English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

9 answers

he would have traded the prisoners and not declared war.
unlike olmert, he is already a war criminal, he wouldnt need to do this to establish himself.

2006-08-05 23:39:04 · answer #1 · answered by agh78 2 · 0 0

Sharon was a military man to the core. He respected the sanctity of Civilian life. He would have gone against Hesbollah in a co-rodinated military fashion. Don't forget who was the last general to lead Israeli forces into Lebanon the last time. There were mitigated civilian loss of life. The problem we have now is that this PM of Israel is a harlot of the UK and USA. He has no military experience whatsoever apart from his two year stint as a reservist. Question you should ask is, Why didn't Sharon, despite the same provocations, attack the civilians when he had the chance as PM? Enough said.

2006-08-05 23:50:22 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I believe he might have tried more to avoid causing civilian deaths in Lebanon & PA. There is also a Lebanese national who was convicted of a terrorist act almost 30 years ago and is still in an Israeli prison. I think Sharon would have released him in exchange for the 2 Israeli soldiers held by the Hezbollah. And indeed, I think that is the right thing to do (this kind of exchange).

2006-08-05 23:26:46 · answer #3 · answered by Avner Eliyahu R 6 · 0 0

We would be fighting Iran and Syria which is probably what we need to get done. Throw in North Korea for practice and it's a wrap.
Get our oil shale out of the ground and this will break our dependence on mid-East oil.

2006-08-05 23:27:36 · answer #4 · answered by loligo1 6 · 0 0

Turned Lebanon into a suburb of Haifa

2006-08-05 23:24:48 · answer #5 · answered by Chief BaggageSmasher 7 · 0 0

getting a tan in Beirut
while his soldiers cleaned up the mess

2006-08-05 23:22:49 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Sent the HezBULLies to bed without their supper.

2006-08-05 23:52:40 · answer #7 · answered by SPLATT 7 · 0 0

I totally agree with lucky j....and if he wren't? he would at least making travel arrangements for that very trip

2006-08-05 23:31:54 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

they are all s.h.i.t he would killed people for nothing like others, they are terrorist u can't controll them , they remind me of an angry dog with an empty head.

2006-08-05 23:25:13 · answer #9 · answered by george s 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers