Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Profits of Doom
I don't think Lebanon was so much about the casualties as it was the fact that Israel had to walk on eggshells during this most recent conflict in Lebanon due to Hezbollah being so entrenched in civilian villages and using them as a human blockade/shield. Israel could've easily leveled most of Lebanon had it chosen to not be sensitive to civilian casualties...
|
But thats the point, they had to walk on eggshells. Deaths of their own soldiers were bad for publicity in Israel, and deaths of Lebanese civilians were bad for publicity internationally. The politicians had their military limit both, thus making Israels invasion of Lebanon in 2006 ineffective.
There's no doubt Israel could wreck some shit in a conventional war, but conventional wars are only fought between civilized countries and for the most part we've been too civilized to fight each other since WW2.
So, with the "could've" and "should'ves" a lot of shit can happen. Like if McArthur could've invaded China in the 40's and 50's like the US govt shouldve let him there might not be a north and south korea today, just a korea.
If the US military couldve had a few hundred thousand more troops at the right time in Vietnam and couldve entered bordering countries unhindered they couldve over run the north. (I dont know about holding it though.)
If the international community only couldve listened to Ho Chi Minhs pleas for help in removing the French from the only major colony they were allowed to retain following their massive defeat in ww2 there probably would not have been a war against communism in Vietnam in the first place, as there shouldve not been.
If the US govt sent more troops to Afganstan instead of crying for Nato to help out more only so they could send their own troops to Iraq, we couldve been a lot further along there.
Lots of couldves and shouldves but reality is how it is, and was.