Heavy attacks imminent?

I'm afraid it's been inevitable for a very long time.

The first impression is that Israel is engaging in extreme overkill. But why?

Yes, clearly Israel has the right to protect and defend its people and territory but bombing the crap out of a country as defenseless as Lebanon seems senseless at best, and one has to question the motives. Wasn't it only a year ago that Bush was praising Lebanon's democracy, and Syria's withdrawal, and using it as proof of the world's march towards more democratic states? How can he stand by now and watch it all be destroyed with little but the most feeble of comments?

One factor that may be pertinent is israel's new PM, who, without any military experience like most past PMs, needs to prove to this countrymen that he's really the man to stand in Sharon's shoes. Ego has always been a important element in political decision making (no matter how much it is denied), especially among men politicians.

Another possibility for what the world is calling "excessive" force on the part of Israel is the need to reactivate the Bush administration's pressure on Iran. Bush has been sounding almost conciliatory lately, or at least willing to talk in regard to Iran's nuclear ambitions. That may simply not be good enough for Israel and by turning what should have been just another military border action into a major international crisis they may be looking to turn attention back to Iran's support for Hezbollah and reactivate the neocon's "Iran Next!" philosophy.

"...especially among men politicians."

oops...don't forget the mighty Maggie Thatcher.

it is not senseless when there is proof by Israeli intelligence that has been varified that the Hizballah has wormed its way into Lebanon , settleing in residential areas and hiding rockets amongst civilians..Syria has been sponsering it, the rockets have syrian signature..
Ehud olmart is not trying to prove anything..it is a wrong assumption and not enough information, for a more accurate account turn to the israeli media www.kolisrael.com

"... for a more accurate account turn to the israeli media?"

I'm afraid that at this point I'd trust the Israeli's interpretation of events about as much as hezboullahs.

Israel may be over responding. But the point to war is to get the other guy to capitulate. You do that with overwhelming force. We could do that with nukes, but nuclear destruction is too damaging. We want to limit collateral damage. If Iran wants to activate it's agents, and exploit holes in our security, we could be at risk, but our decisions can't be based on what they might do.

There will be no peace as long as Hezbollah and Hamas, proxies of Iran and Syria, are still viable. They don't want peace.
Hezbollah by the way, has killed hundreds of Americans over the years.

It is in America's interests to see that Hizbollah is brought to account. Preferably with their own personal god, in their own understanding of what awaits them. If Hizbollah is eliminated, and Iran feels threatened, they could activate foreign agents, who could inflict damage, but they probably won't be very useful long term, if they are activated and discovered. Syria, as I see things, is the mechant who owns the trade route from Damascus to Lebanon.

The trade route becomes significantly more difficult once infrastructure in Syria gets destroyed. Yes, it should be in Syria's interests to persuade Nasrallah, but it probably won't happen. The infrastructure could suffer.