"Has it occurred to you that there may be some quite significant strategic assets or objectives that the IAF is bombing there? "
Yes, it has. I simply don't see how the noble objective of ridding our planet of hizb'allah is achieved by destroying infrastructure in areas populated by Christians (who happen to detest hizb'allah).
Destroying a weapons cache or knocking out an enemy stronghold is one thing. Wrecking a series of bridges that serve a local population on the suspicion that they might be being used to transport arms is another, especially when the enemy will simply use other means to achieve the same end. The local population will be left with having to rebuild that which was destroyed.
"If you otherwise imagine the IAF indulges in joy bombings ala' the Islamofascists, you are wildly off track."
You must be confusing me with someone who works at the NY Slimes.
I support Israel and I think they were morally justified in responding to hizb'allah aggression. However, even the most honorable of nations acting in good faith can make strategic mistakes or be hamfisted in their approach.
There's a well-worn saw about war that I want you to ponder:
Amateurs study tactics. Professionals study logistics.
Think about how that might apply in this case. Take a close look at how small Lebanon really is. Examine the road network while doing so.
Oh, and regarding "hamfisted in their approach":
I recommend a study of the career of one General Curtis LeMay.
I happen to think he was pretty effective.
Get back to me on "hamfisted".