Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
If so, they still didn't need to come back to bomb the airport's fuel installations after they had already cratered the runway. Here's the NYT:
- The Israeli attack on the Beirut airport — the first such attack by Israel since 1982 — blasted craters into all three runways, but did not hit the main terminal. Israeli planes later attacked the fuel stores at the airport, setting at least one tank on fire and filling the night sky with flames. And early Friday, another air strike severed the main road between the airport and the capital.
That said, I am sympathetic with the rationale of closing the airport to keep Hezbollah from flying the two soldiers to Iran. I just don't see a need to do so much damage to Lebanon's infrastructure.
|
Nice dodge. You propose that, rather than bomb runways and fuel tanks, Israel should simply threaten to shoot down civilian and commercial airliners. (And then, presumably, if Iran or Syria decides to test the threat by sending a jetliner, purportedly loaded with food for the citizens in Lebanon and piloted by two willing martyrs .... Israel should shoot it down?)
I ask if you really think that making such a threat -- to kill civilians by the hundreds who fly on airplanes -- would be more palatable to world opinion, or to you personally.
And you respond that they didn't need to bomb the airport twice.
