in the long run, who would have won between israel/hezbollah?

[mastag]

what do you guys think?

 

[Naudian]

3

 

[Raziaar]

It all depends on the conditions of victory.

Israel would of won by destroying everything in their path to get at hezbollah.

Hezbollah would have won at completely changing world opinion of Israel and the atrocities it commited in doing what they did.


But in the end, it all matters on what the exact definition of victory is in that situation.

 

[pvtbones]

It all depends on the conditions of victory.

Israel would of won by destroying everything in their path to get at hezbollah.

Hezbollah would have won at completely changing world opinion of Israel and the atrocities it commited in doing what they did.


But in the end, it all matters on what the exact definition of victory is in that situation.

what he said.

 

[15357]

The oil company people.

 

[Solaris]

What a stupid question. Isreal could totally annialate Hezbullah whenever they wanted, they have 200+nukes. Isreal have really imo lost this battle, their troops as George Galloway put it "got a bloody good hiding", and Hezbalallah are now more popular than ever before.

 

[mortiz]

Israel but at a huge cost. Solaris, do you really think Israel could use Nukes even if they wanted to? Do you realise what affect using a nuke against an enemy for the first time since WW2 would do to world stability?

 

[The Monkey]

Israel but at a huge cost. Solaris, do you really think Israel could use Nukes even if they wanted to? Do you realise what affect using a nuke against an enemy for the first time since WW2 would do to world stability?

Not to mention that nuking Lebanon would probably also cause the descruction of the Israeli population, considering nuclear fallout etc.

 

[Raziaar]

Israel has never been one of those countries that i've considered much of a liability when it comes to nuke frenzied officials. I don't expect them to be the frist to drop any.

 

[PimpinPenguin]

Israel no doubt they are just so much richer and can afford powerfull weapons and they would have the backing of the usa and uk.

Israel can't really nuke Lebanon they are to close they would get radiation i think they would only use them if someone nuked them

 

[SenorDingDong]

neither.

 

[Kangy]

What a stupid question. Isreal could totally annialate Hezbullah whenever they wanted, they have 200+nukes. Isreal have really imo lost this battle, their troops as George Galloway put it "got a bloody good hiding", and Hezbalallah are now more popular than ever before.

Righto, Solaris al-Whitey White. If you think Hezbollah "won" anything, perhaps you should look at the casualty figures for the civilians they were supposedly fighting for, because if you think 1000 casualties is a "victory" you're madder than a box of weasels.

 

[Raziaar]

Righto, Solaris al-Whitey White. If you think Hezbollah "won" anything, perhaps you should look at the casualty figures for the civilians they were supposedly fighting for, because if you think 1000 casualties is a "victory" you're madder than a box of weasels.

Kangy... this is coming from a guy that doesn't care about civilian deaths when it comes to 'fighting for a cause'. I'm reminded of the whole new american revolution thing he supports that would cause untold innocent civilian deaths, but he said it'd be worth it.

Who was it that said those civilian casualties were worth it when it comes to the Iraq war? He sounds like them.

 

[Rupertvdb]

He also has this bizarre love of galloway. That's almost worse...almost.

 

[Raziaar]

Hezbollah won... they got lots of babies named after them. Crazy

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14363135/

How many babies do you see being called Israel? D:

 

[Mechagodzilla]

Israel is actually not an unusual name.


As for the thread topic:

"Whoever wins, they lose" - but more accurately, Hezbollah would definitely have "won" in the sense that this war has once again made israel look like an asshole country (which is an accurate reflection, given israel's assholery over the decades.)
At the same time though, hezbollah would only win by being martyred.

So yeah, it would be impossible for either to truly "win" but israel had far more to lose, so I'll give the trophy to hezbollah.

 

[VictimOfScience]

Yup, Hezbollah has won in the sense that everyone in the Middle East has been scared of Israel for so long and now they needn't be. Of course, Israel did demonstrate some restraint, so who knows what would happen if they really let loose...*shudders to think*

 

[Nemesis6]

http://www.coxandforkum.com/archives/06.08.08.SnatchingDefeat-X.gif

Captures my opinion perfect.

 

[Gunner]

You can't really win against guerrila warfare.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

"Whoever wins, they lose" - but more accurately, Hezbollah would definitely have "won" in the sense that this war has once again made israel look like an asshole country (which is an accurate reflection, given israel's assholery over the decades.)
At the same time though, hezbollah would only win by being martyred.

I disagree.

1. "Whoever wins, we lose." The advancement of religious fanaticisms brought on by the progress of intellectual societies not bound by ignorance or threat of death, will continue to progress they're meager ways at explaining they're lunacy and existence.

Israels victory means a more united Christian ideal. That God promised the Israeli Chosen People paradise and victory against all oppressors, will unite the ignorant and they're like mindedness to accelerate an end times scenario.

Through which at the end of it all, they would find no God.

Hezbollah, Iranian, and Syrian victory means a more united Islamic ideal. Considering the irony that they're Gods miracles can only be witnessed when its children start and suffer through wars, Radical Islam will continue its progress to the destruction of what it deems those who are "unsaved".

Eventually, it will negotiate the promised overlookings of past religions and people out of its moral law, and soon, the Christian and the Zoroastrianist will be targets of its Imperialism.

It too, will accelerate an end times scenario. Without war, petty crime, or empire, this religion learns that it will become a vessel for the purposeless and stagnancy.

For both, an end times scenario means the weak unite under the adherence of "Book of Rubbish" principles, and virture the slaughter of organized societies, intellectuals, and technological progress which might have liberated societies further then they could've promised.

An end times scenario means a violent end, washed with more purposeless pain and bloodshed. Eventually, the most powerful societies will reunite and hopefully buffer out the useless and weak, otherwise, be at the mercy of death and the lunacy of those who cannot handle it.

Even if it succeeds, no God will have come to save them. If you want to know what I'm talking about, do a google search on 'Endtimes'. You'll find that these militant nutjobs are also being sponsored by foreign governments.

2. "Martyrs die for causes unresolved by people -- People die for causes unresolved by Matyrs."