HALF OF LEBANON IS DESTROYED; IS THAT A LOSS?

Via Lenin, here's Ehud Olmert telling the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee that Israel's war against Lebanon was a success because it has deterred Syria or Iran from attacking Israel. The report in Haaretz is here, but I thought I would post Olmert's words without the reportage. You know, give the guy a chance to explain himself in his own words. We wouldn't want any of that context stuff to get in the way, would we?

1. "No country in our vicinity would take a chance on this or that military move with a marginal tactical goal because it understands the price it would pay. Thus, the fighting in Lebanon was a deterrent act."

2. "Syria is the focus of operations for most of the terror organizations against Israel and for the arming of Hezbollah. It would take a great deal of imagination to see in this situation potential for dialogue."

3. "No danger to Israel was revealed during the past month. You didn't know that Hezbollah had 12,000 missiles in Lebanon? You didn't know that Iran supported them? There were failures in the war, but there were also amazing achievements. Has the U.S. collapsed after three years in Iraq? What's the panic? We all make mistakes, I first of all. What did you think, that there would be a war and nothing would happen to our soldiers? The claim that we lost is unfounded. Half of Lebanon is destroyed; is that a loss?"