Post🧵 Thread about the new IDF doctrine and the Lebanese diplomacy

🧵 Thread about the new IDF doctrine and the Lebanese diplomacy At one point there was a serious discussion if the path to a secure and safeguard Lebanon was through diplomacy or strength which is enabled through a resistance. However with time, similar to how the deterrence of the resistance eroded through the mishaps of the latest battle, the worth of diplomatic solutions eroded but faster without any fruits. The difference is that the path to diplomacy was a just a shiny slogan spoken through the mouths of many who either never achieved anything for the overall best of Lebanon or used diplomacy as a veil to hide their ill intentions that intended to drive Lebanon towards full surrender and not only remove it from the few remaining Arab states with an active political and military front against Israel. The goal was to shift its whole identity to one that strips it from its history and culture and put it under the shroud of a client state with no real security and no real worth in this world. You get peace by submission and erasing any threat to the West. The dilemma here is and will always be that the side that chose to not to be part of the resistance does not get burdened at all with loss. They are neither subjected by the enemy to murder, nor are they subjected to material loss and pain. This makes the cost of choosing to be on the other side of the front that assumes the moral high ground in the world affairs, easy and without any costs. On the contrary, the resistance is not only facing the burdens of justifying its existence and then the burdens of building up strength despite the challenges, it is burdened by the immense costs of loss and material damages that affects it and affect its supporting base. This base that needs a lot of effort to keep rallied around the cause. To explain this, compare the costs paid by Hezbullah in 2006 to secure 17 years of unpreceded peace and deterrence before the setback of 2024, verses the costs paid by its political opponents in Lebanon. All the achievements done by Hezbullah since 2000 were ridiculed, yet when the winds shifted in favor of its opponents without any cost or effort from them, and despite years of making wrong assumptions and decisions, they were hailed. What I personally find annoying is the hypocrisy that these opponents showcase, and their disregard of any decency in politics. What I find particularly wrong and is within the scope of this, is how they refused to adhere to the legitimacy given to Hezbullah in the past decade through the ministerial statement and once it was dropped, it became the holy words of God and now Hezbullah is an outlaw. However the disregard to any decency has been showcased particularly not by the general populace of Lebanese who are against Hezbullah's arms, but by the Lebanese Forces party whose officials today crossed an unpreceded low announcing that they are ready to mandate Israel to defeat Hezbullah in the south and the Syrians in the north. They took a step further and said its high time for the Lebanese army itself to fight Hezbullah and that they accept genocide against Shia if done by the Syrians. This is what their head of communication Charles Jabour said. The issue of Hezbullah's arms is indeed a topic that can be discussed. While it is a norm for us, and we not only accept it but encourage it, in the wider definition of states it is indeed irregular to have an armed faction whose power at one point rivals that of states. The only difference between this irregularity and any other, that Hezbullah did not leverage this power to take over the state and submit others like how everyone else in history did, and focused only on Israel. And had Hezbullah not face mishaps in the latest war, and had Israel not get a green light from the whole world to act as it pleases unrestrained by any laws of humanity, the discussion of the weapons would not have sparked such polarity as it is doing today. #admin