Let’s see what the cease-fire gives us. (Full text here.)

Do we get an international force in southern Lebanon with the ability to disarm Hezbullah? No.

Do we get the disarmament of Hezbullah? No. Of course, you can point to 1559, but in the last two years, Hezbullah has laughed at it, and their shills in Lebanon have said they will not disarm the “resistance.” The fact that Hezbullah is not a resistance movement seems moot.

Do we get the kidnapped Israeli soldiers back? No.

Here’s what we get: UNIFIL, without Chapter 7 rights, which are a bit foggy to me, except that I’m pretty sure they still can’t fire back at Hezbullah (if they wanted to; that’s a big if) will put 15,000 troops in southern Lebanon.

The Shebaa Farms issue is not part of the deal, which is a good thing and would have been an unbelievable victory for Hezbullah.

Israel reserves the right to respond if attacked. Now here’s where I found the best quote of the year.

Lebanon’s acting foreign minister, Tarek Mitri, suggested that his nation would accept the resolution though he said its call for a cessation of fighting could not be implemented. He criticized it for allowing Israel to continue some operations.

“A cease-fire that by its terms cannot be implemented is no cease-fire,” Mitri said. “A cease-fire that retains the right for one side the right not to cease firing is not a cease-fire.”

Look at it this way, Tarek. Israel managed to get the UN to do to the Arabs what the Arabs have been doing to Israel for decades. How does it feel, buddy? I think it’s great.

The UN, of course, is gaga over the agreement.

At the heart of the resolution are two elements: It seeks an immediate halt to the fighting and it spells out a series of steps that would lead to a permanent cease-fire and long-term solution.

That would be done by creating a new buffer zone in south Lebanon “free of any armed personnel, assets and weapons other than those of the government of Lebanon and UNIFIL” - the acronym of the U.N. force deployed in the region since 1978. The force now has 2,000 troops; the resolution would expand it to a maximum of 15,000.

South Lebanon had been under de facto control of Hezbollah, a Shiite militia, for several years until Israeli forces occupied parts of it after the start of the fighting last month. The political solution would include implementation of previous Security Council resolutions calling for Hezbollah’s disarmament.

And we can’t get through this without pointing out yet again the lies and biases of the wire services:

Diplomats at the U.N. said the adoption of the resolution must spur them to solve the wider conflict in the Middle East, particularly between Israel and the Palestinians. The Lebanon war has overshadowed the turmoil there, caused by the capture of an Israeli soldier on June 25.

You see? The war was caused by a single action—Israel’s response to an incident that the AP isn’t even honest enough to report the Israeli deaths that occurred during the cross-border invasion and kidnapping. The spin has spun.

On the other hand, Iran really hates the resolution. I might have to raise its grade to a D+ on that factor alone.

Iran said Saturday that the UN resolution aimed at ending the warfare between Israel and Lebanon’s Shiite Muslim Hizbullah group was biased and served only the interests of the Jewish state.

“UN resolution 1701 is completely one-sided and it serves the Zionist regime’s interests,” Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki was quoted as saying by state television.

Interesting. The morning was “quiet“—Ynet’s phrase that means “no rockets were fired on Israeli civilians”—and the afternoon heated things up. But not by a lot. Gee. The ground forces are stopping the rocket fire. Who’da thunk?