"Plunge into political crisis leaves Lebanon vulnerable to war" is yet another Washington Post attempt to cast Israel as the aggressor rather than the surrounding terror groups and countries that explicitly call for Israel's destruction.  In this version, the Post remarks that "Israel has been accused of regularly bombing across its northern border, targeting convoys and military depots in Syria linked to Hezbollah" but omits that these are defensive attacks.  United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 Israeli-Lebanon conflict (and signed by both sides), called for all armed groups (referring to Hezb'allah) to disarm.  Yet current reports are that Hezb'allah has been stockpiling over 100,000 missiles – a failure to comply with the resolution by any stretch of the imagination.  And the U.N. does nothing to stop this build-up!

The Post, as usual, speaks of the "Israeli narrative" while describing the Hezb'allah view as if it were fact.  E.g., "[e]ven Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah pointed to the fact that 'Israel has its own agenda.'"  And he has credibility?  Would the Post say, "Even Korean dictator Kim Jung-un..." or "Even the Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei..." to make anything sound credible?  It's ludicrous!

If the Post researched the conflict, it would find that Hezb'allah's 100,000 missiles are all aimed at Israeli civilian population centers...and Hezb'allah and its sponsor Iran freely admit it!  Israel's goal, on the other hand, is only to protect itself from neighbors who regularly call for her destruction.  Israel has no desire or wish to attack Lebanon.  How could this basic element of the Israeli-Lebanon (Hezb'allah) conflict evade Washington Post thought?