Israeli preparing for 'all out' war (Ground Invasion)

unknauthr

Junior Member
They tried to break an economic blockade.
In the last 18 months, Israel impose an economic blockade on Gaza.

Of course the hole in that argument is that the rockets did not begin with the blockade. The rockets, the mortar rounds, the attempted suicide bombings, the many raids aimed at either killing or capturing the Israeli soldiers who manned the border checkpoints, these all preceded the "blockade".

The bottom line is that firing rockets or mortar rounds is not how a civilized people behave who want to win world sympathy or who seek a negotiated end to their dispute. Hamas has made their objectives clear, and coexistence was never part of their end game.

I still am not clear as to why so many still do not get what Hamas really is all about. The link below, for example, is for a video produced by a Palestinian Christian, documenting a small part of the reality of what life is like, living under the Islamic revolutionary regime of Hamas:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


For an organization such as this there can be no peaceful coexistence, no compromise solution. The religious extremists can deal only in absolutes. A ceasefire? Maybe. A permanent peace? Never. That is why the misery of the Gaza residents will continue to go on.
 

unknauthr

Junior Member
Janes' Defense Weekly had an interesting article on the objectives behind the Israeli operation, as well as some of the tactics employed. The short version can be viewed below:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


There are a number of interesting points made. For example: that Fatah assisted the Israelis in identifying Hamas targets that were struck during the first round of air raids. The article also makes the point that the real objective of the Israeli operation was not to destroy Hamas outright - which would have required Israel to re-occupy the entire Gaza Strip - but to restore a degree of deterrence, similar to what was achieved in the 2006 Lebanon campaign.

Although the Lebanon War was more poorly coordinated than the recent operation against Hamas, and Hezbollah was subsequently able to rearm, the war did achieve one important outcome: it ended the steady waves of rockets and attempted abductions that had plagued Israel's northern border. We'll have to wait another week or so - until after Israel withdraws - to see if that same outcome has been achieved in Gaza.
 

ccL1

New Member
Janes' Defense Weekly had an interesting article on the objectives behind the Israeli operation, as well as some of the tactics employed. The short version can be viewed below:
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


There are a number of interesting points made. For example: that Fatah assisted the Israelis in identifying Hamas targets that were struck during the first round of air raids. The article also makes the point that the real objective of the Israeli operation was not to destroy Hamas outright - which would have required Israel to re-occupy the entire Gaza Strip - but to restore a degree of deterrence, similar to what was achieved in the 2006 Lebanon campaign.

Although the Lebanon War was more poorly coordinated than the recent operation against Hamas, and Hezbollah was subsequently able to rearm, the war did achieve one important outcome: it ended the steady waves of rockets and attempted abductions that had plagued Israel's northern border. We'll have to wait another week or so - until after Israel withdraws - to see if that same outcome has been achieved in Gaza.

I hope you're not attempting to suggest that the 2006 Lebanon war was an Israeli victory of any kind...?

Because it was anything but that.

Israel lost the war. Even the Israeli military agrees. The rockets didn't stop until the day the ceasefire was in effect. Israel didn't defeat Hezbollah or eliminate them. Most importantly, Israel couldn't recover their abducted soldiers. Israel invaded and then withdrew without achieving their military objectives.

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!


IDF Major General Yiftah Ron-Tal, in a rare departure from serving officers' customary avoidance of political statements in public, said Wednesday that Chief of Staff Dan Halutz should take responsibility for the failure of the war with Hezbollah, and leave his post.

...


"We did not win this war, and it is proper that those who directed it should take responsibility."

I would agree fully with your point of view if Israel militarily dismantled the rocket launchers and destroyed their sites. The fact is, Israel couldn't find most of them. The reason why the rockets stopped is that both sides settled on a ceasefire, issued by the UNSC due to Israel not being able to defeat Hezbollah (the critical vote in the UNSC was, as always, the US, who was hoping that Hezbollah would be militarily defeated).

