role of being the legitimate and effective military force
capable of mounting some kind of defense to protect the country's civilian
population.
Hezbollah being Israel's creation it dreads the most, Israel
did what the Jews do in such circumstances: it ran to the American congress for
the mentally challenged, and got it to stand behind labeling as terrorist – not
Israel, the deliberate killer of Lebanese and Palestinian children – but
Hezbollah, the deliberate defender of Lebanese and Palestinian families. Go
figure.
This done, Israel
continues to escalate the demands it makes on the United States . Thus, while the
excuse for continuing its activities is the relation it says exists between it
and Hezbollah; the escalation it continues to pump-up, is that between it and America . As can
be seen in the Abrams article, Israel
is never shy to make new demands on America
regarding Hezbollah, and America
is never reluctant to deliver what Israel wants.
Abrams asks: “Should the United States be giving military
assistance to the Lebanese Armed Forces?” He cites the amount of $221 million,
which is a drop in the bucket compared to the $38 billion that Israel has received from the same United States .
He also calls Hezbollah a terrorist organization, and complains that Lebanon has
failed to control it despite a Security Council resolution that so stipulates.
Of course, he did not see fit to mention the numerous resolutions that Israel continues to ignore with regard to its
occupation of Palestine .
What irritates Abrams more than anything is that he guesses
the following: “cooperation between Hezbollah and the Lebanese Army may be
increasing.” And so he reaches the conclusion that “the United States should demand that this trend be
reversed,” or the American aid to Lebanon will have to be halted, he
suggests.
This is what happens when a superpower loses so much
self-respect that a little mouthy fart – member of a foreign mob of
bloodsuckers – can tell its legislators when they can give money to Israel and
when they must withhold it from Lebanon … when they can make love to their
spouses and when they cannot.