Israel/Palestine

and is not intended to fall on the US or France, or any other party to the cease fire agreement.

Quoting from Articles 6 and 7 of the agreement:

All of the above is the responsibility of the government currently controlled by the allies of Iran, as I demonstrated earlier. All your criticisms and concerns specifically related to the worthlessness of attempts to enforce the cease fire agreement should be directed to this government, and should not be confused or conflated with the responsibilities of any other party to the agreement. The text of the agreement makes this point pellucidly clear and is not subject to conjecture or alternative interpretations. These commitments took effect on 4am, November 27, 2024, and are still in effect.

What you call "the supposed US/French "enforcement" aspect" of the agreement is, per the agreement, to take effect "Upon the commencement of the cessation of hostilities" and is intended to involve, as per Article 9 of the agreement, "Israel and Lebanon resolve, in co-ordination with Unifil, to reformulate and enhance the tripartite mechanism (hereinafter: “the Mechanism”). The reformulated and enhanced Mechanism, hosted by Unifil, chaired by the US, and including France, will monitor, verify, and assist in ensuring enforcement of these commitments".

Monitor, verify and assist. As you can see, all the talk of "enforcement" on the part of the US and France is entirely made up and, therefore, the ensuing criticism of any party other than the Lebanese government in enforcing the agreement makes up for one nice long indulgence in a Strawman fallacy.

When you say "Your supposed infiltration back into Southern Lebanon has nothing to do with an IDF attack on a Lebanese Army position in the far north of Lebanon", you are stating the obvious. Except for the "your supposed infiltration" part. I am not supposing the infiltration of Hezbollah into Southern Lebanon, it is a matter of fact. And, since it has nothing to do with the subject at hand, I only see one reason that you would bring it up: an attempt at deflection, and an excuse to rant about some individuals around the world. And, while you are at it, recall the word blast I previously quoted from the cease fire agreement which you apparently failed to consult before posting. Obviously, nowhere would you find me talking about the US having committed to an enforcement role because... well, consult the cease fire agreement for LEBANON's enforcement role, your feelings on the subject notwithstanding.

And you appear to be absolutely right in thinking that most Americans that heard about a "ceasefire" in Lebanon knew nothing of an apparent promise of putting the US on the hook for enforcing the agreement. No one who read the text of the agreement knew anything of it, for the obvious reasons stated above.

The question is how you got to know something that no one else knew about.