The Middle East Continues...

[SlowwHand]

Ditto.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
While Israel is ofcourse a "great and mighty" country ;-) the Hezbullah threat has infact been very effective.

It has caused up to 500,000 people to flee south, and the rest 500,000 were locked in bomb shelters. It has for a month, effectively devastated normal life and commerce north of Hadera.

That Hizbullah fired rockets into Israel for a month is based more on the tactical failures of the IDF. And lets be honest, that 500,000 fled and the rest stayed in shelters was done to minimize civilian casualties, which is a laudable goal. That said, countless societies have survived and carried on daily life under far worse. The residents of Sarajevo went on for years under a far more intensive attack and kept on living. Far mroe of them died than people in Northern Israel, and I am sure if the people of Saravejo had had the ability to leave, many would have done so. That said, the threat posed by hizbullah was still not existential under any stretch of the imagination.

This is a much more "existential" threat than a full blown short war with Syria, becase it is much more devastating to the economical, social and political structures in Israel.

That is not the meaning of existential threat. As noted above, countless societies and regimes have survived FAR worse. A full blown war with Syria is FAR more dangerous because Syria has vastly greater destructive abilities than Hizbullah. Far more Israelis would die and the damage would be greater in a real war with Syria.

Terrorism is much more effective than war. It is widely known in the middle east and has been directing Palestinian, Syrian and Iranian politics for decades now.

Not really. AQ still hasn't overthrown a single Arab regime. It worked for Hizbullah because the occupying powers were not willing to bear the long term cost of their occupations in the face of the cost. Sadly, it took violence for the Palestinians to get noticed, but most Palestinian gains took place prior to the current wave of terrorism. BUt it has as of yet led to no real basic political change in the region's many ills.

Not true.

You throw around the word "flattening villages" too lightly.

Many villages have many buildings destroyed which were tied or suspected of having been tied to the war. Any building which is a suspected military target can and should be targetted.

When 90% of structures in a village are destroyed or damaged, that is flattened.

Give me a break. Israel destroyed more housing units than Hizbullah had katushas. The report I posted more than adequately tackles that"claim".
.

As far as infrastructure targetted - Israel has only targetted relevant military use infrastructure such as roads, bridges and airports . No electricity, water or industry targets were hit that I know of.

Then you did not read the Amnesty Report, which documents attacks against the eletric grid, and water pumping stations, as well as supermarkets, factories, and gas stations.

[Sirotnikov]

GePap there's a huge difference between "keeping on living" and keeping a healthy national posture.

Sure, a war with Syria will claim 100 times more lives.

However it will end soon, and with a rather clear result (either side). This will not hurt the national posture as much as terrorism, because it is a "rational" thing.

Terrorism is much more difficult to handle with, from a psychological perspective, than war. Everyone knows what a war is, and what to expect. Terrorism is different. It hunts and threatens civilians, it comes from unexpected angles and it is ongoing with no clear victory. It also creates ethical and moral conflicts much more than a war situation.

Not really. AQ still hasn't overthrown a single Arab regime. It worked for Hizbullah because the occupying powers were not willing to bear the long term cost of their occupations in the face of the cost. Sadly, it took violence for the Palestinians to get noticed, but most Palestinian gains took place prior to the current wave of terrorism. BUt it has as of yet led to no real basic political change in the region's many ills.

AQ is the first entity in 50 years that has challenged American power on American soil and succeeded too.

AQ is the reason for a new government dept., for a different "World order", for different transportation rules, for different police work around the US.

Tell me, which conventional war (since WWII) has come close to that. AQ is treated with the same amount of "respect" and "fear" like the USSR in its time.

AQ psychological effect has been to arouse autonomous muslim groups around the world, especially in western countries, to set up hundreds of sympathizer cells. Most - with no actual links or backing to AQ itself. Has the KGB been succesfull in doing that between 1945-1991?

The only reason AQ or the Hamas have gotten 0 results so far, is the stern reaction from the US and Israel respectively.

So far AQ threats against Europe kind of succeeded, and European countries have minimized their presense in Iraq due to that. Thereby, only creating a safer environment for AQ to develop in Iraq, with less forces operating there.

When 90% of structures in a village are destroyed or damaged, that is flattened.

Give me a break. Israel destroyed more housing units than Hizbullah had katushas. The report I posted more than adequately tackles that"claim".

I'd be bothered to reply to actual claims made by the report, though I won't say I'll be in a position to disclose any information beyond what is published in the media.

