Posted on 08/14/2006 10:05:20 AM PDT by NormsRevenge
then they shouldn't have responded as they did - if they had no plans to fight to completion with hezbollah, their approach from the start should have been different.
we have a huge mess on our hands now. Israel has lost its first war. the US had to sit by, offering support for our proxy that would not fight, while Iran's proxy is still standing.
(Go Israel, Go! Slap 'Em Down Hezbullies.)
That's usually the motive for trying to get airpower to do the job of the ground troops. Unfortunately, I think all that's happened here is that Israel has left itself with another war to fight in a few years, one that will be even harder and bloodier.
Dood! It was a joke. :O>
"Do you think that Israel has been successful in accomplishing its goals in this conflict? "
Which goals? The goal at first was that 1559, which Israel agreed to would be enforced. That would be best for Israel and Lebanon. Best because Israel cannot destroy Hezbollah without trashing Lebanon, killing civilians, suffering tremendous causalities and incurring the wrath of more than half the world in the process. What Israel needed and wanted was a robust NATO force to keep Hezbollah away from them. That's the right goal and the best one. They tried like the devil to get that. They could not get that because nobody wants to fight Hezbollah. Not Israel's fault. Now Israel has 1701 and the entire international community had better come through because they know what will happen to Lebanon if they don't.
"Do you think that Israel has more, or less, of the world's nations on its side now vs. on 7/11?"
Right now less. Because in trying to win by air power, they killed too many civilians and trashed Lebanon. It was unavoidable but it brought the wrath of the world upon them. The world has forgotten that Israel begged for another force to keep Hezbollah under control.
"Do Israel and the IDF have more, or less, ability to deter conflict now vs. on 7/11? I look forward to your response."
Maybe Israel had insufficient deterrent capability before this battle or the results would not have been so mixed. And the results ARE MIXED. Why is our side declaring Hezbollah the winner? That is untrue and stupid!! Anyway take a look at Lebanon. The UN is bitching because it is trashed, if they don't want it to happen again let them figure out how to control Hezbollah. If they can't then Lebanon gets more of the same except the next time the IDF and Israeli government won't dither. So I am not going to whine.
'what Israel always really wanted was for the UN to enforce 1559"
I would not hold my breath waiting on the UN to enforce 1559.
They will be calling you blue boy.
The only thing deficient is Olmert's brain!!
Bring back Bibi!!
"If the Israeli's are really thinking like that, they're doomed . They better pack their bags and move to Nevada."
If they can get to Mexico, they're home free. 6 million more illegals in the US won't matter and I'd appreciate the convenience of eating at a Kohser Deli instead of all these Mex. restaurants.
That's the point!!!! When it is demonstrated without doubt that no international force or any one else for that matter can disarm Hezbollah for Israels' sake, that Lebanon is not serious about or capable of controlling Hezbollah, that Israel has done all it can to give peace a chance, that the UN is totally useless to prevent wars with stupid resolutions...then Israel, having learned from its mistakes and hopefully with new leadership can finish off Hezbollah and tell the world to stuff it.
"That's the point!!!! When it is demonstrated without doubt that no international force or any one else for that matter can disarm Hezbollah for Israels' sake, that Lebanon is not serious about or capable of controlling Hezbollah, that Israel has done all it can to give peace a chance, that the UN is totally useless to prevent wars with stupid resolutions...then Israel, having learned from its mistakes and hopefully with new leadership can finish off Hezbollah and tell the world to stuff it"
I agree. But the KEYWORD is a NEW ISRAEL LEADERSHIP
No person's character is flawless. However, there's a qualitative difference between what Reagan did and what Olmert did. Reagan was not in charge of the specific security decisions that led to the Marines being vulnerable - nor should he have been, since he had no expertise in the area and, as President, that type of thing has to be delegated. Taking responsibility in a situation like that is generally understood to mean that you will take the political heat for your subordinates, that you know your subordinates did their best in the circumstances, and that you as a leader aren't going to point fingers at everyone else. If Olmert had a similar situation occur, I wouldn't believe or state that he should resign.
However, Olmert was directly responsible for the big decision about going to war with Hezbollah (a good decision, IMHO), he made decisions limiting the IDF's initial response (stupid and naive, IMHO), he personally ordered the on-again-off-again vacillations of the last week (absurd and unbelievable), and he was directly in charge of deciding whether to accept the Security Council resolution which leaves Hezbollah armed and Israel's soldiers in captivity. On the last ground alone, he should resign because he utterly failed to accomplish the goals that he himself set forth at the beginning of the conflict.
Again, the difference is that Olmert had direct responsibility for policy screw-ups that cost over a hundred lives - for nothing, since no goal of the conflict was accomplished. Worse yet, the deterrent that Israel and the IDF had built up over decades is gone - and that will lead to a new war or wars in the future, whether Olmert is in office or not. Reagan didn't make a policy screw-up that got the Marines killed, he simply took the political heat for it.
I will say, however, that Reagan didn't act according to the character and principles that he had established for himself in the aftermath of the Marine bombing. He slipped - for whatever reason - and the US ran away with its tail between its legs. That and the similarly horrid decision by Clinton to leave in the aftermath of the Mogodishu firefight established a horrible precedent, namely that if you send a bunch of Americans home in body bags the cowardly American leaders will bring the troops home. We are paying for both of those decisions every day.
The thing is still playing out. One could probably arrive to a better judgment in, say, 6 mos-year.
I sincerely hope that you're right. Since I have no choice, I'll wait & see.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.