Quote:
Originally posted by Gattigap
Not solely, no. I do think that Hezbollah in particular is special to Israel, though. They're camped out across the border, have dug more warrens than a pack of rabbits, and like tossing missles into Northern Israel.
That's unacceptable, of course, and Israel needs to do something, and I don't pretend to know what the optimal solution is. I do see, though, that the slogging is much tougher than Israel anticipated, and I suspect that another long term war and occuption, while maybe necessary here, is not at all what Israel had in mind.
Similar deal with Iraq. Declaring that organizations must be "destroyed" led us to the shit that we're in now in Iraq, and it leads us to the rationale where we have to invade and indefinitely occupy every potential terrorist threat on the planet.
|
What organization were we trying to destroy in Iraq?
Hezbollah as a military entity must be destroyed. Should Israel do this through a house-to-house war? No. The cost would be too high. And I don't think destroying Hezbollah as a military entity means killing every last soldier or blowing up every last tunnel (not that I wouldn't applaud that occurrence.)
But I do not see this as solely an Israeli problem or obligation. Security council resolution and all that.
Hamas is a terror organization. Hezbollah is an army. There is a very important difference.
