Quote:
|
Originally Posted by if.away
The article makes sense and it shows a part of a very possible and well calculated plan leading to a likely military confrontation with Iran/Syria. My question is WHY was Hezbollah, therefore Iran, baited into making the first move? Assuming the "plan" was in effect a while before the kidnappings happened why would Hezbollah make the first move and basically step into a trap? Could they not have been aware? Was Israel aware that such a kidnapping might occur given Iran's referral to the security council and did they decide to retaliate with a surprisingly devastating attack which caught Hezbollah by surprise?
Iran has been playing the delay game forever now and such a move seems stupid. Despite all the claims of victory coming from well staged public events in Syria and Iran, Israel has emerged with the upper hand out of this situation. Hezbollah has been "disarmed" and vilified in front of the whole world, their grip on Lebanon has seriously weakened and I would assume they'll not gain nor maintain the same type of support as before. Israel reminded their enemies that it has no problems nor reservations using excessive force when provoked and that it fully takes advantage of a situation where it is “unleashed” by the US. What did Iran/Syria and Hezbollah get out of this whole deal?
|
Well, that all depends on where you believe those Israeli soldiers were captured. It certainly isn't out of the realm of possibility that Israel suckered hezbollah into 'making the first move' by moving troops into southern lebannon.