DEBKAfile Exclusive: Washington forbids Israeli anti-missile offensive in Gaza, wants issue determined by special US military delegation – not IDF
May 13, 2007o
[First benchmarks and now this. US is breaking Israel’s balls. It is determined to force capitulation on Israel.]
Therefore, there was not much point in the prime minister calling the national security cabinet into special session Sunday to decide on military action against ongoing Qassam missile attacks from Gaza and the Hamas war build-up.
The chief of staff and heads of the Shin Bet, Mossad and national security council were present. Some ministers echoed popular demands for an expanded military incursion into the Gaza Strip to put an end to the daily missile attacks against Ashkelon and Sderot, and destroy the war infrastructure Hamas is building up on Israel�s southwestern border.
Prime minister Ehud Olmert, FM Tzipi Livni and defense minister Amir Peretz talked them down.
On the recommendation of Lt. Gen. Keith G. Dayton, US security coordinator, instructions from Washington reached Jerusalem last week, according to DEBKAfile�s sources in the US capital, forbidding the launch of a ground offensive or any other major military operation in Gaza.
To hold the Israeli government to this directive, the Bush administration will be sending an military delegation to Israel this week, to survey the damage caused by the Palestinian missiles and draw up guidelines for dealing with them.
Olmert’s assent to the US government determining what form the IDF’s response to the Palestinian missile blitz from Gaza should take has left Israel’s security and military establishments aghast. They are furious at being summoned to a phony debate in the cabinet Sunday, purportedly for a hearing at long last of their plans to quell the threats building up from Gaza.
DEBKAfile’s military sources report their plans is based essentially on in-and-out incursions for the pursuit of terrorists and missile-launchers, the destruction of war materiel and infrastructure, and targeted assassinations of terrorist leaders.
Jon
The reason there is no let up in the terrorist attacks is becuase the terrorist have safe havens in Iran, Syria, and Pakistan. In order to win the war against Islam, we will have to do something to shut down the sanctuaries. I agree the “perception” is they are winning. This is true every where. They do a much better job at propaganda than we do. We will need to do a better job of getting our message out and we will need to shut down the sanctuaries in Iran, Syria, and Pakistan.
In order to shut down the sanctuaries, the US and its coaltion partners will probably need a larger military force and the troops we currently have in the region should be allowed to fight to win. The rules of engagement have been far to restrictive. With regards to troops numbers, we can’t even get NATO to honor their committments to Afghanistan!!
As far as getting our message out, during the Cold War the US used Air America Radio to send messages into the Soviet Union. Perhaps something like that would work for the current situation. Unfortunately I don’t see many leaders with the courage to implement something like this.
Trouble is even with these ratios there is no let up in terrorist attacks and Jihadi perception is they are winning as we see happened with 2nd Lebanon war. This is my meaning when I say they are being mauled.
“Guidlines for dealing with them…” Destroy the missle launch sites. Destroy the weapons factories. Treat “Palestine” the way Nazi Germany was treated during WWII. These are the appropiate guidlines for dealing with the them.
Jon
The US military kill ratio is somewhere between 50:1 or 100:1. It is fair to say that more Jihadists are getting killed than American soldiers are getting killed. The biggest problem is the terrorists are continually being supplied from Iran and Syria. There are two ways this can be dealt with. They are as follows: 1.)remove the regimes in Iran and Syria. If this is done, the Iraq problem goes away. The infrastructure of those countries will need to be completely destroyed in much the same manner as Nazi Germany and imperial Japan were destroyed during WWII, or 2.)seal the Iranain and Syrian borders. This would halt the flow of weapons and supplies to the terrorists.
I think option one is the best option but either one should work. To implement either option will require that the Americans and their coalition partners start fighting to win rather than fighting not to lose. If we continue to fight not to lose, this will end in disaster. The disaster will range from one or more American cities being reduced to radioactive dust to America being conquered and subjigated by her enemies.
Maybe they should be housed in thin skinned mobile homes around Sderot. They are getting mauled in Iraq and they are going to draw up guidlines for dealilng with it?
I agree with Gary. We cannot win the hearts and minds of the terrorists. The only solution is a military one. I just pray we realize this before one or more of our major cities is turned to radioactive dust.
The soltuion for Israel here is to simply say “no” to pressure from the US or anyone else.
Israel needs to defend itself regardless of American foreign policy (which has been and always will be geared towards its own interests that may or may not be in Israel’s best interest). The Americans are great at tying the hands of Israel and making sure that their oil friends in Saudi and the Gulf are satisfied.
The Gaza pullback failed to bring the desired starting point towards peace – in fact it has worsened the security position of Israel. The failure to soundly defeat the Hezbollah in Lebanon has weakened Israel and has revealed a lack of preparedness and determination. There is way too much deference to world public opinion and the best way to gain respect is through military and leadership strength and vision.
The lessons learned in just these two recent events must inform Israeli leaders that they must do a better job of confronting their foes and do so without consideration for the interests of the State Department in the US. Sometimes the US will be helpful, at other times (like in 1967 when the US remained “neutral†or perhaps were helping Egypt spy on Israel and during the Yom Kippur war when Kissinger wanted to see Israel suffer – and his Arab friends feel vindicated and strong – and Kissinger would not re-supply Israel before their casualties mounted).
I think that the US would have to take the lead from a strong Israel prepared for all eventualities and prepared to act. On the other hand, a weak Israel will be at the mercy of US strategists – the same ones who are still eager to win the hearts and minds of terrorists rather than bomb them into dust.