Military historians have a name for the logic behind Israel's military campaign in Lebanon. It's called the "strategic bombing fallacy." Almost since the dawn of the age of military air power, strategists have been tempted by the prospect that the bombing of "strategic" targets such as infrastructure and transportation hubs could inflict such pain on a population that it would turn against its leaders and get them to surrender or compromise.
Unfortunately -- as the United States itself discovered during World War II and Vietnam, to cite just two examples -- strategic bombing has almost never worked. Far from bringing about the intended softening of the opposition, bombing tends to rally people behind their own leaders and cause them to dig in against outsiders who, whatever the justification, are destroying their homeland.
<snip>
According to retired Israeli army Col. Gal Luft, the goal of the campaign is to "create a rift between the Lebanese population and Hezbollah supporters." The message to Lebanon's elite, he said, is this: "If you want your air conditioning to work and if you want to be able to fly to Paris for shopping, you must pull your head out of the sand...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/07/24/AR2006072400807.html------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In other news, Israel announced plans to bomb Cleveland, Ohio, using Pita and Baba-Ghanoush seeking missiles. The New York times lauded Israel's restraint for restricting their attacks to the neighborhood on Cleveland's west side, known as "Little Arabia" for its high density of Arab-Americans.
This announcement comes on the heels of the kidnapping of Dennis Kucinich, who's calls for an immediate ceasefire were labeled anti-semitic by the Israeli Knesset. George W Bush said that the US would would not interfere with Israel's God given right to defend themselves.