Do you think Britain would piss about if the IRA had fired 3,000 rockets in the British mainland in the past few months?
It's unfortunate, nay a tragedy for each innocent life lost, on either side. Now, to the question of causualties on both sides. It has been pointed out that around 370 Lebanese have been killed, and around 40 Israelis. This diagram may go some way to explaining the difference
Of course you can replace the Palestinian soldier with Hizbullah (or any terrorist militia actually)
I've been searching the net for hours for a good comment piece that reflects my feelings (I am woefully inarticulate and lack a public school education!). Nought on the "MSM", nothing of note from The Telegraph, The Times, The Guardian, any of the British papers. I've been searching the blogs in vain, until I came across this rather good little piece enitled Taking Sides is Not an Option by Perry De Havilland, which I reproduce below for your edification
At the start of the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah, although not unsympathetic to Israel's security needs, I was very concerned that this conflict not escalate into something which was a war between Israel and Lebanon per se. My view was that as the factions that opposed Hezbollah had been trying to undermine that organisation by getting Syrian forces out, it would be a tragedy if Israel's military action undermined the pro-modernist forces within Lebanon.
And yet after reading and listening to the remarks of commentator after commentator speaking for various Lebanese factions, I now seriously question if there was ever a realistic chance of these people achieving a disarmed Hezbollah within Lebanon. It appears that views like those of Ahmed Al-Jarallah do not have much currency in Lebanon (and I urge the commentariat to link to Lebanese sources which suggest otherwise), which means if Israel was just going to wait for political development across the border to eventually neutralise the clear and present threat of Hezbollah, they would have had a very long wait indeed.
In short, I find myself inescapably drawn to the notion that not only is the Israeli action warranted, I now think there is no good reason the IDF should avoid attacking targets of strategic value to Hezbollah which are located in non-Hezbollah areas. Moreover, I would urge them to follow the logic of that position and start striking targets in Syria and (above all) in Iran in order to impose a cost on those governments for their actions in enabling Hezbollah.
Much as I support the idea of a modernist secular Lebanon, perhaps that is simply not within the power of non-Islamists in Lebanon to deliver until military realities have altered the political realities. In short, if the other factions within Lebanon do not want Israel to completely demolish the national infrastructure that Hezbollah also uses, they need to realise that they, as well as Israel, need to declare war on Hezbollah. As long as ports, roads and airfields in Lebanon can be used by Hezbollah, neutrality is simply not an option for anyone.
The delicate balance of power within the Cedar nation became untenable the moment Hezbollah in effect declared war in Israel on behalf of all of Lebanon and as a result, either Hezbollah is expelled from the government, declared a criminal organisation and confronted militarily by Lebanon's army... or Lebanon (and not just Hezbollah) is indeed at war with Israel and must accept the consequences. There are no other realistic alternatives.