Israeli leaders 'rushed to war'

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Half-baked political/military decisions are clearly not exclusive to the US. Recognising that fact however...

The one thing worse than that would be near-complete REACTIVE pol/mil indecision, of which very few examples:

• Neville Chamberlain prior to 1939-08-31
  
• Nehru in 1962 (earlier possibilities, but this one definite)
  
• Carter in 1980
  
• many would add France, post-1815, so I'll include it
  

Chamberlain for one is very controversial. Aside from a highly successful programme of domestic policy his record is largely written off for "appeasing" hitler. Few however seem to take into account the economic/political challenges of the time - specifically whether Britain was really economically capable of fighting a war after its economy was driven almost to bankruptcy by WW1 and the crippling debts it owed to the United States as a result.

Parallels to todays world are somewhat iffy - considering that its really the luxury of the rich and powerful to fight wars for dubious reasons, which they hide behind equally dubious, typically nationalistic rhetoric.

[Ban Hammer 13,622]

Please stop emboldening the terrorists...

I'm afraid Israel already did that -- by failing to crush Hezbollah, stop rockets from being fired

at Israel, or rescue its kidnapped soldiers.

Justifications aside, I think a lot can be learned from badly planned "military adventuring". 4 years after the end of "major hostilities" in Iraq...

ah so that's the primary reason for this thread, another bush bashing session

Half-baked political/military decisions are clearly not exclusive to the US. Recognising that fact however...

It's good to know that the rest of the world doesn't operate the way that certain neocon types appear to think it does. Israel would seem to be as conflicted by this sort of policy making on the part of its leaders as much of the US electorate currently is.

and if they'd done nothing, would anything have changed? it's a danged if you do, danged if you don't situation. in either situation, a public clamoring for their removal from office.........

Sure - but it just goes to prove that its usually the 'cooler' heads who prevail in situations like this. And kneejerk reactionism usually ends up making things worse.

perhaps, but hindsight is always 20/20 ain't it?

if they'd done nothing, they'd have probably been thrown out of office. ergo, danged if they do, danged if they don't.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Please stop emboldening the terrorists...

I'm afraid Israel already did that -- by failing to crush Hezbollah, stop rockets from being fired

at Israel, or rescue its kidnapped soldiers.

Justifications aside, I think a lot can be learned from badly planned "military adventuring". 4 years after the end of "major hostilities" in Iraq...

ah so that's the primary reason for this thread, another bush bashing session

Half-baked political/military decisions are clearly not exclusive to the US. Recognising that fact however...

It's good to know that the rest of the world doesn't operate the way that certain neocon types appear to think it does. Israel would seem to be as conflicted by this sort of policy making on the part of its leaders as much of the US electorate currently is.

and if they'd done nothing, would anything have changed? it's a danged if you do, danged if you don't situation. in either situation, a public clamoring for their removal from office.........

Sure - but it just goes to prove that its usually the 'cooler' heads who prevail in situations like this. And kneejerk reactionism usually ends up making things worse.

perhaps, but hindsight is always 20/20 ain't it?

if they'd done nothing, they'd have probably been thrown out of office. ergo, danged if they do, danged if they don't.

Its not hindsight if the outcome was predictable from the outset.

[deemabrouk 0]

Please stop emboldening the terrorists...

I'm afraid Israel already did that -- by failing to crush Hezbollah, stop rockets from being fired

at Israel, or rescue its kidnapped soldiers.

Justifications aside, I think a lot can be learned from badly planned "military adventuring". 4 years after the end of "major hostilities" in Iraq...

ah so that's the primary reason for this thread, another bush bashing session

Half-baked political/military decisions are clearly not exclusive to the US. Recognising that fact however...

It's good to know that the rest of the world doesn't operate the way that certain neocon types appear to think it does. Israel would seem to be as conflicted by this sort of policy making on the part of its leaders as much of the US electorate currently is.

and if they'd done nothing, would anything have changed? it's a danged if you do, danged if you don't situation. in either situation, a public clamoring for their removal from office.........

Sure - but it just goes to prove that its usually the 'cooler' heads who prevail in situations like this. And kneejerk reactionism usually ends up making things worse.

perhaps, but hindsight is always 20/20 ain't it?

if they'd done nothing, they'd have probably been thrown out of office. ergo, danged if they do, danged if they don't.

Yes but their actions Killed mainly Civilians... I understand them wanting to React.. BUT i dont think what they did was excusable..