Even Hezbollah admitted that they had a couple of months worth of rockets left to fire on Israel if the conflict had not stopped. I'm sure they have re-stocked and reloaded, with even longer range rockets this time.
 
Last edited:

coolieno99

Junior Member
Of course the hole in that argument is that the rockets did not begin with the blockade. The rockets, the mortar rounds, the attempted suicide bombings, the many raids aimed at either killing or capturing the Israeli soldiers who manned the border checkpoints, these all preceded the "blockade"..
The current blockade was imposed to topple the Hamas government that was democratically elected 18 months ago. During that blockade, Israel carried out target assassinations on senior Hamas officials. Israel did not like the Hamas govt, and preferred to have PLO as the governing body of Gaza.

The bottom line is that firing rockets or mortar rounds is not how a civilized people behave who want to win world sympathy or who seek a negotiated end to their dispute. Hamas has made their objectives clear, and coexistence was never part of their end game..
Hamas had nothing to lose, since Israel wants to topple them anyway.
 

unknauthr

Junior Member
I hope you're not attempting to suggest that the 2006 Lebanon war was an Israeli victory of any kind...?

Yes, I quite agree that the Israelis failed to achieve their primary objectives behind the launch of that war. Coordination on the ground was very poor, and even had it not been, the ground campaign came too late to make a difference.

What they did manage to achieve, however accidental that outcome was, was a relative calm on the Lebanon border that had not existed before. Prior to the 2006 Lebanon War cross-border attacks from Hezbollah had been a occurring every other week. Sometimes they fired missiles, sometimes they tried to abduct Israeli soldiers. But you do not see that anymore.

Hezbollah has decided that it is in their own best interest to wait, and bide their time until they are ready for a larger war - rather than inviting a larger scale Israeli response prematurely.

The difference in Gaza is that the Israeli strategy reportedly seeks this relative calm as a core objective, and not the more grandiose aim of destroying their opponent outright as was the case in 2006.
 

The_Zergling

Junior Member
Yes, I quite agree that the Israelis failed to achieve their primary objectives behind the launch of that war. Coordination on the ground was very poor, and even had it not been, the ground campaign came too late to make a difference.

What they did manage to achieve, however accidental that outcome was, was a relative calm on the Lebanon border that had not existed before. Prior to the 2006 Lebanon War cross-border attacks from Hezbollah had been a occurring every other week. Sometimes they fired missiles, sometimes they tried to abduct Israeli soldiers. But you do not see that anymore.

Hezbollah has decided that it is in their own best interest to wait, and bide their time until they are ready for a larger war - rather than inviting a larger scale Israeli response prematurely.

The difference in Gaza is that the Israeli strategy reportedly seeks this relative calm as a core objective, and not the more grandiose aim of destroying their opponent outright as was the case in 2006.

Yet at the same time they also created even more hostility towards them, particularly in the Arab world, which in the long term means more conflict. One can argue about whether or not the resentment is justified, but in any case the point is that while the invasion in the short term may have helped reduce the frequency of Hezbollah attacks (due to the cease-fire, the path to which may not necessarily have been war), in the long term more young men (we're seeing an increase in the number of women too though) are feeling legitimately angry enough about Israel's actions that they are willing to behave against their best interests, or be "irrational" as far as violent responses go.
 

RedMercury

Junior Member
Yet at the same time they also created even more hostility towards them, particularly in the Arab world, which in the long term means more conflict. One can argue about whether or not the resentment is justified, but in any case the point is that while the invasion in the short term may have helped reduce the frequency of Hezbollah attacks (due to the cease-fire, the path to which may not necessarily have been war), in the long term more young men (we're seeing an increase in the number of women too though) are feeling legitimately angry enough about Israel's actions that they are willing to behave against their best interests, or be "irrational" as far as violent responses go.
I have great respect for what Mr. Avnery writes. He conveys a point better than I can.
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
(word of warning, conservatives won't like this website :D)
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]MLK Day [/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1] Edition
January 19, 2009
[/SIZE][/FONT]​
[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]Livni's Smile [/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+2]The Boss Has Gone Mad [/SIZE][/FONT]

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]By URI AVNERY [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=+3]169[/SIZE][/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1] years before the Gaza War, Heinrich Heine wrote a premonitory poem of 12 lines, under the title “To Edom”. The German-Jewish poet was talking about Germany, or perhaps all the nations of Christian Europe. This is what he wrote (in my rough translation):[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]For a thousand years and more
We have had an understanding
You allow me to breathe
I accept your crazy raging[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Sometimes, when the days get darker
Strange moods come upon you
Till you decorate your claws
With the lifeblood from my veins[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Now our friendship is firmer
Getting stronger by the day
Since the raging started in me
Daily more and more like you.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Zionism, which arose some 50 years after this was written, is fully realizing this prophesy. We Israelis have become a nation like all nations, and the memory of the Holocaust causes us, from time to time, to behave like the worst of them. Only a few of us know this poem, but Israel as a whole lives it out.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]In this war, politicians and generals have repeatedly quoted the words: “The boss has gone mad!” originally shouted by vegetable vendors in the market, in the sense of “The boss has gone crazy and is selling the tomatoes at a loss!” But in the course of time the jest has turned into a deadly doctrine that often appears in Israeli public discourse: in order to deter our enemies, we must behave like madmen, go on the rampage, kill and destroy mercilessly.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]In this war, this has become political and military dogma: only if we kill “them” disproportionately, killing a thousand of “them” for ten of “ours”, will they understand that it’s not worth it to mess with us. It will be “seared into their consciousness” (a favorite Israeli phrase these days). After this, they will think twice before launching another Qassam rocket against us, even in response to what we do, whatever that may be.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]It is impossible to understand the viciousness of this war without taking into account the historical background: the feeling of victimhood after all that has been done to the Jews throughout the ages, and the conviction that after the Holocaust, we have the right to do anything, absolutely anything, to defend ourselves, without any inhibitions due to law or morality.[/SIZE][/FONT]
* * *
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]WHEN THE killing and destruction in Gaza were at their height, something happened in faraway America that was not connected with the war, but was very much connected with it. The Israeli film “Waltz with Bashir” was awarded a prestigious prize. The media reported it with much joy and pride, but somehow carefully managed not to mention the subject of the film. That by itself was an interesting phenomenon: saluting the success of a film while ignoring its contents.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The subject of this outstanding film is one of the darkest chapters in our history: the Sabra and Shatila massacre. In the course of Lebanon War I, a Christian Lebanese militia carried out, under the auspices of the Israeli army, a heinous massacre of hundreds of helpless Palestinian refugees who were trapped in their camp, men, women, children and old people. The film describes this atrocity with meticulous accuracy, including our part in it.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]All this was not even mentioned in the news about the award. At the festive ceremony, the director of the film did not avail himself of the opportunity to protest against the events in Gaza. It is hard to say how many women and children were killed while this ceremony was going on – but it is clear that the massacre in Gaza is much worse than that 1982 event, which moved 400 thousand Israelis to leave their homes and hold a spontaneous mass protest in Tel-Aviv. This time, only 10 thousand stood up to be counted. [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The official Israeli Board of Inquiry that investigated the Sabra massacre found that the Israeli government bore “indirect responsibility” for the atrocity. Several senior officials and officers were suspended. One of them was the division commander, Amos Yaron. Not one of the other accused, from the Minister of Defense, Ariel Sharon, to the Chief of Staff, Rafael Eitan, spoke a word of regret, but Yaron did express remorse in a speech to his officers, and admitted: “Our sensitivities have been blunted”.[/SIZE][/FONT]
* * *
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]BLUNTED SENSITIVITIES are very evident in the Gaza War.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Lebanon War I lasted for 18 years and more than 500 of our soldiers died. The planners of Lebanon War II decided to avoid such a long war and such heavy Israeli casualties. They invented the “mad boss” principle: demolishing whole neighborhoods, devastating areas, destroying infrastructures. In 33 days of war, some 1000 Lebanese, almost all of them civilians, were killed – a record already broken in this war by the 17th day. Yet in that war our army suffered casualties on the ground, and public opinion, which in the beginning supported the war with the same enthusiasm as this time, changed rapidly.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The smoke from Lebanon War II is hanging over the Gaza war. Everybody in Israel swore to learn its lessons. And the main lesson was: not to risk the life of even one single soldier. A war without casualties (on our side). The method: to use the overwhelming firepower of our army to pulverize everything standing in its way and to kill everybody moving in the area. To kill not only the fighters on the other side, but every human being who might possibly turn out to harbor hostile intentions, even if they are obviously an ambulance attendant, a driver in a food convoy or a doctor saving lives. To destroy every building from which our troops could conceivably be shot at – even a school full of refugees, the sick and the wounded. To bomb and shell whole neighborhoods, buildings, mosques, schools, UN food convoys, even ruins under which the injured are buried.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The media devoted several hours to the fall of a Qassam missile on a home in Ashkelon, in which three residents suffered from shock, and did not waste many words on the forty women and children killed in a UN school, from which “we were shot at” – an assertion that was quickly exposed as a blatant lie. [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The firepower was also used to sow terror – shelling everything from a hospital to a vast UN food depot, from a press vantage point to the mosques. The standard pretext: “we were shot at from there”.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]This would have been impossible, had not the whole country been infected with blunted sensitivities. People are no longer shocked by the sight of a mutilated baby, nor by children left for days with the corpse of their mother, because the army did not let them leave their ruined home. It seems that almost nobody cares anymore: not the soldiers, not the pilots, not the media people, not the politicians, not the generals. A moral insanity, whose primary exponent is Ehud Barak. Though even he may be upstaged by Tzipi Livni, who smiled while talking about the ghastly events.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Even Heinrich Heine could not have imagined that.[/SIZE][/FONT]
