Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lenny2
No you're right, I should just let the madman kill me so the baby "might" live. (How safe is a baby in the arms of a madman with a gun?)
A cease-fire won't do any good at this point, not yet. All that would do is give Hezbollah time to be resupplied by Iran and Syria.
Once the Lebanese gov't agrees to police it's own citizens, namely Hezbollah, and a U.N. peacekeeping force is put into place to keep Hezbollah on their side of the border, then they can have a cease-fire.
If there were a cease fire now without these other things being in place, this thing would flare back up again in a very short period of time.
I don't like Bush and voted against him twice, however his SecState is right on the fucking money regarding this situation.
|
Like I said in the post you quoted, in some situations you have no choice. If the madman is likely to kill you otherwise, you have no choice. However, in this case, the madman is weak, limping, and although a threat, not a large one. There is no chance of Hezbollah defeating Israel, or even posing a serious threat to the continued existence of Israel.
During a cease-fire, negotiations with the UN could, and probably would, quickly lead to a peacekeeping force restraining Hezbollah's capacity to attack Israel. If that is the goal, a cease-fire would undoubtedly be the best strategy.
Meanwhile, these attacks on Lebanon completely destroy Lebanon's ability to get rid of the influence of Iran and Syria, and actually prevent Lebanon from disarming Hezbollah in the near future - something the majority of the Lebanese parliament does want.