Sunday, April 10, 2011

The case for retaking Gaza

Ted Belman

The diplomatic chapter of the coalition agreement asserts that “the government will work determinedly and regularly against terror groups threatening Israel and do everything needed in order to eradicate them. A strategic target for the State of Israel would be the toppling of Hamas’ rule in Gaza.”

FM Leiberman intends to demand it. I think it should be done now.

1. The arms build up in Gaza both in quantity and sophistication, continues night and day, by land and sea without let up.

2. By doing nothing Israel is playing Russian Roulette. One of these days, a rocket of missile will hit a group of Israelis.

3. The ME is in turmoil today with people all over being killed ruthlessly. That will give Israel some cover to do what it has to do.

4. NATO is occupied in Libya and the EU is showing themselves to be hopelessly inept and divided.

5. Obama is fighting for his political life. 6. Sooner of later, there will be war. We should start the war at a time of our choosing. What we don’t want to have to do, is defend against Hezbollah and Hamas at the same time if we can avoid it. To defeat each of them in the shortest possible time, we must conduct major land invasions. The rocket attacks must be stopped within days. We should deal with Hamas now hoping that Hezbollah won’t attack us while we do it. But that worry should not prevent us from acting.

7. The mere existence of Hamas and Hezbollah with their large arsenals restrains our options against Iran.

8. The goal of the invasion of Gaza would be to kill as many Hamas terrorists as we can, destroy all their weapons and remove them from power. It goes without saying that Shalit must be liberated.

9. The Egyptian army is preoccupied with controlling the situation in Egypt. No way it is going to defend Hamas now. Also there is no permanent government in Egypt. When Hamas is eradicated, it will be on its own if it attacks.

That would put an end to the smuggling, the rocket attacks and the need for a blockade. From the West’s point of view it would make peace with the PA much more possible.

Samson Blinded writes

Ceasefire was a sensible option two years ago because Hamas, acting on its Islamic values, could not agree to any kind of peace with Jews. The current situation is different: Iran steps up weapons deliveries to Gaza, and Rafah Crossing may be opened any time, or at least Egypt won’t enforce weapons embargo. Already today we are dealing with advanced antitank and anti-aircraft rockets, and narrowly prevented delivery of shells with chemical weapons from Libyan rebels to Hamas. Maintaining ceasefire would allow Hamas to arm itself to the point that the next war with Gaza, unavoidable as it is, will be a real war, not a slam-dunk affair like two years ago.

The downsides include many deaths and casualites among our troops. Defending ourselves was never cheap or painless.

No comments: