Israel goes for preemptive strike

Preemptive strike was a well-worn phrase that came up a lot during the George W Bush administration. The argument was, better to hit hard first before being attacked. It seemed to make sense, provided the intelligence warning of an attack on the way was good and accurate. But the concept of a preemptive strike was always going to be controversial. At what point do you launch a pre-strike? When the enemy is literally about to launch, when the enemy is loading up the wagons with rockets and shells? When the enemy is thought to be sitting round a table planning an attack? You see what I mean. Timing is everything, otherwise a country might as well launch a preemptive strike any day of the week as a precautionary measure on the grounds that it is better to strike first than be hit and then retaliate. Israel, in this case today, seems to have had very good intelligence of Hezbollah preparing to launch missiles and rockets at Israel. Satellite pics and other airbone intelligence-gathering systems will have sent back all the relevant images. So a preemptive strike was launched in order to remove or at least limit the imminent attack across the border. Hezbollah effectively proved Israel's point by launching hundreds of rockets into Israel, most of which were shot down. Israel's justification for the premmptive attack on Hezbollah positions was that it would forestall a longer and more dangerous war. Again, the argument appears to be reasonably based because after its huge launch of rockets, Hezbollah announced that would be an end of it, for the moment at least. Other attack phases are anticipated, if not promised. But Hezbollah is now on notice: if they try to carry out another series of rocket launches, Israel will get in first. Preemptive strikes are now part of the Middle East lexicon.