Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skybird
Okay, then show us that better way. We have the ability to learn so we could adapt. You just need to convince us. Do not expect us to simply believe this... or that... and hope... and pray... and wish for the better... any maybe... or not?... who knows... The dilemms I pose is real: fight Hezbollah and limit it, do not fight it and accept beeing assaulted by it again and again. that is their declared, admitted, propagated pollicy - and they do not hide it, and say it at every opportunity, and have given a multitude of evidence that they mean it exactly as they say it. So why do you know better than they do themselves what they want and what they are about?
|
Alright then, let's go back to when last year's new government was elected in Lebanon during the Cedar Revolution. The Lebanese had finally managed to kick the Syrians out of Lebanon - no small task - and the anti-Syrian bloc won a majority of seats in Parliment, which meant their pro-American leader would be PM. At the same time, Hezbollah still won 14 out of 128 seats in Parliment and there still lingered some remnants of support for Syria and likely some Syrian operatives within the country as well, having left very reluctantly and with their feet dragging the whole way.
The new government was fairly weak, after decades of civil war, assasination, terrorism, and occupation, and the Lebanese army terribly so. A weak central government can only do so much, to do more, like efffectively police its Southern border and reign in Hezbollah militants, it requires international help - but could the new, and still weak, PM ask for this help when he had no idea what was coming? Would any country at peace ask for foreign peacekeepers to patrol its border when it had just thrown the Syrian army out? No, but it was still possible for this to happen.
Unfortunately nobody, not Israel, not anyone suggested that the Lebanese needed help securing their border with Lebanon and offered assistance in doing so and in disarming Hezbollah. When the current crisis came, it was still possible, however.
Turning the clock back in Lebanon has not gotten Israel back its 2 captured soldiers, it has only killed several more and destabilized and brought massive destruction to a country that was on the right path but needed a hand to go the distance.
Thus, why could not Omert open dialogue either directly with the Lebanese PM or through proxies, dialogue that would get the soldiers back and a joint force of some kind, either joint Lebanese-Israeli or a more broadly international force, to begin disarming Hezbollah, patrolling the border, and ensuring that Hezbollah remained toothless. If necessary this could be backed up with coercion and threats, but the idea is to get a peacekeeping force in there while there is still a peace to keep.
3rd parties have no problem lending their troops to a just cause, like disarming a terrorist organization and maintaining peace, and it is much easier to do when there is already peace and a working infrastructure and government to coordinate with.
But Israel did not even try this approach. It saw one approach and one approach only, and not only has it not accomplished the stated goal of returning the captured soldiers, it has destabilized the country and made it prey once more to Syria and to radical militants. Moral issues aside, this is counter productive and totally self-defeating.