I started a new Poll in the right column. What do you think?
By David Horoqwitz, TOI July 29/14 4:23 PM
The PM is clear-eyed about the danger Hamas poses to Israel. So why, despite considerable pressure, is he manifestly disinclined to order a full-scale ground offensive?
[..] Indeed, it has been clear since the days before this conflict began that Netanyahu has not wanted to launch a full-scale war against Hamas. He repeatedly offered “quiet for quiet” when the rocket fire first escalated, immediately accepted the Egyptian ceasefire proposal two weeks ago, agreed to a series of “humanitarian time-outs” which were then breached by Hamas over recent days, and waved away what he called the “background noise” from those, like Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, who have been loudly urging him to smash Hamas and deriding him for his hesitancy.
Nobody can imagine for a moment that Netanyahu does not consider Hamas the embodiment of Islamic extremist evil. Nobody can doubt that he takes seriously Hamas’s declared goal of destroying Israel. Netanyahu does not believe for a second that Hamas can be reformed. Netanyahu does not believe any conceivable post-conflict framework could achieve the demilitarization of Gaza if Hamas remains largely intact. He knows all too well how Hamas has strengthened its capacity to do Israel harm over the seven years since it seized control of Gaza, and that it will only strengthen further if it is able to do so after this conflict. It was he who warned that the tunnels would have been used to “catastrophic” effect against the residents of Gaza-adjacent communities had they not been tackled now. It was he on Monday night who declared it untenable for Israelis to be faced with the threat of “death from above” by rocket fire and “death from below” via the terror tunnels.
So why, from a prime minister clear-eyed about the danger Hamas poses to Israel, and urged by his right-wing base to approve more intensive military action, this manifest disinclination to send the IDF “all the way”?
One possible explanation: He believes that for all Hamas’s swaggering, it is in real trouble — not militarily, where its key capacity has not been significantly harmed, but in terms of its credibility in Gaza and thus its likely standing when the guns fall silent. That Gazans loathe Israel is a given. But might they also increasingly loathe Hamas for bringing Israel’s military force down upon them? And might a weakened Hamas be forced to accept the return of Mahmoud Abbas’s Palestinian Authority to Gaza, with the possibility of the “sustained calm” for Israel that Netanyahu set as his opening objective for this conflict?
Another possible consideration: He knows how heavy the IDF losses will be in a full-scale ground offensive. Israel enjoys air supremacy over Gaza. On the ground, things are very different. Israel lost five soldiers on Monday who were killed by Hamas gunmen emerging from a tunnel the IDF had identified, partially demolished, and thought it had secured. Even in those most favorable of conceivable circumstances, the infiltrators fatally surprised the army. Deep in Gaza, Hamas enjoys a home field advantage. Its killers are waiting. The IDF is a highly motivated, well-trained and well-equipped fighting force. Hamas’s home advantage notwithstanding, Israel’s ground troops are certain to kill many more of the enemy’s gunmen than they lose. But be the ratio 5:1, 10:1, or 20:1, Israel will bleed, and quite apart from his own anguish at such a prospect, the prime minister may be concerned that the public mood will turn radically before Hamas is defeated.
Alternately, Netanyahu may be highly concerned about the consequences of a successful ground invasion, leaving Israel back in control of 1.7 million very hostile Palestinians.
A further possible explanation — to my mind a relevant one: Netanyahu is watching the boiling Middle East aware of the ease with which one active military front, in Gaza, can become two, three or more. In South Lebanon, Hezbollah has 10 times as many rockets as Hamas had three weeks ago, with longer ranges, greater accuracy and bigger warheads. It has stayed out of this conflict so far; there are no guarantees it will continue to do so. Its sponsor-in-chief, Iran’s Ayatollah Khamenei, has been urging Muslims everywhere to arm the Palestinians against the vicious Zionist enterprise. Thus far, he has steered clear of calling Hezbollah into action — testament, perhaps, to the ongoing deterrent effect of the 2006 war. Closer to home, last weekend saw nine Palestinians killed in clashes in the West Bank, after the masses were exhorted by Hamas to unleash a Third Intifada. There were riots in parts of East Jerusalem, too.
Also worth remembering, as Netanyahu holds back, is his unyielding focus on the Iranian nuclear weapon drive. If necessary, he has said time and again, Israel will act alone to stop Iran attaining the bomb. Netanyahu emphatically considers the Iranian program an existential threat to Israel, and is anything but confident in the will of the international community to avert it. Becoming deeply embroiled in a major, bloody war in Gaza is a distraction he may be intent on avoiding. He may also be concerned at exhausting such tolerance for Israeli military action as still exists internationally over Gaza — where the scenes of devastation, death and helplessness effortlessly trump the most articulate efforts to explain why this is all Hamas’s fault — when he may need it over Iran.
