Just thought I'd add my tuppence. Someone above said the US won't be a superpower forever. That's certainly true, as history teaches. the Roman empire, the British empire, they've all disappeared in time. But I think we can safely say that it won't happen any time soon re. the USA (though China is gettin stronger by the day, and would have no qulams about taking on the USA if it thought it could - you'll see that some day soon it'll annex Taiwan and none of the 'democracy' exporting neo-cons in the White House will pip up a single word about it). The real problem for Israel is that it is still heavily dependent on US sponsorship, right down to the bombs it was delivered there the other week. US interest in the region is largely dictated by the presence of oil (there are lots of other places struggling under dictatorship, but not a US marine is to be found anywhere in Zimbabwe, for example). Once the oil finishes, the US will drop the region like a hot potato, and Israel will find itself rather isolated amongst extremely hostile Arab neighbours (especially if China vetos US action, as they are already making rumbling noises about in relation to Iran). It makes very good sense for Israel to strike some sort of deal with its Arab neighbours. Now I know they have not been the most accomodating, and indeed they invaded Isarel the day after the state was declared, but Israel has not been doing itself any favours either by ignoring UN resolutions, engaging in land grabs and so on. Its incursions into Lebanon and the West Bank were planned weeks before the kidnapping of their soldiers. Indeed, these very same soldiers they set out to rescue - the supposed pretext for their invasion of Lebanon etc., - are unfortunately probably lying dead under some of the buildings Israeli bombs have flattened, dropped by their IDF colleagues. So you see, it was never about the kidnapped soldiers, but like the WMD it provided a good excuse for another agenda. If they had really intended to rescue them it would have made more sense to send in a highly trained commando platoon acting on good intelligence. Meanwhile, hundreds of Lebanese civilians who have no connection with Hezbollah, are lying dead because US-made Israeli dropped 'smart' bombs turned out not to be so smart after all. Does the kidnapping of a few soldiers Knesset doesn't really give a hoot about justify killing whole families, children, funeral mourners? You might say Hezbollah have been using the civilian population as shields. It's seems a clever argument and has done the rounds. But when the Israelis advised the civilians to flee, they then bombed them almost as soon as they tried to escape! The situation in Israel is more complicated - since every adult Israeli (man or woman) is also a member of the IDF, in a sense they are as legitimate a target as a Hezbollah fighter is to the Israelis, if there is a state of war. Moreover, I remember seeing photos in Newsweek back in 2004 showing the IDF using a palestinian teenager as a human shield, tying him onto their jeep. So, no moral high ground in that instance. G.Bush and Rice (will the real president please stand up?) have muttered angrily about Iran sponsoring Hezbollah and how Syria and Iran must respect Lebanese sovereignty, without the slightest hint of a sense of irony, as they sponsor Israel and say nothing about its complete disregard for Lebanese soveriegnty.
The most logical explantion I have seen for Israel's invasion of southern Lebanon is to gain control of the Litani river, an important and strategic source of fresh water which Israel feels it badly needs. Indeed, it was interesting to note Knesset state that they will push on into Lebanon 'as far as the Litani river' on the news tonight.
But as someone said on this forum already - there will be no winners as such in this war. Even if Israel succeeds in its aims of grabbing southern Lebanon as far as the Litani river, the resentment caused will ensure Hizbollah etc., will have an endless stream of recruits, and so Israel will explain (after the fact, as usual) that it now needs to invade north of the Litani river to protect itself, and so on all the way up to the North Pole and off the planet. The problem is that, especially since George Bush came to power, the loudest voices on all sides - Iranian, Syrian, Israeli, US - have been the neo-con warmongers with their unshakeable belief in military might being the cure for all the world's ills. Unfortunately, the only military solution to terrorism - whether Hizbollah or Israeli - is genocide. You can't convince people to like and trust you and live peacefully by killing them and destroying everything they have, so the only other way is to wipe them all out so you don't have to live with their resentment. If the parties involved keep going the way they are, they may well end up dragging us all into World War Three. Maybe then they'll be happy with themselves.