All leaders who expect to improve things by attacking their neighbours are terrorists. That includes both Nasrallah and Olmert. Oh, and George Bush too. And Tony Blair.

The nature of Hezbollah's weapons is that they are innacurate weapons...like the German buzz bombs in WWII. They can only be fired at a general large area. If Hezbollah had the wherewithal to attack Israel with more accurate weapons, such as smart bombs, satellite-guided cruise missiles, helicopter gunships, a modern air force...the kind of things the Americans and Israelis use all the tiem...they they would. As it is, they do not have that luxury, and they are able to kill one Israeli for every ten Lebanese killed. That's a lot better than one American for every hundred Iraqis, though, so evidently Hezbollah is pretty efficient, considering how much more weakly they are armed than Israel.

I note that the majority of Israeli casualties in this war, in any case, have been military personnel. The majority of non-Israeli casualties have been civilians.

That's not because Hezbollah is nicer than Israel, and it's not because Israel is nicer than Hezbollah. They are both terrorists. It's because of the military realities of the situation...meaning: the equipment that is available for Israel and Hezbollah to use.

Nothing more than that. Neither one of them secretly gives a shit if they kill the other side's civilians. If they say they do, they are just engaging in public relations.