Transcript [00:00] So, over the past few days, there's been [00:02] increasing calls for Israel to withdraw [00:05] from southern Lebanon. There was a UN [00:07] Security Council meeting, an emergency, [00:09] sorry, an emergency UN Security Council [00:12] meeting about this issue. France called [00:14] the meeting, and speaker after speaker, [00:16] uh [00:17] the representatives from France, from [00:18] the UK, from China, from Russia, and [00:21] more, Pakistan, they all were calling [00:24] for Israel to withdraw, and they were [00:25] all citing the same document. If you've [00:27] been following the news about Lebanon, [00:29] you might have heard talk of UN Security [00:31] Council Resolution 1701. [00:35] Like, that is a 2006 [00:37] resolution that ended the Second Lebanon [00:41] War. And in it, one of the provisions in [00:43] it is that Israel withdraws from [00:45] southern Lebanon. And I want to look at [00:46] that resolution with you. We're going to [00:48] look at a few details in it. We're not [00:50] going to read the entire thing. It's too [00:51] long. [00:52] But when you actually read what it says, [00:54] and I read the whole thing today, [00:56] um you're going to see that there's [00:59] stuff in there that the diplomats at the [01:01] UN are not bringing up and don't want to [01:04] talk about, and the media certainly is [01:05] not talking about. But let's start, [01:07] let's, you know, let's set the stage [01:09] here by talking about what's actually [01:10] happening right now. So, you see this [01:12] headline on your screen here. This is [01:14] from Turkish state media. UN Security [01:16] Council members [01:18] urge Israel [01:20] to withdraw [01:22] from southern Lebanon. What does it say [01:24] here? Several UN Security Council [01:25] members urged Israel to withdraw from [01:28] southern Lebanon during an emergency [01:29] meeting on Monday as concerns mounted [01:32] that Israel's expanding military [01:34] occupation in Lebanon and threats to [01:36] strike its capital Beirut could derail [01:39] efforts to secure a broader regional [01:41] ceasefire. The session was convened at [01:44] France's request [01:46] after Israeli forces advanced [01:49] further into southern Lebanon, occupied [01:52] the strategic Beaufort Castle, and [01:53] raised an Israeli flag over the site, [01:56] reviving memories of Israel's occupation [01:59] of Southern Lebanon between 1982 and [02:02] 2000. Lebanon has emerged as a major [02:05] point of contention [02:07] in the ongoing US-Iran negotiations, [02:09] blah, blah, blah, etc. Let's get to what [02:12] we want here. [02:14] Lebanon's ambassador, Ahmad Arafa, urged [02:17] the council to condemn Israel's actions, [02:19] accusing Tel Aviv of capitalizing, as [02:21] usual, on a tense regional climate. [02:25] He said Israel was continuing a [02:26] systematic campaign of destruction, [02:28] deliberately targeting medical [02:30] personnel, hospitals, journalists, [02:31] schools, security agencies, UN [02:33] peacekeepers, places of worship, and [02:36] archaeological sites. Those horrible [02:37] Israelis. [02:39] This is the Lebanese UN rep. [02:44] As well as countless other targets. The [02:45] situation in Lebanon is deeply alarming, [02:48] Martha Ama Akyaa Pobee, UN Assistant [02:51] Secretary-General for Political and [02:53] Peacebuilding Affairs and Peace [02:55] Operations, [02:56] told the council. These I mean, these [02:58] these positions at the UN are something, [02:59] right? Pobee said Israel's presence [03:02] north of the blue line, the blue line, [03:04] I'll show that to you in a moment on a [03:05] map. Um that's really just the [03:07] Lebanese-Israeli border. [03:10] She said that Israel's presence north of [03:11] the blue line violated Lebanon's [03:14] sovereignty and Security Council [03:16] Resolution 1701. [03:19] Israeli forces must withdraw to south of [03:21] the blue line, she said, while also [03:23] stressing that Hezbollah and other [03:25] non-state armed groups in Lebanon must [03:27] disarm. [03:28] Russia's envoy accused Israel of [03:31] replicating tactics used in Gaza. [03:35] Um and he said that Israel's offensive [03:37] in Lebanon was an identical replay of [03:40] the Gaza war, that continued occupation [03:43] could that the continued occupation in [03:46] South Lebanon could fuel support for [03:48] armed resistance, [03:50] deepen sectarian tensions, and risk [03:52] triggering a civil war. [03:55] Said it was unjustified aggression. [03:56] China also expressed concern over [03:58] Israel's expanding ground operations. [04:00] Military force is not the solution. [04:02] France's UN envoy said Hezbollah bore [04:06] responsibility for triggering for [04:07] triggering the hostilities but warned [04:09] that Israel's military response was [04:11] counterproductive. [04:13] Nothing can justify the continued scale [04:15] of its military operations. [04:17] Um UK, Britain's ambassador said [04:19] Hezbollah had dragged Lebanon to the war [04:22] but that Israel's actions were worsening [04:24] the conditions for civilians. [04:26] Now the US placed the onus for [04:28] de-escalation on Hezbollah and Iran [04:30] avoiding criticism of Israel's military [04:32] attacks. Acting US representative [04:34] Michael Waltz said that peace could be [04:36] achieved quickly if Hezbollah stopped [04:38] the attacks on Israel [04:40] and honored and honored its commitments [04:42] to halt hostilities. [04:46] Okay, that's that piece. That's again [04:49] that's Turkish that's Turkish state [04:51] media there. [04:53] So, let's uh let's just sum up the key [04:56] points here. France called this [04:57] emergency Security Council meeting and [04:59] here from Turkish state media not [05:01] exactly a friend of Israel, you can see [05:02] who showed up to demand Israeli [05:04] withdrawal. France, Britain, China, [05:05] Russia and they're all citing resolution [05:08] and if you go back and watch the [05:09] speeches, I actually watched the [05:10] hearing. [05:11] Um they're all citing 1701. Now notice [05:15] something buried at the bottom of the [05:16] article, the UN official at the meeting [05:18] said yeah, Hezbollah also has to disarm. [05:21] One sentence. But most of the meeting [05:23] was just they didn't even mention [05:25] Hezbollah. Most of these guys didn't [05:26] mention Hezbollah at all. They just [05:28] talked about the need for Israel to [05:29] withdraw. We'll come back to that. [05:32] Now let's take a look at another uh [05:34] interesting media source and that is [05:36] Global Times. This is Chinese state-run [05:38] media. Chinese envoy calls for immediate [05:41] ceasefire, Israeli withdrawal from [05:43] Lebanon at UN Security Council meeting. [05:46] And and here also [05:49] he's going to cite [05:51] 1701. And the guy's name is Fu Cong. He [05:54] is the he's the Chinese permanent rep to [05:56] the UN. [05:58] Look what it says here. All parties [05:59] concerned, especially Israel, especially [06:02] Israel, must immediately cease [06:03] hostilities, fully abide by the [06:05] temporary ceasefire arrangements, [06:07] implement UN Security Council resolution [06:09] 1701 and other relevant resolutions, and [06:13] work to de-escalate as soon as possible. [06:19] Okay? There you go. [06:21] They want full implementation of 1701. [06:25] Okay, we're going to find out what's in [06:26] it soon. So, this is Fu Cong [06:30] saying that Israel has to that we have [06:31] to implement 1701. [06:33] And for 20 years [06:36] uh [06:37] this the Chinese rep, the permanent [06:40] whoever has a permanent seat on the [06:41] Security Council, never brought up the [06:43] anything else that's in 1701 [06:46] besides Israeli withdrawal. And we'll [06:48] get into that in a moment. But first, [06:49] let me show you what we're actually [06:50] talking about geographically. [06:53] Okay? Let's just understand a few [06:54] things. We'll do this very quickly. [06:56] Let's take a look at a map. [06:59] So, here's a map of South Lebanon. [07:00] Here's the border with between Israel [07:02] and Lebanon, this blue line here. [07:04] This is the border. [07:06] Okay? [07:08] And this here, this blue line, is the [07:12] Litani River that you've heard so much [07:14] about. [07:15] You notice that the Litani River gets [07:17] actually really close to Israel at one [07:18] point, really right here by Kiryat [07:20] Shmona and Metula. [07:23] And the according to UN Security Council [07:25] 1701, [07:27] this area here, which is about 20 miles, [07:29] 30 km, at you know, approximately, you [07:32] see it's not exactly the same [07:34] everywhere, but this this zone here is [07:37] supposed to be completely demilitarized [07:40] other than the Lebanese Armed forces [07:41] themselves. Okay, that's the [07:45] That's the situation. [07:47] Okay, now and and that's again 1701 [07:51] designates between the Litani and the [07:54] Israeli border as a weapons-free zone. [07:57] Right, no military presence other than [07:59] the Lebanese army and UN peacekeepers. [08:01] Now, keep this geography in mind as we [08:04] read further. So, now we're going to [08:06] look at UN Security Council Resolution [08:08] 1701, the famous 1701 that everyone's [08:10] talking about from 2006. [08:12] Okay, so here we have it. It's a [08:14] four-page document. Like I said, I'm not [08:16] going to read the whole thing. [08:18] But, I just want to show you three [08:19] passages because they tell the whole [08:21] story that we're talking about here. [08:23] So, let's first look at the preamble. [08:27] Uh recalling all previous resolutions [08:30] and it gives a list of all the previous [08:31] resolutions. And here we go. Here's [08:33] where it really gets started. Expressing [08:35] its its utmost the Security Council [08:38] expressing, you know, meaning that's the [08:40] opening and every single paragraph [08:42] begins with something the Security [08:43] Council is doing. Recall it's recalling [08:46] and now it is expressing its its utmost [08:49] concern at the continuing escalation of [08:52] hostilities in Lebanon and in Israel [08:55] since Hezbollah's attack on Israel on [09:00] July 12th, 2006 which has already caused [09:02] hundreds of deaths and injuries on both [09:04] sides, extensive damage to [09:06] infrastructure, and many many and [09:08] hundreds of thousands of displaced [09:09] persons. [09:10] The reason I highlighted that [09:13] is that right there in the opening [09:14] paragraph, the Security Council [09:16] the same body that met on Monday to [09:18] pressure Israel to withdraw acknowledges [09:21] that Hezbollah started it, right? Since [09:23] Hezbollah attacked Israel [09:26] on July 12th, in 2006. [09:28] And that's the same pattern. It's 20 [09:29] years later and it's the same thing. How [09:31] did How did this all start right now [09:33] what we're dealing with in Lebanon? [09:34] There was not a shot being fired between [09:36] Israel and Lebanon for months and months [09:38] and months until March 2nd. [09:42] Right? Two days after the US and Israel [09:45] started attacking Iran in this current [09:47] conflict. Hezbollah started firing [09:49] rockets at Israel, started firing drones [09:51] at Israel. [09:53] Right? So, it's the same story over and [09:55] over again. [09:56] Israel does not start these things. [09:58] Like, ever. [10:01] Okay. [10:03] Now, let's go to paragraph eight. [10:06] I think there's 19 paragraphs in this [10:07] whole thing. [10:08] Let's jump down to eight. [10:10] Look at paragraph eight. [10:13] The Security Council calls for Israel [10:15] and Lebanon to support a permanent [10:17] ceasefire and a long-term solution based [10:19] on the following principles and [10:20] elements. This is what it actually calls [10:22] for. Right? Like, a lot of the [10:23] statements in this are are just [10:25] reiterating things or affirming things. [10:27] And then there's these sections where it [10:29] calls for specific [10:31] demands. Right? It It makes demands. [10:34] So, it calls for Israel and Lebanon to [10:35] support this permanent ceasefire based [10:37] on the following principles and [10:39] elements. Number one, full respect for [10:42] the blue line by both parties. In other [10:44] words, that you have a sovereign border [10:46] that both sides respect. [10:48] Then, security arrangements to prevent [10:50] the resumption of hostilities including [10:52] the establishment between the blue line [10:54] and the Litani River [10:57] of an area free of any armed personnel, [11:00] assets, and weapons other than those of [11:04] the government of Lebanon and of UNIFIL, [11:06] that's the UN force, [11:08] as authorized in paragraph 11, [11:11] deployed in this area. [11:14] Okay. [11:16] Sounds good to me. [11:20] So, [11:21] full I I want to I want to point out we [11:24] just introduced something new. [11:29] Okay? [11:30] All right here. Full implementation [11:34] of the relevant provisions [11:37] of the Taif Accords [11:40] and of resolutions 1559 and 1680 [11:43] that require the disarmament of all [11:45] armed groups in Lebanon. So, there were [11:46] these two other resolutions, 1559 in [11:49] 2004, 1680 earlier in 2006 before this [11:53] one, that required the disarmament of [11:55] all armed groups in Lebanon. [11:58] So, that pursuant to the Lebanese [12:00] cabinet decision of July 27th, 2006, [12:03] there will be no weapons or authority in [12:06] Lebanon other than that of the Lebanese [12:08] state. This is This is a new This is a [12:10] new term that was introduced. The Taif [12:12] Accords. We'll talk about those in a [12:14] moment. It also says no foreign forces [12:16] in Lebanon without the consent of the [12:18] government, no sales or supply of arms [12:20] and related material to Lebanon except [12:23] as authorized by the government, and [12:25] provision to the United Nations of all [12:26] remaining maps of landmines in Lebanon [12:29] in Israel's possession. So, these are [12:31] the terms that are supposed to be [12:34] implemented by 1701. [12:38] Hope that was clear. [12:44] Now, the same resolution that China just [12:47] cited [12:49] that the and all the others just cited [12:51] calls for disarmament of all armed [12:53] groups. [12:55] So, that there will be no weapons other [12:56] than those of the Lebanese state and [12:58] UNIFIL. [12:59] This has never been implemented. Never. [13:02] Not for a day. [13:04] Not it not briefly and then violated. [13:06] Never. Not in 2006, not in 2016, not in [13:09] 2025 when the Lebanese government [13:12] promised to disarm Hezbollah. Never. [13:15] And there was not one emergency Security [13:17] Council session over the 20 years since [13:19] this was signed that ever was called to [13:22] to discuss the problem that 1701 is not [13:25] being implemented at all. Meaning this [13:27] this 1701 was never implemented [13:31] by [13:32] the other side, by Lebanon. [13:34] Now, let's read this next citation very [13:36] carefully. [13:38] Okay, this is paragraph three. [13:40] And I'll tell you, I read a lot of these [13:42] international documents like these [13:44] diplomacy declarations and whatever and [13:46] these Security Council resolutions, and [13:48] they often have contradictions built [13:50] into them. [13:51] And here's one that's interesting. This [13:52] is paragraph three. [13:55] The UN Security Council emphasizes the [13:57] importance of the extension of the [13:59] control of the government of Lebanon [14:02] over all Lebanese territory. [14:05] Right? The importance of Lebanon [14:07] actually governing its own territory in [14:09] accordance with the provisions of [14:11] resolution 1559 and 1680. That's those [14:14] other two resolutions that call for the [14:16] disarming of all other militias. [14:18] And of the relevant provisions of the [14:20] Taif Accords. There is it There it is [14:22] again. I'll explain it in a moment. [14:25] And of the relevant provisions of the [14:26] Taif Accords for it to exercise, it [14:29] meaning Lebanon, to exercise its full [14:32] sovereignty [14:33] so that there will be no weapons without [14:37] the consent of the government of [14:39] Lebanon. [14:41] There will be no weapons without the [14:43] consent of the government of Lebanon and [14:45] no authority other than that of the [14:48] government of Lebanon. [14:50] Oh, interesting. No weapons without the [14:53] consent of the government of Lebanon. In [14:55] other words, [14:56] there could be weapons [14:58] with the consent of the of the Lebanese [15:00] government. [15:02] That would be permitted, authorized, [15:04] legitimate under this resolution. Hold [15:06] that thought. [15:08] Because we're going to need it. [15:11] You see, [15:13] we now have to understand the Taif [15:14] Agreement. [15:16] So, Hezbollah [15:18] has weapons, lots of them. [15:22] Let's go back to 1989. [15:25] 1989 is when the Lebanese Civil War that [15:28] had raged for about 15 years [15:33] came to an end. [15:35] And it came to an end by the signing of [15:37] the Taif Accords. It's the agreement [15:40] that ended the Lebanese Civil War. It's [15:41] got nothing to do with Israel. [15:44] Israel's not mentioned in the thing. [15:47] And in this document [15:49] and it it it did a few things. The Taif [15:50] Agreement is very complex. It included a [15:53] restructuring [15:54] of some of the of some of the [15:56] governmental powers that were in the [15:58] hands of the Prime Minister and the [16:00] President and the Speaker of the House [16:02] and the Parliament. It it changed some [16:03] things and reordered it and it became [16:07] constitutional in Lebanon, the Taif [16:08] Accords. [16:10] But it's the agreement that ended the [16:11] Lebanese Civil War. [16:13] And one of the one of the [16:15] uh passages in the Taif Accords requires [16:17] all militias in Lebanon to disarm [16:19] because there was a lot of terrorist [16:21] groups operating in Lebanon from the [16:23] early [16:23] early 1970s until 1990. There was all [16:26] these different Palestinian groups and [16:27] Syrian groups and of course Hezbollah [16:30] that came along in the middle of that. [16:32] It required all of these militias to [16:34] disarm. [16:35] Christian militias, Palestinian [16:37] factions, everyone except Hezbollah. [16:40] What? [16:41] Excuse me, you might be thinking. [16:43] That's correct. [16:45] There was a carve out in the Taif [16:48] Accords. There was a carve out allowing [16:51] Hezbollah to still have its weapons. [16:53] Look it up. You could look up Taif [16:54] Agreement on Wikipedia and you'll see [16:56] this there. [16:58] True. [16:59] They basically said, "All the militias [17:01] have to disarm, but Hezbollah doesn't." [17:04] And they designated that the reason [17:07] stated for why Hezbollah did not need to [17:09] disarm [17:10] was that Hezbollah is a resistance [17:13] force, resistance force against Israel. [17:19] Understand what this means. [17:21] The Lebanese [17:23] in in the closing of the Lebanese Civil [17:25] War and they're creating the new [17:27] Lebanese government and they're deciding [17:29] what to do with all the militias, they [17:30] said there's going to be an exception [17:32] that Hezbollah is going to be allowed to [17:34] keep its weapons because they're doing [17:36] the holy work of [17:38] fighting Israel. [17:41] So, Hezbollah all these years [17:43] building up weapons has not been acting [17:45] outside of Lebanese law. [17:48] This was Lebanon's government making a [17:50] sovereign decision to authorize [17:52] Hezbollah's armed status [17:55] specifically for the purpose of fighting [17:57] Israel. [17:59] Now, let's go back to that line in 1701 [18:01] that I just read to you. [18:03] That there can be no weapons without the [18:05] consent of the government of Lebanon. [18:08] Lebanon consented to Hezbollah's weapons [18:11] officially, [18:13] sovereignly, [18:15] which means by the plain language of the [18:16] very resolution being cited against [18:18] Israel, Hezbollah's weapons are not a [18:21] violation of 1701. [18:23] Right? Look what it says there in clause [18:25] three. [18:26] The importance of the