In some ways, that question is ludicrous, although it's the ONLY question the radio guys discussed yesterday, from the locals through the nationals. Same-o the bloggers. Agenda, anyone?
By definition, a cease-fire is a compromise. Nobody "wins" a cease-fire, and nobody "loses."
Put another way, neither party is perfectly happy with the results.
Here's an assessment from a Middle East scholar, Juan Cole:
It was such a stupid war. It was thick-as-two-blocks-of-wood strategy on all sides. It was moronic for the Israelis to plan it out last year. It was idiotic for Hizbullah to cross over into Israel, kill soldiers, and take two captive. It was brain dead for the Israeli officer corps and politicians to think they could get anything positive out of bombing Lebanon back to the stone age and making a million people homeless. It was dim-witted for Hasan Nasrallah to threaten Israelis with releasing poison gases from Haifa chemical plants on them. It was obtuse for the Israelis to confront a dug-in guerrilla movement with green conventional troops marching in straight lines. It was dull of Hizbullah to fire thousands of katyushas into open fields where they mainly damaged wild grass. The few times when the rockets managed to kill someone, it was often an Arab Israeli civilian. Stupid.
Better question: which party was Stupid-er? Stupid-est?
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Post a Comment