@Cyph0n, if you think Israel's approach led to too much collateral damage, why don't you propose a solution that would have led to less collateral damage while still taking the Hezbollah leaders out of action?
I bet you won't do this, because I think we can ultimately agree it wasn't possible for Israel to take all these men out of action simultaneously and minimize collateral damage much beyond what it did.
I think where we disagree is that you think Israel should not have taken these men out of action.
Nice deflection. All I need to care about as a lowly SWE is that this attack injured thousands of Lebanese civilians. This is the real world, not a movie or simulated war game.
And I would wager that you would immediately condemn such a barbaric attack if the sides were reversed.
So you weren't able to propose a solution that would have led to less collateral damage because no such solution exists. You know it. I know it. Everyone reading this knows it.
Instead of answering directly you make a comment about deflection, and insist an obvious falsehood (the attack injured thousands of Lebanese civilians) is all you care to believe. On this, we agree. It's all you care to believe, the evidence be damned!
@Cyph0n, if you think Israel's approach led to too much collateral damage, why don't you propose a solution that would have led to less collateral damage while still taking the Hezbollah leaders out of action?
I bet you won't do this, because I think we can ultimately agree it wasn't possible for Israel to take all these men out of action simultaneously and minimize collateral damage much beyond what it did.
I think where we disagree is that you think Israel should not have taken these men out of action.
Nice deflection. All I need to care about as a lowly SWE is that this attack injured thousands of Lebanese civilians. This is the real world, not a movie or simulated war game.
And I would wager that you would immediately condemn such a barbaric attack if the sides were reversed.
So you weren't able to propose a solution that would have led to less collateral damage because no such solution exists. You know it. I know it. Everyone reading this knows it.
Instead of answering directly you make a comment about deflection, and insist an obvious falsehood (the attack injured thousands of Lebanese civilians) is all you care to believe. On this, we agree. It's all you care to believe, the evidence be damned!