Lebanon, Again
The same ceasefire, the same enemy, the same betrayal.
Unfortunately, as predicted, the same pattern that followed the ‘unconditional surrender’ in Iran now seems to be actualising in Lebanon.
Just a week ago, I wrote, "Lebanon may become the immediate one if the same pressure for a ceasefire is now turned northward.” That is precisely what now seems to be happening.
After Hezbollah resumed missile fire, Israel expanded the war in southern Lebanon. It pushed in more deeply, caused widespread destruction, and gained meaningful ground. Once again, the language of appeasement resurfaces before completing the task.
But this is not new. We already had a ceasefire in Lebanon in November 2024. At this point, one almost loses track of the endless “temporary” arrangements Israel makes, the pauses, the understandings, the recycled promises of stability. They lead nowhere. Hezbollah remains, the threat remains, and the same war returns. At some point, repetition of failure stops being an error and becomes madness.
And the reason is simple. Hezbollah is not merely one enemy among others. Its entire purpose is the destruction of Israel. As long as it still has fighters, commanders, rockets, money, leadership, and political power inside Lebanon, the threat to Israeli life remains in place. That is why leaving Hezbollah standing is not some neutral compromise. It is a failure of the government. The first duty of any Israeli government is to protect the lives of its own citizens. If it knowingly leaves on its border an armed movement dedicated to Israel’s destruction, then it is not fulfilling its most basic job.
This is also why the whole theatre of “peace with Lebanon” is so absurd. Israel is being asked to make peace with a state that does not actually control the territory from which Israel is being attacked. The formal government in Beirut does not possess sovereign control over the south. It does not command the force that dominates that territory. Hezbollah does. And Hezbollah is not some fringe militia outside the system. It is deeply embedded in Lebanon, both militarily and politically.
This is not new. In my November 2024 essay on the previous Lebanon ceasefire, I wrote: “Such an agreement would leave Hezbollah intact.” I also wrote: “It’s either madness or treason.” Looking at this latest round, it is hard to say it more plainly now.
Since October 8, 2023, the northern front has already cost Israel at least 134 lives: 46 civilians and 88 soldiers. In the renewed Lebanon fighting of 2026 alone, at least 15 Israelis have already been killed: 13 soldiers and at least 2 civilians. And after all that blood, Hezbollah still stands.
There is something grotesque about this by now, and the grotesque part is not only Lebanon. It has become the pattern of the entire war since October 7th. Israel fights as though its survival is at stake, because it is, and then governs as though survival were negotiable. Soldiers are sent into hell, gains are made, blood is shed, and then just before the enemy is broken, the state loses its nerve and calls the interruption wisdom. This is no longer an isolated error. It is a recurring national obscenity: heroism at the front, surrender at the top.
And the mechanism is always the same. Territory is entered, infrastructure is destroyed, civilians are displaced, and then, before the enemy is annihilated, diplomacy arrives to rename incompletion as prudence. Bridges are destroyed, populations are pushed northward, then the crossings are repaired, civilians return, and the same threat begins to reconstitute itself. Destroy, pause, rebuild, return, repeat. At a certain point, the repetition becomes so grotesque that one begins to wonder whether the refusal to finish the war is no longer weakness, but policy.
There is no mystery here. We have seen it already. We are seeing it again. And if this is repeated knowingly, after all the previous rounds, then it is no longer merely an error.
It is madness.
It is a betrayal of the Israeli people.
And it will keep happening as long as these lunatics run Israel.
If you enjoyed Philosophy: I Need It, and want to see more, you can support my work by buying me a coffee. Every contribution makes a real difference. Thank you!
Reading this article was like the conversations my husband and I have. When we heard that there was a ceasefire between Israel and Lebanon, as soon as we heard 'Lebanon' we knew this was a farce. How did they negotiate with Lebanon, when its government is too afraid to deal with Hezbollah? You were so on point, it was scary. Israel has made so many errors over the many years it's been fighting its enemies and is still repeating those errors. When they had victory, they gave land back and sacrificed the security of those borders. Israel made it easier for their enemies to attack. Since October 7th, there have been multple fake ceasefires. Ceasefires are for the enemy's benefit. The IDF may get a short pause until rockets are fired and then it's back to fighting. We're of tired hearing about weapons destroyed, leaders assassinated, Hezbollah buildings blown up, and somehow Israel believes it's doing the job. Yet, Hezbollah emerges like a phoenix time and time again. Until the Israeli government sees itself as the strong fighter it really is, it will continue to 'mow the grass' giving its enemies time to plan future attacks.
NO, "it will keep happening" as long as Hezbollah and their criminals and terrorists continue to be financed from "secret" accounts at "Financial Places" in the "Free West" and their alleged allies, Switzerland, Liechtenstein, British Isles, Caribbean, Qatar, Singapur, Shenzhen a.m.o. - Guess why nobody in the "Free West" is talking about these "secrets", let alone taking any action against it.
Perhaps because the "mainstream" of the "Free West," the "critical left," is busy persecuting and criminalizing the legal economy, while screaming "Free Palestine", "-phobia!!!", "Discrminiation!!!" etc., and while the freedoms and rights of customers and citizens are being destroyed from ALL sides and handed over to chatbots, "contact forms" or "no-reply" addresses?