I was not "out of the loop" during the war, and I am not aware of the huge amount of carnage you speak about.

I've yet to hear about a village so destroyed that it has been abandoned, or that 90% of its buildings were hit. (excluding the possibility of 5 houses constituting a village )

Then you did not read the Amnesty Report, which documents attacks against the eletric grid, and water pumping stations, as well as supermarkets, factories, and gas stations.

I am not aware of intentional attacks on such targets.

If you bring me examples I can bother to dig up what I know. I can't promise I'll be able to respond though.

Gas supplies are a different area, since they are related to transportation ability which is a military function and therefore can be considered a legitimate target.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

Ouch.

I'm hurt.

I hit the spot so much that you had to employ not one but 2 different evasion tactics!!

1. You insult me trying to provoke a response.

2. You throw in a strawman, that has nothing to do with what I said.

Ahh the arrogance of the Israeli military trying to propagandise defeat into victory...

In general : the soldier's protest has nothing to do with your pathetic plights or opinions.

I'm not the one in any plight...

None of the protesting soldiers have so far expressed an opnion similar to yours. Quite clear since none of them justify terrorist methods or hate Israel.

Their protests is about poor handling of the war - as in "not being harsh enough" or not being well enough prepared for the fight.

Indeed, they are pissed that they lost the war and want those responsible to pay for their incompetence.

As for my specific opinion:

a) I think the army was not always prepared as well as it should have been, given what was known.

b) There were mistakes and errors during the handling of the war, on tactical and strategical levels. Many of them methodic and systematic in army routine. Some are the blame of several personas.

c) Some of the errors might have been the fault of the top echelons - the government and the high command.

As a serving officer I shouldn't really judge or publicly criticise the political echelons (or the chief of staff).

Tell us something we don't know Einstein... Oh wait "As a serving officer I am too much of a ***** to say what I really think..."

I already speak my mind here more than I should on many occassions.

I think that the servicemen are right to feel what they do, and that their protest is legitimate and important for Israeli democracy and Israeli future.

Indeed, Israel lost the war and they're pissed off.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
No electricity, water or industry targets were hit that I know of.

Then you are either lying through your teeth or wholly ignorant of the actions of your own army...

Aren't you supposed to be in 'Military Intelligence' or something...?

Most apt oxymoron ever!

[MOBIUS]

Cluster Bombs Don't Recognise Ceasefires!

Hey Terrorist-Apologist boy, what do you think of this...?

UN denounces Israel cluster bombs

Abbas Yussef Abbas, 6, in hospital after cluster bomb exploded in Nabatiyeh 30 August
Cluster bombs are causing injuries and deaths daily, the UN says
The UN's humanitarian chief has accused Israel of "completely immoral" use of cluster bombs in Lebanon.

UN clearance experts had so far found 100,000 unexploded cluster bomblets at 359 separate sites, Jan Egeland said.

Israel has repeated its previous insistence that munitions it uses in conflict comply with international law.

Earlier, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rebuffed UN chief Kofi Annan's calls for a swift end to Israel's air and sea blockade of Lebanon.

After talks with Mr Annan, Mr Olmert said the siege would only be lifted once the ceasefire terms were fully implemented.

This included the release of two Israeli soldiers whose capture by Hezbollah militants sparked the conflict.

But a Lebanese Hezbollah cabinet minister said there would be no unconditional release of the soldiers - the pair would only be freed as a result of a prisoner exchange with Israel.

UN efforts to rid Lebanon of cluster bombs have been under way since the conflict ended. Earlier estimates from UN experts had suggested a total of about 100 cluster bomb sites.

Mr Egeland described the fresh statistics as "shocking new information".

"What's shocking and completely immoral is: 90% of the cluster bomb strikes occurred in the last 72 hours of the conflict, when we knew there would be a resolution," he said.

The UN ceasefire resolution which ended the month-long conflict between Israel and Hezbollah was agreed by the Security Council on Friday, 11 August, and came into effect on Monday, 14 August.


Cluster bomblet

Factfile: Cluster bombs http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/2788569.stm

Cluster bomb clean-up fears http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/5263616.stm

Mr Egeland added: "Cluster bombs have affected large areas - lots of homes, lots of farmland. They will be with us for many months, possibly years.

"Every day, people are maimed, wounded and killed by these weapons. It shouldn't have happened."

