"Ceasefire" or "hudna"?

The news that:

"Three years after Israel fought a bloody war in Lebanon against Hezbollah, there are fears that hostilities could erupt again — this time with the militant group better armed than ever.

According to Israeli, United Nations and Hezbollah officials, the Shia Muslim militia is stronger than it was in 2006 when it took on the Israeli army in a war that killed 1,191 Lebanese and 43 Israeli civilians.

Hezbollah has up to 40,000 rockets and is training its forces to use ground-to-ground missiles capable of hitting Tel Aviv, and anti-aircraft missiles that could challenge Israel’s dominance of the skies over Lebanon.

Brigadier-General Alon Friedman, the deputy head of the Israeli Northern Command, told The Times from his headquarters overlooking the Israeli-Lebanese border that the peace of the past three years could “explode at any minute”. "

does not surprise me. When will people learn that usually when an Islamic country or terrorist body agrees to a "ceasefire" they actually agree to a "hudna"? Ah but what is a "hudna"? It's a tactical ceasefire to allow the Islamic forces time to regroup and prepare to wage war again. Time after time, Israel and the eager fools in the Western media fall for the trick and time after time it's Israelis who will pay the price.

As I have said before I think Israel's days are numbered, not since 1967 has the Country looked more surrounded by enemies, and now it has no ally in the White House but rather someone keen to sacrifice Israel to his new friends in the "Muslim World".