Again, I think Israel could have done better. However, I think hindsight will show (is showing) that they did better against Hezbollah than was perceived right after the war. The UN troops there now will help keep Hezbollah in its box. Hopefully, the UN force won't (again) be both coopted and toothless over time.
On the other point, I am NO fan of Bush's resolve. I guess these things are relative however. Compared to the Dems (John Kerry comes to mind), Bush is a veritable Rock of Gibraltar. However, when compared to historical figures like Lincoln and Churchill, he comes up very short.
The problem is that Bush says one thing and often does another. He says your with or with the terrorists. Yet he had been funding the PA, which was obviously a terroist entity. He has also been playing footsie with the Saudis, who are arguably responsible for radicalizing the Muslim world. Ditto with Pakistan. In Iraq, where his resolve is supposedly "strongest", he put in enough troops not to lose, but not enough to win. He should have stabilized the country first, then built up the security forces. As a result of his decisions, we may never be able to put humpty dumpty back together again in Iraq.
Overall, I think his GWOT has been extraordinarily weak. Perhaps the most blatent example was after 9/11, when he urged people to "go shopping" rather than enlist. I understand he was trying to keep the economy afloat. However, I find it hard to believe we would have won WWII, if FDR had made a similar statement after Pearl Harbor.
I empathize with your animosity and distrust of the Saudi's, the PA, and Pakistan.
However, the myriad leaders of these countries are not comprised of one solid group of America-hating zealots, or on the other hand, one solid group of America loving friends.
Our dealings with them must reflect that fact.
For example, one segment of the large family of King Saud in Saudi Arabia IS in fact pro-Western and does much to help the US defeat terror.
There is also a faction of the Saud regime which covertly sides with the west-hating terrorists, and yes, gives large support to terror groups.
Ditto in Pakistan where Mushariff has been a great friend to the US. (Pakistani forces helped us capture Khalid Shiek Mohammad, or KSM as his evil butt is known.
Are we simply to abandon the friendly faction of Pakistan because there are groups in Pakistan which hate the US.
What if other countries in the world stopped dealing with the Bush Administration because of the Democrats, which have a totally different philosophy in world affairs.
Should Israel stop dealing with the US (Bush Admin) simply because there is a large faction of Jew-haters in the Democrat Party, or elsewhere.
Should Japan stop helping the US simply because the Clinton Administration (not to mention current Democrats) supported and befriended Kim Jong Il of North Korea.
Bottom Line: the relationships between two countries are a very delicate dance, and often revolves around the carrot and stick approach.
One cannot always paint a black and white picture.