Comment by mupuff1234 3 days ago
I think the answer is fairly straightforward if you limit it to the current round in the conflict
Not to mention that Israel is no longer in Lebanon and Hezbollah can just stop firing rockets and the situation will go back to relative peace.
So sure the history is complicated, but current events are fairly straightfoward, you had relatively peaceful status que until Hezbollah broke it.
So given the context, why is Hezbollah not responsible for the current escalation?
Hezbollah was founded to drive Israel out of Lebanon, and Israel is no longer in Lebanon, so not sure how that context makes any difference to who started and is to blame for the current round of escalation.
It's pretty simple - tell me why you think it's justified for Lebanon to attack Israel?
You're dancing around the "context" but not actually saying why that context makes it legitimate for Lebanon to attack based on the pre Oct 7th status quo. Sure Lebanon and Israel have some territorial dispute, but it's like 20 sq km, not something you should start a war for.
Lots of neighboring countries have a bloody history, that doesn't mean starting a new war is legitimate, right? Can Poland start firing rockets at Germany because Germany invaded them in the past?
Texas sharpshooter fallacy