I have a feeling Israel may adopt a more ‘aggressive’ defense.

Hezbollah non consegnerą le proprie armi al governo libanese, ma si limiterą a non esibirle in pubblico. Se questo č il compromesso raggiunto tra il primo ministro Fuad Siniora e il leader dei terroristi, Hassan Nasrallah, ha probabilmente ragione Bi…

Or have you not noticed that UN resolutions apply to Israel, but not its enemies? Who’s doing a damn thing about disarming Hezbollah?

Nobody, that’s who – and that’s why Olmert is a dead man walking, politically…

The article has a link to this book, which I have not read, but might just to kill some time.

I do think that the situation has changed in that this brief conflict served as a interogative action. Hizbollah remains our enemy and we have had a chance to see how they would respond when threatened in Lebanon. IF, a second conflict were to arise our intel network is now vastly superior on where targetting should occur. They will likely follow the same strategy that has brought them so much success and change very little.

It is telling that the Israeli intel was simply dreadful. Their inability to specifically target the katushya sites, before they actually were used would suggest that their decision not to proceed was a wise one. Finding the katushya sites will likely be easier, now that a large amount of transportation logistics must be used to resupply the various sites. Limiting their means of receiving weapons, by the bombing of the bridges will make it that much easier to track the resupply effort.

This pause..and it is a pause, allows the Israelis to get their act together. Regardless of the actual size of the UN presense, Koffi is working under a plan of boots on the ground. If the situation deteriorates, again, he will have two choices-increase troops, or remove them.

It also will give the people of lebanon a chance to examine their relationship with Hezbollah. Yes they hate the Israelis and will love the people that kill them, but their desire for a peaceful existence will remain challenged so long as Hezbollah uses them in their war. While the conflict continued, the Lebanese would lose sight of the fact that while Hezbollah is active, their country is in jeapordy. This pause allows for that assessment.

The most dramatic change in Lebanon came not from Israeli intervention, but from the Syrian assasination of Hariri. While lebanese will continue to hate Israel, they cannot help but see themselves as pawns of Hizbollah actions. An Israel occupation is unthinkable for the Lebanese, but now they may perceive Hizbollah as the only occupying force left.

I am not sure Rice agreed to it, but I had the same response to the news. It seems that Olmert did not have the will to really go all in on Hezbollah. From what some commentators are saying (saw this on the RCP blog) the Israelis stunned the Americans in their lack of effort. Cannot blame Rice or Bush if they gave Olmert the opportunity and he backed away. As they say, you can lead a horse to water..

Cheers, AJStrata