Comments on: Hoping That I Know The Ledge http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/ Just another Firedoglake weblog Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:52:40 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Mammal http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/comment-page-1/#comment-5531 Mammal Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:52:22 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/#comment-5531 <p>Like everybody else, I’m trying my best to understand Israeli strategy, and hope that their vagueness about it is strategic rather than indicative of its absence. It is possible, and I’ll guess we’ll find out, that Israel wishes to occupy a buffer zone, ala southern Lebanon back in the day, in order to push back the rocketeers (and give it greater access for incursions). If this is the case, then I hope they turn over the buffer zone to the UN or NATO.</p> <p>Alternatively, Israel might simply be degrading Hamas’ capabilities in the short term. If this is the case, then they must repeat this every six months. I don’t like this option, but at least it constitutes a logical strategy.</p> <p>I don’t know why Israel doesn’t retake the Philadephi route. When Sharon pulled out of Gaza, including the Philadephi route, did anyone not see this day coming?</p> <p>And, Spencer, I’m curious about this. Everybody roundly considers the 2006 Hezbollah war to be a disaster for Israel. Is it possible that we’re all missing the boat? I mean, there has been quiet on the norther front ever since the war. It might just be the case that, for all of Nasrallah’s bluster, he really did not enjoy all that much the destruction of southern Lebanon, and that he doesn’t wish for a repeat experience. Maybe, by raising the stakes, Israel bought some quiet, which, in theory, allows for a chance at peace. Perhaps the thinking is the same here in Gaza.</p> Like everybody else, I’m trying my best to understand Israeli strategy, and hope that their vagueness about it is strategic rather than indicative of its absence. It is possible, and I’ll guess we’ll find out, that Israel wishes to occupy a buffer zone, ala southern Lebanon back in the day, in order to push back the rocketeers (and give it greater access for incursions). If this is the case, then I hope they turn over the buffer zone to the UN or NATO.

Alternatively, Israel might simply be degrading Hamas’ capabilities in the short term. If this is the case, then they must repeat this every six months. I don’t like this option, but at least it constitutes a logical strategy.

I don’t know why Israel doesn’t retake the Philadephi route. When Sharon pulled out of Gaza, including the Philadephi route, did anyone not see this day coming?

And, Spencer, I’m curious about this. Everybody roundly considers the 2006 Hezbollah war to be a disaster for Israel. Is it possible that we’re all missing the boat? I mean, there has been quiet on the norther front ever since the war. It might just be the case that, for all of Nasrallah’s bluster, he really did not enjoy all that much the destruction of southern Lebanon, and that he doesn’t wish for a repeat experience. Maybe, by raising the stakes, Israel bought some quiet, which, in theory, allows for a chance at peace. Perhaps the thinking is the same here in Gaza.

]]> By: sghiteinfla http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/comment-page-1/#comment-5530 sghiteinfla Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:49:52 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/#comment-5530 <p>If thats all they do there is now way they can claim they “crushed” Hamas. All they will have done is crushed their infrastructure. Hamas lives through the people, not in my opinion their weapons. After they leave whomever is left will just find other ways to get access to weapons. Nothing gained.</p> <p>Of course what I really think will happen is the exact opposite. They will error on the side of over reaction and kill a lot of Palestinians who are not Hamas militants “just to be sure”. And thats what I think my biggest problem is. There has been a tendency to say Hamas over and over in the media to the point where a lot of average everyday people have the impression that all of the residents of the Gaza strip are Hamas militants. Not a lot of people, yourself excluded, are even bothering to point out that not long ago the more moderate (at least perception wise) Fatah ruled Gaza and there are still many of them there.</p> If thats all they do there is now way they can claim they “crushed” Hamas. All they will have done is crushed their infrastructure. Hamas lives through the people, not in my opinion their weapons. After they leave whomever is left will just find other ways to get access to weapons. Nothing gained.

Of course what I really think will happen is the exact opposite. They will error on the side of over reaction and kill a lot of Palestinians who are not Hamas militants “just to be sure”. And thats what I think my biggest problem is. There has been a tendency to say Hamas over and over in the media to the point where a lot of average everyday people have the impression that all of the residents of the Gaza strip are Hamas militants. Not a lot of people, yourself excluded, are even bothering to point out that not long ago the more moderate (at least perception wise) Fatah ruled Gaza and there are still many of them there.

]]> By: Spencer Ackerman http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/comment-page-1/#comment-5528 Spencer Ackerman Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:39:22 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/#comment-5528 <p>They’re identifying Hamas targets — installations rather than people — like the university and certain mosques and government buildings run by Hamas and using that as a proxy. Your broader point, I think, stands though. There’s a necessary imprecision here that speaks to the myopia of the enterprise.</p> They’re identifying Hamas targets — installations rather than people — like the university and certain mosques and government buildings run by Hamas and using that as a proxy. Your broader point, I think, stands though. There’s a necessary imprecision here that speaks to the myopia of the enterprise.

]]> By: sghiteinfla http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/comment-page-1/#comment-5527 sghiteinfla Sun, 04 Jan 2009 15:22:56 +0000 http://attackerman.firedoglake.com/2009/01/04/gazainvasionpitfalls/#comment-5527 <p>A simple question. How do the Israeli troops decide who is Hamas and who isn’t? They don’t wear uniforms and they have lived their all their lives. So if they start to blend in, other than recognizable Hamas leadership how do they weed out the rank and file. If the answer is what I think it is “they can’t” then the whole premise of the exercise is fatally flawed.</p> A simple question. How do the Israeli troops decide who is Hamas and who isn’t? They don’t wear uniforms and they have lived their all their lives. So if they start to blend in, other than recognizable Hamas leadership how do they weed out the rank and file. If the answer is what I think it is “they can’t” then the whole premise of the exercise is fatally flawed.

]]>