SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Keith Feral who wrote (191830)7/16/2006 11:37:23 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (2) of 281500
 
If Israel waited any longer, Iran would have become a bigger factor. The quick response was necessary to create the most amount of short term damage with the least amount of regional conflict or disruption of the balance of power. Iran never got a chance to issue ultimatums to Israel not to attack the Hezbelloh. They were forced to draw the line with Syria and say, "Now, if you attack Syria, we are going to blow you to pieces." Who the hell said anything about Syria in the first place?


Good points, Keith. Much as I would have liked to see Israel do some kind of deal with the government of Lebanon to disarm Hizbullah, one has to remember that Hizbullah is PART of the government of Lebanon, which means the diplomacy would have accomplished nothing but giving Hizbullah lots of warning and a chance to go to ground and prepare their Iranian backers.

Likewise I feel really bad seeing Israel bomb the airport and highways in Lebanon, knowing that most of the Lebanese hate Hizbullah. But what else can Israel do? How do you separate a "Lebanese" highway or airport from a "Hizbullah" highway or airport? It's not like the Lebanese army is prepared to cut off Hizbullah's access to any part of Lebanon.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext