I agree, in general. But that has jack-all to do with what's happening in Lebanon.

You, apparently, support continuous and endless fighting there.

I, on the other hand, see Lebanon asserting control over the south of the country for the first time in two decades; a beefed up UN peacekeeping force with a more robust mandate; western navies patrolling the coast and Lebanese Army units patrolling the border with Syria to interdict arms shipments to Hezbollah; Hezbollah's military strength muzzled. An end to rocket attacks on Israel.

Does Hezbollah still exist? Yes. Will Lebanon disarm them? No. Not immediately, perhaps not ever. But there are enough other changes going on that what we're seeing is not a mere ceasefire; it's changing the chessboard.

All without anyone else getting killed.

So yes, I think this is progress. And a better sort of progress than continued fighting would have produced. The fighting was a necessary precursor to the progress; force still plays a large role in Middle Eastern diplomacy. But knowing how to use force includes knowing when to *stop* using it.

Your "we'll stop fighting when all of our enemies are dead" approach is, frankly, unattainable -- and thus self-defeating.

__________________
Man up.