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

23 answers

I DIDN'T REALIZE THEY WERE DOING SO POOR. I THOUGHT THEY WERE DOING GREAT.

2006-08-14 07:05:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because they have always been so succesful against very poor Egyptian, Syrian, and Jordanian military forces that they were not expecting the Iranian officer led Hezbollah to be so well equipped or tactically aware.

There would however only have ever been one winner if the conflict had gone on and the Israelis will have learned a lot of lessons from this and next time will perform much much better I reckon.

2006-08-14 17:06:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Unfortunately, Israeli P.M. Olmert underestimated The Hezz, and the Israeli Air Force were indiscriminate in the early stages of the war. This I read in today's paper and I have to agree.

There was no need for all those Lebanon casualties. And Lebanon is actually a moderate country when it comes to Islam. I don't blame them for being so angry at Israel, but I place the blame on Olmert.

2006-08-14 15:05:11 · answer #3 · answered by Sick Puppy 7 · 0 0

Poor Performance???? They leveled 1/3 of the country in 2 weeks.

2006-08-18 02:12:00 · answer #4 · answered by Norman 7 · 0 0

Well, considering the death tolls (150 israelis dead, over 1100 lebanese dead), Israel's military has done a great job comparatively. Of course...concerning aim, not so good. Of the 1100+ dead lebanese, over 90% were civilians. Many of the targets of the smart bombs were schools and apartment buildings. Israel has the technology to hit the head of a tack on a wall, so these things aren't accidental. The small violent faction of Hezbollah has rockets...that can't be aimed except in a general direction...but that's all they have. Does the Isaeli army need more training? No. They just need to not have the goal of "Kill them all". Nothing against the Jewish people, just the Zionist neo-con death machine government that is the problem. Just like you can't blame all Americans for the criminal actions of Bush (considering that he wasn't voted in either time), noone blames the Jewish people for the atrocities it's government is committing. If they stop trying to expand the land originally granted to them, and flexing at the Arab world all the time, they might find themselves living in a mutually prosperous, long-term peace. At least if they help make reparations for their past mistakes.

Why is it that people feel that innocent people just trying to live their lives should have to die for the actions of a few? Are people really ignorant enough to believe that killing civilians will solve anything? Are people really stupid enough to believe that every brown person is evil just because a few people from the same country do bad things? Should American people be held responsible (by death) for the terrible war crimes and genocide perpetrated by the Bush Administration?

The fact is, when violence happens, it is because two way communication is not happening. "Shoot first, ask questions later" types of approaches just create more enemies. You don't like someone, so you shoot his family, you just created enemies out of his entire extended family and friend base. now you have dozens of enemies instead of just one. By communicating and trying to find a reasonable compromise, everyone walks away happy, and noone has to die for the egos and pockets of their leaders.

P.S. Mulligans...65 years ago, the French were forced to use such techniqes to fight the Nazis. Simply put, what we call terrorism, is simply war fought by poor people. If you can't afford Smart Bombs and cruise missiles, you use fertilizer and ether to create a small bomb, and if neccesary to get the bomb to your target, you have to have someone carry it. Truth is, terrorism can be used by rich people too...like what the US has been doing throughout the middle east. We just have bigger bombs, so we get to call it war.

2006-08-14 14:11:18 · answer #5 · answered by corwynwulfhund 3 · 0 0

What "poor performance" are you talking about?

It's my impression that the IDF was expected to just roll over a few thousand guys who've spent the last 6 years preparing for just such an attempt. An unrealistic expectation, at best.

Make no mistake, the IDF will have learned the appropriate lessons of this campaign and will be better-prepared when the conflict heats up again.

2006-08-14 14:04:54 · answer #6 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 0 0

They lost the spin and they might not have done as well as people expected, but they accomplished alot. 1) They destroyed most of what Iran had built up over 6 years 2) They got the world to acknowledge Iran and Syria's involvement in international terroism. 3) They got a 30,000 troop comittment to create a buffer zone and disarm Hezbollah 4) They neutralized Iran's ability to open up a second front after the US moves to destroy Iran's nuclear capability (action pending-hopefully). If Israel hadn't shown restraint in their actions, they could have carpet bombed the place. It is a credit to their humanity that so many lives were spared. Only Hezbollah targeted civillains on purpose. Last I checked Hezbollah hadn't set foot on one square inch of Israeli land. To win you have to take over enemy real estate or at least control it. They only made their own organization suffer. Even Warren Buffet is still bullish on Israel.

2006-08-14 14:25:01 · answer #7 · answered by mnpindus 1 · 0 0

The fact that in the last decade people have become too cautious. The politicians get too much flack if people start dying. We lost 50000 people in ONE day in WW2 and that was neccessary we loose 1000 people in one year in Iraq and everyone is crying. This type of fear of losses has kept the isreali forces from Really pressing the fight plus they were concerned with Collateral damage on Lebanese civilians. They were trying to keep those low (again because of politics these people were not really "civilians" they were COLABORATORS and should have been taken out also.

2006-08-14 14:13:49 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The Israelis Did not deploy their total strength in this conflict, therefore some peole may suggest a poor performance.

2006-08-18 11:22:13 · answer #9 · answered by gorillaguth 3 · 0 0

Who says that they are performing poorly....


They have created a 8 mile buffer into Lebanon in a little over a month. Their casualties are minimal and they control the airspace over the battlefield.

Stop watching CNN

2006-08-14 14:05:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

The "poor performance" comes from doing everything humanly possible to avoid civilian casualties!
Hezbollah targets civilians and uses women and children as shields.
Israel puts themselves in harms way to avoid civilian casualties!

2006-08-14 14:05:55 · answer #11 · answered by Hatikvah 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers