
Pardon me Tim, but I do not see how it can be possible for the IDF to fail
to detect the presence of those responsible for planting the bomb which
killed the three IDF troops and then later know the exact number and 
whereabouts of all of them. Several villages were shelled. How could the IDF
possibly have known that there were guerrillas in each of the targetted
villages? You see, it was an arbitrary act of "retaliation".



The problem, Tim, is that the original reason for the invasion was Palestinian
attacks on Israel, NOT Lebanese attacks. 


First, I believe that my statement applies to both sides.

Having said that, I think it is neccessary to separate what is legitimately
negotiable and what is not. For example, no country has the right to abuse
one's human rights. Deciding whether there will be one or two states in
Palestine is a legitimate question. While de facto one state exists, Israel 
must treat all within its domain equitably.


Yes, I am afraid that what you say is true but that still does not justify
occupying your neighbor's land. Israel must resolve its disputes with the
native Palestinians if it wants peace from such attacks.


Not true. Lebanese were not attacking Israel in the 1970s. With a strong
Lebanese government (free from Syrian and Israeli interference) I believe
that the border could be adequately patrolled. The Palestinian heavy
weapons have been siezed in past years and I do not see as significant a
threat as once existed.