‘….things could be different if we thought differently….’
Yes, that’s a very good assessment but it’s more especially valid if we decide to act differently as well, to approach the problem from what amounts to the opposite end of the spectrum and zero in on it from there.

The situation has always been a seriously large one and, perhaps, never more so than now. There will thus be a need for a correspondingly large solution if any serious chance of properly remedying the matter is to be had.

It would help if there was one we could just take down off the shelf , dust off the cobwebs and put in place right away.

Failing that, we may just have to soldier on with what we’ve got.

Which isn’t all that much.

This business, therefore, cannot be dealt with piecemeal. It’s no good trying to win over one or two elements in so diverse a patchwork of opposing groups. An ‘all-or-nothing’ approach is what’s required, one that can cater for this hugely divergent range of viewpoints and still carry the day, no matter what develops in the interim.
Otherwise, it just ain’t gonna happen.
Not now, not ever.

If only Israelis do this then Arabs will do that, if this side shows flexibility in one area, then the other will respond in kind. No, this is something that will not happen; it never does. There are simply too many pressures being brought to bear, too many balls in the air at any one given time. We have the religious ball, the military, the political, the economic, the tribal, security aspects, a whole catalogue of past crimes and injustice, personal and public memories of death and destruction, a veritable cocktail of everyday incidents that constantly feed the fires of resentment and fear.

On reflection, it’s somewhat amazing that the situation is no worse than it already is. That’s not to say that it’s anywhere near acceptable or normal because that is most certainly what it is not.

This problem has been in existence for at least sixty four years and, in all that time, not one day has passed without the situation becoming more entrenched and unresponsive to whatever human intervention has tried to do. Today, it looks set to enter upon an even deeper and darker phase.

And our reaction to this has been what? It’s precisely the same as it’s always been. We blame this group or that, we remonstrate with politicians right, left and centre to reach some sort of settlement, we argue for any reasonable outcome, all the time knowing that the chances of it actually happening are virtually zero. In short, we accomplish nothing except to allow more lives to be lost, more treasure to be wasted and more bitterness and hatred to spill over into yet more years of violence.

After so much experience, mostly bad, in this entire matter, shouldn’t we have delivered something that’s a whole lot better by now? It seems we’ve done nothing but dither and dodge about on the sidelines as this dreadful business sinks slowly under the combined weight of its own historical and cultural baggage.

Let us at least be able to say that we did something rather than nothing. If conventional tactics will not move matters forward, then unconventional ones may have to be considered. What can we lose? We tried everything else and, every time, we’ve come up empty-handed.

And that is not how it should be.

Http://yorketowers.blogspot.com

Its interesting Aristedes, that you would summarize that statement as “you can’t put the onus exclusively on Hezbollah for its defensive preparations, not when you recall the ruins of Lebanon’s cities.”

Wiki: The Dahiya doctrine is a military strategy put forth by the Israeli general Gadi Eizenkot that pertains to asymmetric warfare in an urban setting, in which the army deliberately targets civilian infrastructure, as a means of inducing suffering for the civilian population, thereby establishing deterrence.

Since Gadi Eizenkot is not institutionalized, neither in penal setting nor in an insane asylum, Israel is a state where depravity is an official doctrine. Converting Arab habitation to “parking lots” seems to be a national pasttime. Sometimes there are some excuses, “they had command centers there”. Sometime, like with villages in Negev and Area C, just for kicks.

If Israel felt threatened by Iran, it would not organize monthly discussion how to attack Iran. What is the true reason? There were discussions why certain factions in USA (not unrelated to factions in Israel) were promoting attack on Iraq. Any rational reason can be found illogical (including helping Israel). One remains:

“War is to man what maternity is to a woman. From a philosophical and doctrinal viewpoint, I do not believe in perpetual peace.”

“War alone brings up to their highest tension all human energies and imposes the stamp of nobility upon the peoples who have the courage to make it.”

“The function of a citizen and a soldier are inseparable.”

“It is humiliating to remain with our hands folded while others write history. It matters little who wins. To make a people great it is necessary to send them to battle even if you have to kick them in the pants. That is what I shall do.”

.
Lebanon not only has the right, but the absolutely demonstrated need to defend itself against its aggressive neighbor.

20,000 or 40,000 or whatever number of Hezbollah missiles aimed at civilian centers is not exactly a defensive capacity.

The cycle of violence between Hezbollah and precursors and Israel and triangulated factions, does not have a definitive starting point.

Both are actively defending and actively aggressing.