by Damsi » Sun Aug 06, 2006 3:35 pm
miltiades
I believe the original plan was to go in and attempt to root out Hezbollah in what they thought would be a fairly quick operation. I also think that the Lebanese governement was prepared to go along with it up to a point as Hezbollah has been a thorn in their side on occasion and was controlling southern Lebanon. And the UN had asked them to do something about disarming them, a difficult move given the chance of another civil war among the Lebanese factions.
I believe Israel, which has ignored more UN resolutions than any country in history, became impatient altho the Lebanese govenrnment was in talks with them about the issue of disarming. In fact, if things had been left alone, the necessity of Hezbollah had somewhat diminished since they pushed Israel out of Lebanon six years ago.
I think no one anticipated the amount of resistance put up or the capabilities, organisation and the support Hezbollah had when this misadventure began.
The Israel campaign went too far, evidenced by a turnround in statements by Lebanese politicians. In the beginning they didnt say much but after the massacre in Qana - the second one in ten years - the cost became too high for Lebanon's government to tolerate it any longer and they told Condo-sleezza Rice to take a hike when she went to the region last week.
I think it was General Grivas who said some thing like "you don't send an elephant to catch a mouse. You send a cat." This is the essence of defeating guerilla warfare, if that is your real aim.
If that was not Israel's plan, and the whole point is all-out conflcit in the region by provoking Syria and Iran, then that's another story altogether. Only time will tell.
At the moment all the Israeli action is doing is increasing support for Hezbollah and turning many people in the west against Israel.