You and I both know what kind of casualties a real "total war" would cause in the area. Is Israel really ready to take those kinds of casualties? Are they really ready to dish them out? I think that the evidence suggests that the answers are no. And if the Israeli public isn't willing to fight a real war, the hell do you think that the American public is going to sign on to even an occupation of Iran? Remember that I never said that a US occupation of Iraq was impossible, I said that the butcher bill would be too high and the US public would never agree to it. That's also the problem for Israel.
I don't see another choice, either Israel is willing to accept as many casualties as it takes, or they have to leave. Do you see another option that I don't, They may be bloodied by this adventure into lebanon, but the adventure simply proves that the war should not have been so picky. Fighting HIzbollah isn't possible, destroying Lebanon is. But I think the immediate war should be with Palestine, total no nonsense, kill as many palestinians as possible war. It will reduce overcrowding and perhaps settle things in palestine for a time. Then Syria should be next, a surprise attack that cripples their airports, and then slow but complete destruction of the entire infrastructure of the country, and then Lebanon, with the possibility of resupply from Iran cancelled first an air war, and this time demolish the ports, air strips and any way into the country and then a street by street hunt and kill campaign until every member they can find of Hizbollah is dead. |