Mr Egeland said his information had come from the UN Mine Action Co-ordination Centre, which had undertaken assessments of nearly 85% of the bombed areas in Lebanon.

Earlier this week the US state department launched an inquiry into whether Israel misused US-made cluster bombs in Lebanon during the conflict.

A senior White House official told the BBC that the investigation would focus on whether US-made weapons were used against non-military targets.

Blockade defended

At their talks in Jerusalem, Mr Annan and Mr Olmert discussed the deployment of UN troops in Lebanon as well as the continuing blockade.

The UN chief said he hoped Israel would withdraw from southern Lebanon once 5,000 UN peacekeepers were on the ground "in the coming days and weeks".

The BBC's Jill McGivering, in Jerusalem, said Mr Annan and Mr Olmert emerged from their meeting with little sign of the gap between them having narrowed.

Mr Annan's Jerusalem talks followed a visit to Lebanon as part of a regional tour aimed at bolstering the truce between Israel and Hezbollah.

After his talks in Israel, Mr Annan flew to the West Bank for talks with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

At a joint press conference in Ramallah, Mr Annan said that more than 200 Palestinians had been killed since the end of June, and the violence had to stop.

Mr Annan has now arrived in Jordan for talks with King Abdullah II, after which he is expected to proceed to Syria.

So, what's your little spin on this one then Siro?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov
GePap there's a huge difference between "keeping on living" and keeping a healthy national posture.

Sure, a war with Syria will claim 100 times more lives.

However it will end soon, and with a rather clear result (either side). This will not hurt the national posture as much as terrorism, because it is a "rational" thing.

Terrorism is much more difficult to handle with, from a psychological perspective, than war. Everyone knows what a war is, and what to expect. Terrorism is different. It hunts and threatens civilians, it comes from unexpected angles and it is ongoing with no clear victory. It also creates ethical and moral conflicts much more than a war situation.

And none of that has to do with the notion of existential threats. A bad life is still life. It might be more miserable than death, but life it remains.

As for the notion that it is more diffciult to handle than war, hardly. Maybe more difficult to handle than an interstate war, but certainly not worse than civil war, or anarchy. And if it is moraly and ethically taxing, well, that is the price to bear for the political roots of terrorism and the murky and ethical morass that gives birth to most of it. And that ethical morass can't be solved militarily.

AQ is the first entity in 50 years that has challenged American power on American soil and succeeded too.

American power was not challenged for a second. America's "sense of security" was shattered yes, but that sense of security was a great lie built on the notion that security comes solely out of the number of bombers you have, and not out of having a politically positive situation.

AQ is the reason for a new government dept., for a different "World order", for different transportation rules, for different police work around the US.

Those new US rules are simply the US catching up to what states like Israel, or the UK and France have had for decades. As for Homeland Security, that is just beurocratic idiocy created by folks trying to show they were doing something, as opposed to actually doing anything.

Tell me, which conventional war (since WWII) has come close to that. AQ is treated with the same amount of "respect" and "fear" like the USSR in its time.

I would argue strongly that we are no where near the paranoia of the Cold War, and with good reason, since AQ is not the same kind of threat the Soviet Union was. That AQ is the "big threat" has more to do with the fact that we live in an unbalanced world system of US hegemony and the fact that AQ seeks to destory that world, as weakly as they have done, still creates more consternation than some real power working to slowly undermine the system while working in it.

AQ psychological effect has been to arouse autonomous muslim groups around the world, especially in western countries, to set up hundreds of sympathizer cells. Most - with no actual links or backing to AQ itself. Has the KGB been succesfull in doing that between 1945-1991?

The KGB had no interest in doing such a thing, as it was a centralized government agency. You can;t compare centralized government bureaucracies to NGO's. They fucntion in distinctly different ways.

The only reason AQ or the Hamas have gotten 0 results so far, is the stern reaction from the US and Israel respectively.

Please. Egypt and KSA have both been FAR MORE "stern", and that utter failure of Islamist to actually topple these guys is what lead them to failed states. AQ has far greater operational freedom in Iraq than it does in KSA or Egypt, and Hamas has not been able to make Israel change any policies, but politically they have done rather well.

So far AQ threats against Europe kind of succeeded, and European countries have minimized their presense in Iraq due to that. Thereby, only creating a safer environment for AQ to develop in Iraq, with less forces operating there.

