Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
Lets cut to the chase here. In the collective opinion, of those on this thread, what should the IDF have done?
I think we rarely have a collective opinion I'll give it a shot, though.

From the perspective of Israeli national security interests, a very much shorter air campaign, with much less targeting of civilian infrastructure (power station, bridges, gas stations, etc.), and possible a few well-aimed heliborne raids in "rear" areas. Then stop, declare victory, and let it wind down the way it usually winds down.

Hizballah's original snatch-and-grab was something of an uncharacteristic political blunder, which generated little enthusiasm in Lebanon. Indeed, it was striking how much political capital the first few days of the war cost Hizballah, even in the Shi'ite community.

However, as things dragged on and the target set grew, Lebanese opinion shifted almost 180 degrees. The party was thus saved from the folly of its own mistakes by even bigger Israeli blunders (the scope and nature of the IDF response), as well as Hizballah's ability to ride out the punishment.



Complicating things further now--and this properly belongs in a different thread--there are indications that UN cartographic reexamination of the "blue line" (to which Israel withdrew in 2000) has found that Hizballah may have been right, and the Israeli-occupied Shaba Farms area really is Lebanese (and not Syrian) territory. Oops.

Let's say this is true. Under present political circumstances, I don't foresee Israel acknowledging this or offering a Shaba withdrawal for fear that it will look like a Hizballah victory. Yet it also means that Hizballah will remain political resistant to anything the IDF might throw at them.