* * *
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]THE LAST DAYS were dominated by the “Obama effect”.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]We are on board an airplane, and suddenly a huge black mountain appears out of the clouds. In the cockpit, panic breaks out: How to avoid a collision? [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The planners of the war chose the timing with care: during the holidays, when everybody was on vacation, and while President Bush was still around. But they somehow forgot to take into consideration a fateful date: next Tuesday Barack Obama will enter the White House.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]This date is now casting a huge shadow on events. The Israeli Barak understands that if the American Barack gets angry, that would mean disaster. Conclusion: the horrors of Gaza must stop before the inauguration. This week that determined all political and military decisions. Not “the number of rockets”, not “victory”, not “breaking Hamas”. [/SIZE][/FONT]
* * *
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]WHEN THERE is a ceasefire, the first question will be: Who won? [/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]In Israel, all the talk is about the “picture of victory” – not victory itself, but the “picture”. That is essential, in order to convince the Israeli public that the whole business has been worthwhile. At this moment, all the thousands of media people, to the very last one, have been mobilized to paint such a “picture”. The other side, of course, will paint a different one.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The Israeli leaders will boast of two “achievements”: the end of the rockets and the sealing of the Gaza-Egypt border (the co-called “Philadelphi route”. Dubious achievements: the launching of the Qassams could have been prevented without a murderous war, if our government had been ready to negotiate with Hamas after they won the Palestinian elections. The tunnels under the Egyptian border would not have been dug in the first place, if our government had not imposed the deadly blockade on the Strip.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]But the main achievement of the war planners lies in the very barbarity of their plan: the atrocities will have, in their view, a deterrent effect that will hold for a long time.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Hamas, on the other side, will assert that their survival in the face of the mighty Israeli war machine, a tiny David against a giant Goliath, is by itself a huge victory. According to the classic military definition, the winner in a battle is the army that remains on the battlefield when it’s over. Hamas remains. The Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip still stands, in spite of all the efforts to eliminate it. That is a significant achievement.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Hamas will also point out that the Israeli army was not eager to enter the Palestinian towns, in which their fighters were entrenched. And indeed: the army told the government that the conquest of Gaza city could cost the lives of about 200 soldiers, and no politician was ready for that on the eve of elections.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The very fact that a guerrilla force of a few thousand lightly armed fighters held out for long weeks against one of the world’s mightiest armies with enormous firepower, will look to millions of Palestinians and other Arabs and Muslims, and not only to them, like an unqualified victory.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]In the end, an agreement will be concluded that will include the obvious terms. No country can tolerate its inhabitants being exposed to rocket fire from beyond the border, and no population can tolerate a choking blockade. Therefore (1) Hamas will have to give up the launching of missiles, (2) Israel will have to open wide the crossings between the Gaza Strip and the outside world, and (3) the entry of arms into the Strip will be stopped (as far as possible), as demanded by Israel. All this could have happened without war, if our government had not boycotted Hamas.[/SIZE][/FONT]
* * *
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]HOWEVER, THE worst results of this war are still invisible and will make themselves felt only in years to come: Israel has imprinted on world consciousness a terrible image of itself. Billions of people have seen us as a blood-dripping monster. They will never again see Israel as a state that seeks justice, progress and peace. The American Declaration of Independence speaks with approval of “a decent respect to the opinions of mankind”. That is a wise principle.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Even worse is the impact on hundreds of millions of Arabs around us: not only will they see the Hamas fighters as the heroes of the Arab nation, but they will also see their own regimes in their nakedness: cringing, ignominious, corrupt and treacherous.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]The Arab defeat in the 1948 war brought in its wake the fall of almost all the existing Arab regimes and the ascent of a new generation of nationalist leaders, exemplified by Gamal Abd-al-Nasser. The 2009 war may bring about the fall of the current crop of Arab regimes and the ascent of a new generation of leaders – Islamic fundamentalists who hate Israel and all the West..[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]In coming years it will become apparent that this war was sheer madness. The boss has indeed gone mad – in the original sense of the word.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Uri Avnery is an Israeli writer and peace activist with Gush Shalom. He is a contributor to CounterPunch's book
Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
. [/SIZE][/FONT]
 