That canard. All war is political, and the European voter, correctly, did not want to invade Iraq. Kudos to them for not allowing their government to conitnue in that boondoggle. I see no reason why any sane Democratic state would expend their treasury and lives to help maintain the failing startegies of even an ally.

I'd be bothered to reply to actual claims made by the report, though I won't say I'll be in a position to disclose any information beyond what is published in the media.

I was not "out of the loop" during the war, and I am not aware of the huge amount of carnage you speak about.

I've yet to hear about a village so destroyed that it has been abandoned, or that 90% of its buildings were hit. (excluding the possibility of 5 houses constituting a village )

Sorry Siro, but as an investigator, all I can say is, let the facts speak. A bombed out water pump is just that, and it disproves any claim you make that water facilities were not targetted. Never new you were actually Halutz. How did the stock sale go?

I am not aware of intentional attacks on such targets.

If you bring me examples I can bother to dig up what I know. I can't promise I'll be able to respond though.

Gas supplies are a different area, since they are related to transportation ability which is a military function and therefore can be considered a legitimate target.

Sorry Siro, but NO, transporation is NOT a legitimatre target merely by being. NOthing is, except purely military targets. ANYTHING of dual use can only be struck if you can point to a real military threat, or that it is being actively used in a military manner. Otherwise, it is NOT a valid target.

[GePap]

Another piece by Amir Hass:

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/756413.html

Can you really not see?
By Amira Hass

Let us leave aside those Israelis whose ideology supports the dispossession of the Palestinian people because "God chose us." Leave aside the judges who whitewash every military policy of killing and destruction. Leave aside the military commanders who knowingly jail an entire nation in pens surrounded by walls, fortified observation towers, machine guns, barbed wire and blinding projectors. Leave aside the ministers. All of these are not counted among the collaborators. These are the architects, the planners, the designers, the executioners.

But there are others. Historians and mathematicians, senior editors, media stars, psychologists and family doctors, lawyers who do not support Gush Emunim and Kadima, teachers and educators, lovers of hiking trails and sing-alongs, high-tech wizards. Where are you? And what about you, researchers of Nazism, the Holocaust and Soviet gulags? Could you all be in favor of systematic discriminating laws? Laws stating that the Arabs of the Galilee will not even be compensated for the damages of the war by the same sums their Jewish neighbors are entitled to (Aryeh Dayan, Haaretz , August 21).

Could it be that you are all in favor of a racist Citizenship Law that forbids an Israeli Arab from living with his family in his own home? That you side with further expropriation of lands and the demolishing of additional orchards, for another settler neighborhood and another exclusively Jewish road? That you all back the shelling and missile fire killing the old and the young in the Gaza Strip?

Advertisement

Could it be that you all agree that a third of the West Bank (the Jordan Valley) should be off limits to Palestinians? That you all side with an Israeli policy that prevents tens of thousands of Palestinians who have obtained foreign citizenship from returning to their families in the occupied territories?

Could your mind really be so washed with the security excuse, used to forbid Gaza students from studying occupational therapy at Bethlehem and medicine at Abu Dis, and preventing sick people from Rafah from receiving medical treatment in Ramallah? Will also you find it easy to hide behind the explanation "we had no idea": we had no idea that the discrimination practiced in the distribution of water - which is solely controlled by Israel - leaves thousands of Palestinian households without water during the hot summer months; we had no idea that when the IDF blocks the entrance to villages, it also blocks their access to springs or water tanks.

But it cannot be that you don't see the iron gates along route 344 in the West Bank, blocking access to it from the Palestinian villages it passes by. It cannot be that you support preventing the access of thousands of farmers to their land and plantations, that you support the quarantine on Gaza which prevents the entry of medicine for hospitals, the disruption of electricity and water supply to 1.4 million human beings, closing their only outlet to the world for months.

Could it be that you do not know what is happening 15 minutes from your faculties and offices? Is it plausible that you support the system in which Hebrew soldiers, at checkpoints in the heart of the West Bank, are letting tens of thousands of people wait everyday for hours upon hours under the blazing sun, while selecting: residents of Nablus and Tul Karm are not allowed through, 35-year-olds and under - yallah, back to Jenin, residents of the Salem village are not even allowed to be here, a sick woman who skipped the line must learn a lesson and will be purposefully detained for hours. Machsom Watch's site is available for all; in it are countless such testimonies and worse, a day by day routine. But it cannot be that those who are appalled over every swastika painted on a Jewish grave in France and over every anti-Semitic headline in a Spanish local newspaper will not know how to reach this information, and will not be appalled and outraged.

