Comments by "Sunoo Peek" (@Sunopeek) on "With what can Hezbollah threaten Israel?" video.

Israel tried to do that in 2006 and failed miserably. The militia group remained intact and only grew significantly stronger
17
@LassiseA Israel invaded first in 1947-1948 and ethically cleansed the people... that's why those armies attacked in response... Israel attacked in 1956... and lost Israel attacked in 1967 Israel lost in 1973 politically & strategically... Israel attacked in 1982 Israel attacked in 2006... and lost Israeli is losing in 2023-2024 in the greatest strategic failure in modern history...
4
@MovieRoundup1 They didn't achieve any of their objectives in 2006 despite using more firepower than the entire 1973 war and having full air superiority. Hezballah was left intact and only grew significantly stronger than before. They achieved nothing tactically nor strategically, quite the opposite. So it's accurate to call the 2006 a loss considering they're a regional superpower while their opponent were a weak radical militia with no airpower or support.
2
@LassiseA Really? Then why is Israel so insistent on having technological superiority at all times? They make sure all hi-tech equipment is banned from going to their neighbors. If what you're saying is true, Israel shouldn't be terrified of an even fight, but the truth is they're terrified of their neighbors in an even fight that's why they go out of their way to ensure their neighbors ability is always restricted. Let Egypt or Syria get the F35s or long range air to air if you're so confident? Truth is, you never fought a real modern army in your entire history, only poor 3rd world countries or unarmed women and children. And you have the audacity to call yourselves brave lions?
1
@ESENECHRISTIAN come back when you fight a real army instead of unarmed women and children.
1
@MovieRoundup1 They didn't achieve any tactical or strategic goal despite overwhelming tactic, strategic, and economic superiority. The group didn't only survive. It grew substantially stronger. The best you can call 2006 is a stalemate, but Israel is a regional superpower power, while the other group was a ragtag militia with nothing at hand So it can only be called a loss for Israel
1
@markusk9080 Israel never fought real armies. Only 3rd world nations and unarmed women and children. Those weren't real armies Israel fought in 48 and 67. It was 3rd world nations that could barely read and write fighting off ww2 veterans. The only time they acted like a semi functional real army was in 73, and the result was Israel immediately seeking peace at any cost. They only gave back the Sinai because they were terrified of another 73 with Egypt. In contrast, they never gave back the Golan because they're not scared of Syria. Israel is terrified of a fair fight. That is why it doesn't allow neighbors to gain access to high-tech weaponary, not even US allies like Egypt. Right now, in Gaza, it's primarily fighting unarmed women and children. They did the same in 82 during the invasion of Lebanon.
1
@markusk9080 Don't get me wrong. Everything is fair in war. But you don't get to pretend to be heroes or "valourous lions of Zion" or whatever nonsense when all your victories are against 3rd world nations or against unarmed women and children. It's even more laughable when you realize Israel is doing everything in its part to make sure its neighbors do not develop in any way that ensures a fair fight.
1
@markusk9080 What are YOU talking about? Israel only fought Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, and Jordan, that's 4 or 5 poor undeveloped nations. Where did your World War 3 scenario come from? When did anyone fight 500 million people? Israel is civilized? What do you think Israel did in 47-48 in order to create the state? They did mass brutal Nazi-like ethnic cleansing. It was the major reason the 48 war broke out.
1
@markusk9080 No, Israel only gave the Sinai back because it was afraid of another 73 with Egypt. Israeli leaders weren't confident of another victory at the rate Egypt was improving. For example, It didn't give back the Golan because it's not scared of Syria. Similarly, it doesn't give back the other 67 territories because it's not scared of Palestinians. "We want peace" is the nonsense it gave its domestic audience. If it actually wants peace, it would give back the Golan and other 67 captured territories back.
1
@markusk9080 All is fair in war. Just don't pretend to be heroes or "Courageous Lions of Zion" or whatever nonsense when all your victories were against 3rd world nations and unarmed women and children.
1
@markusk9080 How can you claim you're under threat from your neighbors and at the same time claim they're not a threat because they're terrible fighters?
1
@markusk9080 War is war, I get that. But don't pretend to be heroes or "Courageous Lions of Zion" or whatever nonsense when all you've fought are 3rd world nations and unarmed women and children. Give those labels to yourself once you fight a real modern army.
1
elel-ww5nf How so? What target or goal did they even achieve after the war? They achieved nothing, not tactically nor strategically. That group they tried to destroy in 2006 not only survived but got stronger, bigger, and more sophisticated. That's a strange definition of "victory."
1
elel-ww5nf Wars aren't won by a scoreboard. Vietnam won despite massive casualities. Soviet Union won despite massive casualities. Wars are won by what you achieve in the end.
1
@elel-ww5nf You talking about the Gaza group or the Lebanon group? The Gaza group caused little tactical damage, but massive strategic damage that will take generations to heal. It also led Israel into one of history's greatest strategic failures.
1
 @r.b6170 Significant cost to both sides. That's why Israel wants to avoid war with them at all costs.
1