extension of [18:28] control [18:31] and the application of the relevant [18:33] provisions of the Taif Accords [18:37] so that there will be no weapons without [18:38] the consent of the government of [18:40] Lebanon. [18:42] Very slippery language, but basically [18:44] allowing the carve of the Taif Accords [18:47] for Hezbollah to remain. [18:53] Let me show you this, [18:54] which will [18:56] kind of emphasize the point. [18:58] This is a an article from last year, not [19:01] so long ago, from October of 2025, [19:04] and it quotes Hezbollah's leader Naim [19:07] Qassem as saying that possessing weapons [19:10] is a legitimate right of Hezbollah. [19:14] Possession of weapons is an inseparable [19:15] part of our legitimate right. [19:18] Resistance is a legitimate right, Naim [19:20] Qassem said in an interview. [19:23] The Lebanese state decides how it wants [19:25] to act internally regarding the handling [19:27] of weapons. Israel has nothing to do [19:29] with it. [19:31] Now, with everything that I've told you, [19:33] this statement actually has much more [19:34] meaning. He's saying this is an internal [19:36] Lebanese matter and we have every right [19:38] to our weapons because they're for [19:40] resistance. Naim Qassem, the current [19:42] leader [19:44] of Hezbollah, saying saying that [19:48] saying this I I know this is going to [19:49] surprise you, but he's not wrong. [19:52] Cuz under Lebanese sovereign policy [19:54] going back to the Taif Accords, the [19:56] Lebanese government authorized Hezbollah [19:58] to have weapons. [20:01] So, Qassem isn't making a a false claim. [20:03] He's actually citing the Taif Agreement. [20:06] A formal decision of Lebanon's [20:08] government. [20:09] So, here's the trap that the [20:11] international community has walked into. [20:13] If Hezbollah's weapons are legitimate [20:16] as Lebanon decided [20:20] then when Hezbollah fired rockets at [20:22] Israel on March 2nd unprovoked [20:26] those weren't the actions of a rogue [20:28] militia operating operating outside of [20:30] Lebanese authority. [20:32] Those were Lebanon's state-sanctioned [20:35] resistance [20:36] force [20:38] using its state-sanctioned [20:39] state-authorized weapons to attack [20:42] Israel. [20:44] So, Lebanon owns that attack. You know, [20:45] the [20:46] part of the narrative is that oh, it's [20:48] Hezbollah, this rogue terrorist group. [20:50] They're attacking Israel and the [20:51] Lebanese government, they're an innocent [20:52] party here. [20:55] You can't have it both ways. Either [20:57] Hezbollah is an independent actor [20:59] outside of Lebanese sovereignty, in [21:01] which case their weapons violate [21:03] Lebanese law and Lebanon should have [21:05] disarmed them, or Hezbollah is Lebanon's [21:08] sanctioned resistance force against [21:10] Israel, in which case Lebanon owns [21:12] everything Hezbollah does. [21:16] And the international community has [21:17] spent forever, basically, 35 years or [21:20] whatever, pretending [21:23] that this isn't the case. [21:25] Now, some people will say, "Well, you [21:26] know, but Lebanon can't control [21:27] Hezbollah. They're a victim of [21:29] Hezbollah." Okay, maybe that's true. [21:31] Let's take that seriously. [21:33] But [21:34] it doesn't matter. It's immaterial [21:35] because either way Israel's justified. [21:37] Let me explain. [21:39] Either Lebanon has the ability, or had [21:42] the ability at some point over the over [21:44] these years, [21:47] to disarm Hezbollah, and chose not to, [21:51] in which case Lebanon made a hostile [21:54] policy choice for 35 years, and in which [21:57] case Israel is entitled to respond. [21:59] Meaning, if they had the ability and [22:00] they didn't do it, [22:02] then Israel is totally entitled to [22:04] respond, and they bear responsibility. [22:07] On the other hand, maybe Lebanon didn't [22:09] have the ability to disarm Hezbollah, [22:10] which is probably true. [22:12] So, if they didn't have the ability to [22:14] disarm them, [22:16] in which case, that