As Jews we all enjoy the privilege Israel gives us, what makes us all collaborators. The question is what does every one of us do in an active and direct daily manner to minimize cooperation with a dispossessing, suppressing regime that never has its fill. Signing a petition and tutting will not do. Israel is a democracy for its Jews. We are not in danger of our lives, we will not be jailed in concentration camps, our livelihood will not be damaged and recreation in the countryside or abroad will not be denied to us. Therefore, the burden of collaboration and direct responsibility is immeasurably heavy.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by BlackCat
Nah, I don't ignore your pov's - actually I start smiling when I see that you have responded in a thread - I know that I probably are laughing highly after reading

Glad to be of service. Entertainment and education, what more could you ask for from a post!

Guess you kept a low profile - none of the mentioned regions are in flames Did you go to Barcelona ? I've had the pleasure to visit it a bit outside tourist season and I liked it.

Consider it a reconnaissance...

Been to Barca before, Gaudi is

My 'visit' to Spain this time was mainly to see the curious territorial anomaly of Llivia in the Pyrenees where a small enclave of Spanish land is entirely surrounded by France - those crafty Spanish tricked the French into keeping it during the Treaty of the Pyrenees...

I was doing the Cathar 'tour' of Catholic religious murder (yet another reason why religion sucks big hairy monkey balls!) and it and the solar furnace at Odeillo (and dinner and cheap booze/petrol in Andorra) were a convenient detour on the way back to where we were staying.

[Edan]

"With a victory like this, who needs defeat?" concluded an article by Lebanese publicist Husam Itani in Al Saffir, a pro-Syrian Lebanese daily that can hardly be dubbed "anti-Hizbullah."

link

[Sirotnikov]

Hey Terrorist-Apologist boy, what do you think of this...?

Tell us something we don't know Einstein... Oh wait "As a serving officer I am too much of a ***** to say what I really think..."

Then you are either lying through your teeth or wholly ignorant of the actions of your own army...

Aren't you supposed to be in 'Military Intelligence' or something...?

Most apt oxymoron ever!

Can't imagine what's it like to be so insecure that you feel the need to try and prove your worthiness by insulting other people. Explains your need to spell your nickname with all caps. That's got to be compensating for lots of insecurity.

However, to quote Ming - "discuss the topic, not the posters".

So you're welcome to come with a list to counter my apparent lack of knowledge, smart ass.


And I expect a salute when you address an officer
The last I recall your current rank is... nobody

[Sirotnikov]

Originally posted by GePap
And none of that has to do with the notion of existential threats. A bad life is still life. It might be more miserable than death, but life it remains.

Again you fail to see the difference between an existential threat for a person or a group of persons - and an existential threat for a "state".

A total war is an existential threat for individuals, however the community as a whole, can infact be strengthened by it.

A lagging war with terrorism is an exsitential threat for a state / community, since it is a draining and unhopeful task.

As for the notion that it is more diffciult to handle than war, hardly. Maybe more difficult to handle than an interstate war, but certainly not worse than civil war, or anarchy.

Depends what do you consider worse - more dead people - or a weakened society with loosened social bonds.

And if it is moraly and ethically taxing, well, that is the price to bear for the political roots of terrorism and the murky and ethical morass that gives birth to most of it. And that ethical morass can't be solved militarily.

Every time you have to target potencially civilian areas is morally and ethically tasking. It has nothing to do with the political roots of the problem. Rather with the choise of weapon - a terrorist campaign, whose perpetrators hid amongst innocent civilians.

Its very easy to make a choise of whether to send a missile to kill some f***er or not, when he doesn't threaten your life. To you it is obviously wrong.

I have to deal with two possible outcomes - dead f***er + possibly civilian casualties. Or - dead Israelis due to a terrorist attack.

American power was not challenged for a second. America's "sense of security" was shattered yes, but that sense of security was a great lie built on the notion that security comes solely out of the number of bombers you have, and not out of having a politically positive situation.

What good is american power with no sense of security?
What good is american power when it can be shattered by 18 guys with razorcutters?

[insert random LOLs at thinking 9/11 was caused by a negative political situation].

Those new US rules are simply the US catching up to what states like Israel, or the UK and France have had for decades. As for Homeland Security, that is just beurocratic idiocy created by folks trying to show they were doing something, as opposed to actually doing anything.

You're missing the grand point.

