Replies

Heard Bibi Netanyahu a little earlier and it still sounds like he is in lockstep with the Olmert govt. which suggests to me, at least at this point, that the IDF is going to make things happen, maybe a little slower than we'd like to see, but still going to make it happen. When Bibi starts to sound a little frustrated with the pace of any Israeli military operations will signal the beginning of the end of Israels efforts to stop Hizbullah

I'm curious about that statement. Isn't Netanyahu the hardliner? And Olmert ... where is he?

Israel should be going for the long game, a solution to this decade long cancer NOT a drama queen headline breeding short term military blitz. It would be utterly stupid for Israel to prune back Hezbollah when it is in both their's, and the the NATO powers, interests to completely uproot Iran front group Hezbollah from the Mediterranean Littoral.

All the plans advanced by the Junk Media so far would accomplish is a lot of dead Jews for a short term "Quick fix". Hezbollah would simply bleed the Israelis while pulling back into sanctuary areas in Syria and northern Lebanon. Then when the Israelis could no longer stand the blood and treasure long term occupation was costing them, Hezbollah would simply flow back into the same positions they hold now. And 5 years from now the Israelis would face the same crises in Lebanon. Basically simply a replay of the 1982 war now in 2006.

Like the US in Iraq, Israel should go for a long term FIX that uproots Hezbollah and creates a viable Lebanese Govt that can police its own territory.

That maybe why the Israelis have indicated interested in a NATO force to do in Lebanon what it is currently doing in Afghanistan. Suppress the terrorist groups while the Lebanese build a viable nation state that can provide long term stability.

For Israel, and the West, that outcome would be a durable strategic victory in what will be a very long war

As I wrote in a post some hours ago my inerpretation of IDF's strategy (and I'm not an expert, at least no more than other armchair generals...) is that this time they are not going for land or other geographical objectives, this time they are going for bodies.

One advantage is that much of the fighting then will take place close to the Israeli border and consequently there will be less political pressure on Israel to accept a cease-fire.

The other advantage is that it seems like Hezbollah has amassed a lot of their best fighters in those fortified towns and villages close to the border. The advantage for Hezbollah is that they will be able to fight from prepared positions. The disadvantage is that they give up one of the large advantages of guerilla fighters - mobility.

If the IDF has decided, as I guess they have, to take this operation step by step then there is nothing for the terrorists to do but to fight and die or surrender.

Of course once upon a while they may be lucky - as they were in Jenin - but it appears that Nassrallah has sacrificd his front line troups - the "Ktyusha brigade" (I think that was an Israeli nick-name of those terrorists stationed in the villages close to the border.)

I guess the political disagreement will start once there will be requests from the IDF to continue their operation towards the Bekaa valley.

I heard that with Bibi also..

I wish some DEMS would have heard it...because he made the point that even though he belongs to the Likud party...that they are at war...and during war, they are one country, and parties always come together in one purpose.

But, John Kerry, today: "If I was POTUS, THIS would NOT have happened."

It sounds that you have read Stratfor ;-)