Replies

Generally, I agree with the conclusions of this article. I think Israel still has time to recover from the mess Olmert has created. But it will take a new government in Israel and some missteps by Syria and Iran.

If Israel does not make the appropriate changes, the US needs to be prepared to accept millions of Israeli refugees as Israel depopulates over the next ten years.

If Olmert were removed and competent leadership put in place, the first rocket attack from Lebanon would be answered with an air and ground campaign that would sweep through Lebanon north to the Syrian border in a manner that emulated Sherman's march through Georgia.

Israel had a chance to kill two birds with one stone. Clean out the infection in Lebannon and end its transmission from Syria. The decision not to neutralize Syria was a bad one IMO. Israel cannot afford to look weak.

What was Israel's strategic objective in this war? The Media says it was "to destroy Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon." This was not a goal that could be attained by military means alone. As things sit now, Hezbollah will probably be in a postion to increase it's representation in the Lebanese government -- possibly taking control of the entire country.

Iran created Hezbollah, but it's line-of-communications stetches through Syria. Iran probably cannot be attacked decisively (by Israel) without resorting to nukes. Syria is another matter. Syria is the lynch-pin.

What the IDF should have done was continue the operation into Lebanon & force the Syrians to intervene, then thrust down from the Golan on Damascus, cutting off the Syrian forces attempting to intervene. With Syria defeated, Hezbollah dies on the vine.