means that Lebanon [22:18] can't control its own territory, it [22:20] can't prevent attacks on Israel, [22:22] and Israel has every right to do what [22:23] Lebanon can't or won't do. [22:26] You can't claim the protections of [22:27] sovereignty, don't cross our borders, [22:29] don't strike our territory, [22:31] but you refuse the responsibilities of [22:33] sovereignty. [22:36] Right, which is controlling what's [22:37] launched from your territory to your [22:39] neighbor. [22:42] Right, if you have sovereignty that it [22:43] only protects the attacker and never [22:45] restrains them, that's not sovereignty. [22:46] It's just cover. Just cover for for [22:49] attacks. [22:51] Let me use a an analogy to express this [22:53] whole thing. I think this is a really [22:54] valuable analogy. [22:56] Imagine the following. Imagine that the [22:58] that the Mexican government [23:01] actually made a decision [23:04] as a government, as a legislature, they [23:05] voted on it. They made a decision [23:08] that the cartels [23:10] are exempt from any demand that they [23:12] disarm. [23:15] Meaning that they're we're fine with the [23:17] cartels having weapons. [23:19] And that they said that not only did [23:21] they say that they're that we now are [23:23] fine with the cartels controlling a [23:25] whole part of Mexico and having their [23:27] weapons. Not only are we okay with it, [23:29] but the reason that we're okay with it [23:31] is because we like the fact that they [23:34] are attacking the United States. That [23:36] their stated purpose of the cartels' [23:38] weapons is to attack the United States. [23:40] And therefore, and we hate the United [23:42] States, and therefore we are going to [23:45] sanction and give approval and and allow [23:49] make an exemption to the rule that [23:50] people shouldn't have big weapons. We're [23:52] going to say that no, the cartels can [23:53] have their weapons because [23:55] because they're attacking the US. And [23:58] then the cartels launch a cross-border [24:01] attack into Texas. [24:04] Would anyone argue that the US has no [24:06] right to respond to the cartels [24:08] attacking Texas? And would anyone argue [24:11] that Mexico has no responsibility under [24:13] those circumstances? [24:17] Would the argument of you're hurting [24:19] innocent Mexicans [24:21] Imagine if that charge was then levied [24:23] at the United States. [24:25] Mexico's innocent. You're hurting [24:26] Mexico. Would that carry the same weight [24:29] if we knew that the Mexican government [24:32] had actually voted [24:34] to keep the cartels armed because like [24:38] specifically to attack Americans? [24:41] Of course not. It's ridiculous. And if [24:43] the cartel leader stood up and said, [24:45] "What do you mean? [24:46] Possessing weapons is our legitimate [24:48] right." He'd be telling the truth under [24:50] his own government's law because that [24:51] truth implicates his government. It [24:53] doesn't protect his government. [24:56] And that's the situation with Lebanon [24:57] and Hezbollah, exactly. [25:00] Okay, [25:01] here, look at this Jerusalem Post story. [25:05] Look how absurd this is. [25:06] This is from when is this? Like [25:08] yesterday or 2 days ago? [25:10] UN Secretary-General Guterres proposes [25:13] new force to replace Lebanon's UNIFIL. [25:18] My gosh. [25:20] Okay, Israeli forces are finally doing [25:23] what 1701 [25:25] required [25:27] 20 years ago. [25:28] And the UN Secretary-General Guterres [25:30] wants to replace UNIFIL with a new UN [25:33] force, a rebranded version of the same [25:36] mission that failed. Right? Here's what [25:38] was Here's what was discovered when [25:40] Israel went into southern Lebanon, okay? [25:42] Hezbollah weapons depots, missile [25:44] stockpiles, tunnel networks, and you [25:47] know what? A lot of that was built right [25:49] near UN bases, right near UNIFIL bases. [25:52] They knew about it. The The UNIFIL bases [25:54] in many cases were could see [25:58] the Hezbollah infrastructure being [26:00] built. [26:01] The world knew about this. No one acted. [26:04] So that whole area between the Litani [26:08] and Israel's northern border, [26:10] that whole area became a Hezbollah [26:12] militarized zone, even though UNIFIL was [26:14] there. They did nothing. [26:18] Here, there's a quote in here from [26:20] from uh [26:23] from Israel's UN ambassador, Danny [26:25] Danon. It's a good quote. Let me pull it [26:27] up here. [26:31] Israel's ambassador to the UN, Danny [26:33] Danon, told the Jerusalem Post, "After [26:35] years of complete failure to implement [26:37] resolution 1701, [26:39] the UN is now proposing to replace one [26:42] failed force with another under a [26:45] different name. A clear decision was [26:47] made to end UNIFIL's mandate at the end [26:49] of the year, and there's no [26:51] justification for attempting to [26:52] circumvent it. [26:54] Those who failed to prevent Hezbollah's [26:56] rearmament for two decades will not [26:58] achieve different results simply by [27:00] wearing different uniforms and operating [27:02] under a new title, under a new name. [27:06] The whole thing is ridiculous. [27:10] Okay, let's bring this whole thing [27:11] together and end this video. [27:14] 35 years ago, under the Taif Accords, [27:17] Lebanon made a sovereign decision to [27:20] keep Hezbollah armed [27:23] specifically to attack Israel. They were [27:26] in favor of that. [27:28] And then 20 years ago, the UN passed [27:30] Resolution 1701 and promised the world [27:33] that it would fix that. [27:36] And the UNIFIL would prevent Hezbollah [27:38] from getting entrenched between the [27:39] Litani and the northern border, right? [27:41] And and the Lebanese army would be the [27:43] you know, would would be the only [27:45] uh armed group in Lebanon. We're going [27:47] to fix it. Neither Lebanon nor the UN [27:50] did anything. [27:52] And now the same UN Security Council [27:54] that ignored those failures for [27:57] 20 years [27:58] is meeting in an emergency session to [28:01] stop Israel from solving the problem [28:04] they created. [28:05] China invoked 1701 to demand Israeli [28:08] withdrawal, the same 1701 that China [28:10] never enforced for 20 years. France [28:12] calls Israel's response [28:13] disproportionate. [28:15] France helped helped write 1701 [28:18] and watched Lebanon violate it [28:20] immediately and every and forever since. [28:23] The UK says Hezbollah dragged Lebanon [28:25] into a war its people didn't want [28:29] while acknowledging that the Lebanese [28:31] government never disarmed Hezbollah as [28:33] they were required to do. And they're [28:34] all citing the same document, right? [28:36] They enforced They're trying to enforce [28:38] half of it, the half that that restrains [28:40] Israel. [28:43] But the half that would have restrained [28:44] Hezbollah [28:46] nah, we don't care about that. 20 years, [28:48] never brought it up. [28:50] Okay, this is ridiculous. [28:53] Israel's doing what the UN promised to [28:55] do in 2006, but never did. And the same [28:59] people who failed to keep that promise [29:01] are now meeting in an emergency session [29:04] to stop Israel from keeping it. Now, one [29:06] more thing. [29:08] The next time someone tells you that [29:09] Israel needs to comply with resolution [29:11] 1701, [29:12] just ask them which part of 1701. [29:16] Because there are two parts. [29:18] And the world has only ever demanded [29:19] compliance [29:21] with one of them. [29:22] I hope you found this video useful. I [29:24] hope you found it interesting. Please [29:27] drop a comment below. Let me know what [29:29] you thought. And if you found it [29:30] valuable, please share it with someone [29:32] else. Please tell someone else about it [29:34] cuz people are talking about this whole [29:35] Lebanon thing and they don't know what [29:36] they're talking about. [29:37] Um I I [29:38] And we need to just speak truth and be [29:40] very straightforward about what's [29:41] actually happening. Thank you. God [29:43] bless.
