<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The UN Cease Fire Resolution</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.floppingaces.net/2006/08/05/the-un-cease-fire-resolution/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.floppingaces.net/2006/08/05/the-un-cease-fire-resolution/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 22 Nov 2009 06:40:03 -0800</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: PatHMV</title>
		<link>http://www.floppingaces.net/2006/08/05/the-un-cease-fire-resolution/#comment-1460</link>
		<dc:creator>PatHMV</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 01 Dec 2006 21:22:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.floppingaces.net/2006/08/05/the-un-cease-fire-resolution/#comment-1460</guid>
		<description>Contrary to what many are saying, I am not at all pleased with this resolution. The only good thing about it is it looks like none of the warring parties are willing to accept it.

As I point out over at &lt;a href=&quot;http://stubbornfacts.us/foreign_policy/middle_east/dont_fall_for_the_hype&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;Stubborn Facts&lt;/a&gt;, the problem is that it does not spell out the composition or rules of engagement for a new multinational military force to guarantee the disarmament of Hizbollah. Once Israeli bombs stop falling on Hezbollah, so will the support for a robust multi-national force. We&#039;ll wind up with nothing significantly better than the utterly impotent existing UNIFIL forces. Maybe a few more of them, but with no more power to actually fight terrorists and keep them from rearming then UNIFIL has... which is to say, none at all.

So, the resolution will put pressure on Israel to stop major fighting, but won&#039;t ensure a real force to protect them later.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Contrary to what many are saying, I am not at all pleased with this resolution. The only good thing about it is it looks like none of the warring parties are willing to accept it.</p>
<p>As I point out over at <a href="http://stubbornfacts.us/foreign_policy/middle_east/dont_fall_for_the_hype" rel="nofollow">Stubborn Facts</a>, the problem is that it does not spell out the composition or rules of engagement for a new multinational military force to guarantee the disarmament of Hizbollah. Once Israeli bombs stop falling on Hezbollah, so will the support for a robust multi-national force. We&#8217;ll wind up with nothing significantly better than the utterly impotent existing UNIFIL forces. Maybe a few more of them, but with no more power to actually fight terrorists and keep them from rearming then UNIFIL has&#8230; which is to say, none at all.</p>
<p>So, the resolution will put pressure on Israel to stop major fighting, but won&#8217;t ensure a real force to protect them later.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
