I agree that there should be no distinction between terrorists and the countries that harbor them, but there should be a distinction between a country that HARBORS terrorists and one which has been insufficiently vigilent in rooting them out. It is Syria that armed Hezbolla (with a major assist from Iran) and Syria that is using Hezbolla as their proxies to exert de facto control over Southern Lebanon, in violation of the demand made by Lebanon, the US and the international community to leave Lebanon alone. Lebanon is not a terrorist state, and its people are not terrorist sympathizers, it is a country that has been torn apart by outside jihadists and forced under Syria’s boot for a generation, and that desparately wants to return to normalcy. I believe that it was this desire that deluded Lebanon to believe that they could live with the terrorists.

I understand Mark’s point — that Isreal’s goal is to force Lebanon to do what it has been reluctant to do so far (since disarming Hezbolla could spark a civil war), but I still believe a strike directly on Syria, if effective, could have accompished the same goal, as it would have distracted Syria and given the Lebanese people the opportunity to do what they already wanted to do.