The fact that the huge super-power - the United States of America - had to change its ways due to 18 guys, and some people hidden away in a cave.

Terrorism is a very effective threat and a potent weapon.

It changes a targetted society, much more than any single war. Especially because it is not "contained" or limited.

I would argue strongly that we are no where near the paranoia of the Cold War, and with good reason, since AQ is not the same kind of threat the Soviet Union was.

Agree - the USSR was after all governed by (drunken and power hungry, yet) reasonable people, who wanted to avoid total annihilation of society.

Fundamentalist fascist Islamic leaders would only like the "War to end all wars" to begin, because they are convinced they will win. And if not - they still go to heaven.

Win-win situation.

That AQ is the "big threat" has more to do with the fact that we live in an unbalanced world system of US hegemony and the fact that AQ seeks to destory that world, as weakly as they have done, still creates more consternation than some real power working to slowly undermine the system while working in it.

AQ would still be a big threat had it arose earlier.

An AQ attack on the US that would not have been promoted by the USSR, would have likely pushed the two "sane" nations together, and the USSR would have been less of a threat.

The KGB had no interest in doing such a thing, as it was a centralized government agency. You can;t compare centralized government bureaucracies to NGO's. They fucntion in distinctly different ways.

I don't compare its structure, I compare the magnitude of their effect, as a measure of strength.

AQ has changed the inner and foreign policy agenda for dozens of huge powerful countries.

AQ has sparked a self proclaimed Islamic world revolution, much more succesfully than the Marxist movement.

It is a very strong phenomena. You can say that by observing its effects on the whole western world, and its effect on world wide population of muslims.

Denying the magnitude of the effect is ridiculous.


[q]Please. Egypt and KSA have both been FAR MORE "stern", and that utter failure of Islamist to actually topple these guys is what lead them to failed states. AQ has far greater operational freedom in Iraq than it does in KSA or Egypt, and Hamas has not been able to make Israel change any policies, but politically they have done rather well.[q]
Egypt hadn't been far more stern, but rater just as stern.

I was planning to answer your points, but I don't realize what the heck does it have to do with mine.

That canard. All war is political, and the European voter, correctly, did not want to invade Iraq. Kudos to them for not allowing their government to conitnue in that boondoggle. I see no reason why any sane Democratic state would expend their treasury and lives to help maintain the failing startegies of even an ally.

Correction - European governments wanted to help bring a law and order to Iraq, and were spooked out by a bunch of AK-47 baring fanatics and fears of terrorist attacks on their soil.

You over estimate the effect of public will on government decision.

Sorry Siro, but as an investigator, all I can say is, let the facts speak. A bombed out water pump is just that, and it disproves any claim you make that water facilities were not targetted. Never new you were actually Halutz. How did the stock sale go?

The stock sale went reasonably well

I wasn't aware you're an investigator. That's an interesting proclamnation.

You're correct - we did damage a water pump to Beirut one time.

Still, generally there were no electric or water outages in Beirut.

I'm not claiming to know everything. But had an effort to intentionally target civilian infrastructure had been taken, I would have probably heard about it

Sorry Siro, but NO, transporation is NOT a legitimatre target merely by being. NOthing is, except purely military targets. ANYTHING of dual use can only be struck if you can point to a real military threat, or that it is being actively used in a military manner. Otherwise, it is NOT a valid target.

I appologize there.
I was sure you had a clue in military tactics and studies.

Apparently you seem to think that operating a military against an enemy is similar to operating a police against felons, where you would wait for a positive incrimination and amounting evidence for each target. Then you have to weigh those evidence against.... blah blah...

Bull****. If you wait for an enemy to use its double use resources then its too damn late.

You attack the transportation assests of an enemy before he uses them, as prevention - you force him to use poor roads or have no transportation at all.

Attacking the roads after the use would be "punishing" the roads, which has no real value.

Prevention is only good if you do it in advance.

The bombed transportation targets functioned to make it more difficult for Hezbullah to transport the captured soldiers, or for fresh missile supplies to arrive.

[dannubis]

So what about the suspiciously timed use of all those cluster bombs siro ?

What could possibly be the tactical or strategic advantage of that ? Except of course making sure that no lebanese would be in the possibility to return to his home after the fighting has stopped.

[TCO]

If Israel captures Hexb leaders, they should hang them. This will be a very decisive act and will have the added benefit of bothering the Euro sideshow moralists.

[dannubis]

ah... it surfaces again...