unknauthr

Junior Member
Yet at the same time they also created even more hostility towards them, particularly in the Arab world, which in the long term means more conflict.

Israel was not going to see its neighbors suddenly embracing peace and halting rocket attacks by sitting there and taking a pounding. Under the circumstances, military action was the only alternative that was left open. In the case of Lebanon, that military action was poorly planned and executed. In the case of Gaza, the Israelis were much better prepared.

The peace treaty with Egypt, you should recall, did not come about because the Egyptians suddently decided that they liked the Israelis. It came about because the Egyptians were sick and tired of watching their sons die to fight someone else's war. By the early 1970s it had become a cliche that "The Arab League is willing to fight Israel down to the last Egyptian." The Egyptians wanted a better life for themselves - and a peace treaty was the only way to achieve it.

The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians will also eventually wear itself out. But it will not happen under Hamas rule. Expecting the religious zealots of Hamas to change their world view would be like expecting the Vatican to renounce the Trinity. It isn't going to happen. It would violate their fundamental view of reality and reason for existence - which is why the separation of church (or mosque) and state is so vital to the functioning of a modern society.

Saner minds will eventually prevail, and recognize that Hamas has nothing to offer the Palestinians but more destruction and death. Unfortunately, before that happens, it is likely that other, outside influences - whose sons are not paying the price for continuing the cycle of violence - will no doubt attempt to stir things up.
 

Pointblank

Senior Member
Israel was not going to see its neighbors suddenly embracing peace and halting rocket attacks by sitting there and taking a pounding. Under the circumstances, military action was the only alternative that was left open. In the case of Lebanon, that military action was poorly planned and executed. In the case of Gaza, the Israelis were much better prepared.

