Tbh, what course of action you'd have taken instead of Nasrallah had you been the overall Commander in Chief of Hezbollah?
It's a tough decision, if I start a war Israel will bomb Lebanon back to the stone age and kill thousands of innocents, but at the same time I wouldn't let Israel humilte us like this.
Israel has help from America in all it's wars, also Israeli soldiers were usually, WW2 veterans while, arab armies consisted of conscripts.
Most were not veterans of ww2 many of them were Jewish settlers and European civs and jews from Palestine and US helped materially, not militarily, Arabs had much larger but untrained and politicised manpower, remember excuses, excuses don't survive war, had Arab commanders and soldiers excused themselves of wars they'd have remained trapped between Arabs and Persians and Islam would have been just another version of Judaism practiced by a small population in Arabian peninsula or better they'd have been Christianised cos Christianity would have never faced a military opposition
Surviving another day to fight is better than humiliation, Israel is dying, it's population is not birthing enough, they're so desperate that they're converting Christian chinks from NE India to Judaism and settling them in Israel so they can have a populations, Arabs will win just by waiting, the war of cocks is much better than the war of guns for men
Mughals were not Persians, they were Chagatai Turko Mongols from Central Asia, Persian rule over Indian subcontinent never existed apart from Achemenid rule over Sindh, and they were extremely corrupt and they didn't defend shit, they were so corrupt that when the emperor Aurangzeb ordered his governors to destroy temples and to kill Brahmins and to bring their sacred threads many temples just bribed them instead and they went away, you have a very idealised version of this world or at least Islam my friend, Jizya by itself is never mentioned for polytheists but muslim rulers of India took Jizya, and their patronised islamic scholars would justify anything they wanted
Water system, dams, canals, sales tax? Man wtf, do you think guys were Romans, these guys are Turko Mongols barbarians, they're not cultured Ottomans who had been sedentary for centuries or Europeans, they were grazing on the steppes 100 years ago. The only kind of tax they took was 1/4th or all of it based on the governor's whims of a farmer's yield and forget property rights or any rights, it was a loose wild west of some sorts, India during Mughal rule had no rule or anything, there was excessive taxation and wealth accumulation by a few families, just the amount of highwaymen, outlaws, thugs and criminal tribes britbongs had to weed out once they established their rule. You've to understand that even though the Mughals, Safavids of Persia and Ottomans of Turkey shared a common Turkic ancestry, Mughals became sedentary much later, their ways of war was crude and stupid as well, devoid of any sane military tactics, when the safavid trained Nader Shah met Mughals he routed two of their armies and captured Delhi. Ottomans or any European army would have destroyed Mughal Empire forces, European pike and shot and later line infantry therefore ran rings around Mughal style of cavalry and sluggish hodge podge Maratha Empire aground, even though they tried to implement European line infantry they couldn't match industrial strength of Britain. Mughals were rich only cos India was and is the most fertile piece of land on Earth, it was agrarian pre industrial wealth. Muslim rulers of India were of 2nd rate even by Islamic standards, they were filthy rich and degenerate. The British trained Indian army however is much better than any modern day Islamic army, therefore I love Rome, Rome gave Europeans a standard to aspire for. Rome gave Islamic rulers a standard to aspire for. That's the reason the best of the Muslim rulers, the Ottomans aspired to be Romans, not Arabs or Mongols.
