At the end the IDF was at the Litani River, South Lebanon was occupied, Lebanese Infrastructure was in ruins, and before the ceasefire the Lebanese Government was on the point of collapse, so great job they did, Hezbollah lost over 500 well trained and extremely well equipted fighters to enemy fire while many more got captured, and 95% of their rockets hit absoloutly nothing while most of the ones that hit Israeli targets hit Israeli Arabs who might have otherwise been sympathetic to them, so unless you factor in propaganda Israel definitely beat Hezbollah, not to mention the fact that most of Hezbollah's best armaments have been destroyed. If winning just means killing a few Joooooooooos then Hezbollah won, however traditional military wisdom says otherwise.Originally Posted by Husar
It is a type 5 mandate, no shooting allowed under that type, unless they are under emergency of being destroyed, and Hezbollah rockets miss 95% of the time, hence they can not respond to them. That is the reason the French Defence Minister gave for only sending 200 troops, so take it up with her if you don't believe it.Could you point out which part of the agreement or mandate states that ?
Or are you just making things up ?
That happened only in Hezbollah propaganda, 1-5 casualty ratios say the one who lost 5 lost unless of course they gained something worth the casualty gap, however the IDF had Southern Lebanon Occupied at the end of the fighting, and had captured more Hezbollah fighters, and destroyed a lot of Hezbollah Rocket Caches so Hezbollah did lose, if only the Israeli PR machine could match it's military machine.Damn I must have been asleep for a while , I must have dreamt that the mainly conscript , badly organised and led army of Israel got its butt kicked by a few thousand nutters .
Without British or American leadership International Forces are worthless, just ask the Tutsis.It is my opinion that the IDF would kick the IDF's butt.
Bookmarks