The peace treaty with Egypt, you should recall, did not come about because the Egyptians suddently decided that they liked the Israelis. It came about because the Egyptians were sick and tired of watching their sons die to fight someone else's war. By the early 1970s it had become a cliche that "The Arab League is willing to fight Israel down to the last Egyptian." The Egyptians wanted a better life for themselves - and a peace treaty was the only way to achieve it.

The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians will also eventually wear itself out. But it will not happen under Hamas rule. Expecting the religious zealots of Hamas to change their world view would be like expecting the Vatican to renounce the Trinity. It isn't going to happen. It would violate their fundamental view of reality and reason for existence - which is why the separation of church (or mosque) and state is so vital to the functioning of a modern society.

Saner minds will eventually prevail, and recognize that Hamas has nothing to offer the Palestinians but more destruction and death. Unfortunately, before that happens, it is likely that other, outside influences - whose sons are not paying the price for continuing the cycle of violence - will no doubt attempt to stir things up.

I would point to Edward N. Luttwak's article in the journal Foreign Affairs in 1999; in that article, he argued that imposed ceasefires do nothing but prolong the conflict, unless the ceasefire is immediately followed by negotiated peace talks. Why? Because it gives the combatants a chance to rest, re-arm, recruit and train for additional combat, which will prolong a conflict and increase the scope of the killing and destruction. It also shields weaker parties from the consequences of refusing to make concessions for peace, and as expected, such weaker parties continue to fight knowing that if things are getting out of hand, they can turn to the world stage and get another imposed ceasefire to save themselves so they can fight again.
 

The_Zergling

Junior Member
Israel was not going to see its neighbors suddenly embracing peace and halting rocket attacks by sitting there and taking a pounding.

Granted.

Under the circumstances, military action was the only alternative that was left open. In the case of Lebanon, that military action was poorly planned and executed. In the case of Gaza, the Israelis were much better prepared.

I disagree with this strongly: military action was *not* the ONLY alternative available, and certainly not necessarily the indiscriminate type they have been using in this conflict. It is oversimplifying things and too easily justifying Israel's invasion.

The peace treaty with Egypt, you should recall, did not come about because the Egyptians suddently decided that they liked the Israelis. It came about because the Egyptians were sick and tired of watching their sons die to fight someone else's war. By the early 1970s it had become a cliche that "The Arab League is willing to fight Israel down to the last Egyptian." The Egyptians wanted a better life for themselves - and a peace treaty was the only way to achieve it.

The conflict between Israel and the Palestinians will also eventually wear itself out. But it will not happen under Hamas rule. Expecting the religious zealots of Hamas to change their world view would be like expecting the Vatican to renounce the Trinity. It isn't going to happen. It would violate their fundamental view of reality and reason for existence - which is why the separation of church (or mosque) and state is so vital to the functioning of a modern society.

Saner minds will eventually prevail, and recognize that Hamas has nothing to offer the Palestinians but more destruction and death. Unfortunately, before that happens, it is likely that other, outside influences - whose sons are not paying the price for continuing the cycle of violence - will no doubt attempt to stir things up.

I agree that it is hard to envision a lasting peace (cease-fires are possible though) coming from Hamas with their current ideology, however what I'm saying is that as long as Israel continues to prolong the political circumstances that frustrate Palestinians daily, then there will always be incentive to support or join a group like Hamas. To me, the most effective long-term way to get rid of the problem is not by bombing a group and making death the only barrier to support, but rather make it so what the group advocates seems unattractive, possibly through reconciliation. Note that this by no means is bowing to all of Hamas' demands, but rather showing the Palestinians and the world that Israel sees Palestinians as logical human beings that they actually care about, rather than simply barely tolerate due to the fact that they were already there on the land when the Israeli state was created by the Europeans. In essence, hearts and minds (to use an old cliche).

And yes, I realize death is one way to make joining a group unattractive, but when you are frustrated enough (as the Palestinians appear to be) then the power of it as a deterrence decreases immensely.
 
Top