Only the prime minister and those closest to him know which if any of these considerations, or others, are centrally impacting his decision-making. Netanyahu is anything but a fool — and nor, for that matter, are the minister of defense and the IDF chief of staff who are stewarding this conflict with him and, unsurprisingly, showing no signs of dissent. He knows he can’t leave the IDF treading water in Gaza — partially deployed, relatively exposed.
But whatever choices he now makes, there can be no doubt: Netanyahu, who opposed Israel’s 2005 disengagement from Gaza, did not want to order its re-invasion. Which begs the question: What does he have in mind?
Obama must be very happy for the distraction of the gaza war from his many blunders. Flooding US with illegals, ebola scare, ukraine, iran mess, isis syria, congressional suit…..
France seeking to disarm the Jews in preparation for their slaughter
http://www.israelnationalnewsDOTcom/News/News.aspx/183558#.U9ps6PldWSo
SHmuel HaLevi 2 Said:
My desire is to see the complete destruction of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the demilitarization of Gaza. It is painful to see the death of any Israeli soldier and a civilian by terrorists. I pray to God to give wisdom to the current leadership of Israel in order for them to stay the course until they decisively defeat the vicious murderers and sadist Islamists in Gaza.
If the war ends in Israel’s favor, forming a commission to investigate about the war may not be essential. If not,I fully agree with your suggestion. Thanks.
yamit82 Said:
I concur with your outrage. How are you and Dagmar getting along, still pals???
yamit82 Said:
It is interesting to me that you can accuse BB of the most vile kapo crimes but cannot entertain the speculation of a conspiracy in the outcome for gaza.
In my view there is strong indication the BB has already agreed to an abbas takeover of a demilitarized gaza which is the same as a unity gov sought by the western alliance, GCC and Egypt. You said the same when i originally brought up the speculation of the same relationships a couple of years ago regarding the arab spring and understandings between the GCC and Israel which have since been confirmed by BB and liberman. I said the same relationship governed the peace talks and now govern the gaza outcome.
My model is so far the best explanation for all the strange goings on of BB starting with the aborted pillar of defense and the gaza cease-fire and prisoner releases. My explanation for BB not going all the way is because he does not want to risk more lives for an outcome he has already accepted. The only fight is because hamas is holding out for more for its end of the deal. the beginning will be abbas taking over customs. Gaza has already agreed to unity gov but want to keep their weapons.
If BB is capable of a war on the jews then why could he not be capable of an elitist move of staging events for the street. These moves typify the CFR.
Hamas is operating like a loser who knows it can still influence the game, is a player that others depend on to fulfill their agenda, can roil the pot……and therefore get more concessions before conceding.
I am not talking about a conspiracy where everyone agrees but where major players like the US/EU/GCC enlist their proxies into their agenda. And then the agenda does not play out exactly as they thought they agreed.
@ yamit82:
Calls to Stop Destruction of Community Honoring Murdered Teens
Homes for five families, built to honor the memories of three murdered Israeli teens, are in danger of demoition.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/183559
There are NO WORDS …
🙁
@ bernard ross:
This is the Real BB!!!
Easier to destroy Jewish Homes than Hamas Tunnels. 🙁
Government Demolishes Homes of IDF Soldiers Fighting in Gaza
Maybe this is why 16,000 reservists were just mobilized.
BB may attain a ceasefire with Hamas but his war against the Jews is ongoing, no matter what.
@ SHmuel HaLevi 2:
Its too early to jump the gun. Let’s see first how this war ends.
diana Said:
On the contrary, if Israel does not control Gaza, the most poisonous things flourish there. Gaza was handed to the Arabs on the premise they would look after themselves and leave Israel alone. That hasn’t happened. Hamas would rather much kill Jews than help the Gazans attain better lives. By every measure, Sharon’s Disengagement was a catastrophe. It needs to be completely reversed or Gaza is doomed to be a Groundhog Day.
I accept the idea by Abbu Guutuu of a post war review to ferret out the facts related to the aftermath of “disengagement”. Including the present brutal war which is a direct result of that abomination.
A people directly elected Commission of Inquiry with extended power would be the only accepted instrument of review.
And I do not have or want access to classified information at this point. Those elected to the Commission and after stern vetting will receive that information.
@ AbbaGuutuu:
@ diana:
That is because, Diana, what we are facing since Oslo and “disengagement” is far better, is it?
Don’t you love the “peace” that those disgraces that against the law concocted Oslo and against a referendum effected “disengagement” brought to us all? The era of the unJewish concoctions under false pretenses is over or soon will be Diane.
So, Israel reoccupies Gaza temporarily. Who wants to have to control 1 1/2 million Gazans, even if it is temporarily. It is a recepie for disaster………….