I used to think that people like the author are just pretending---nobody can be that stupid.
Don't underestimate the amount of pro-Arab sentiment around the world. Maybe it originates in the cradle of civilization stuff, maybe it comes from the 1001 nights - the point is that some of these guys are so infatuated with the Arabs that they think it's unreasonable for Israel to respond militarily to Arabs lobbing missiles into their cities. Of course, if Pakistan were to do the same, India would be returning the fire and responding with indignation to any criticism.
Maybe it originates in the cradle of civilization stuff, maybe it comes from the 1001 nights
It's the 'civilized fantasy' of going primitive, fighting The Man, getting away from the boredom and all the First World problems.
St. Pancake had the luxury of playing revolutionary in Gaza because she knew that she didn't have to stay in Paleostine. Similarly, every journalist spouting off in Beirut knows that they can hop off their barstool and onto a plane back to New York, Paris , or London. The freelance photog in Syria knows it's just a paying job; they won't be stuck there for the aftermath.
Who knows - maybe there's a paying job touting your recently gained expertise when you get back. Beats having to grub for an art grant or cover all those boring sex and corruption scandals back home.
I was referring to his belief that Iran gives a sh*t about Paleos, ZF.
Only in so far as they are another pawn on the chessboard, g(r)omgoru
Excellent to use as mis-direction, see how this kerfuffle has removed Syria from the front pages.
I post this for discussion, not because I necessarily agree with the author.
Today, for the first time in decades, air raid sirens sounded across Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. The rockets fired from the Hamas, always the voice of sweet reason,-controlled Gazoo Strip crashed down harmlessly in open areas, but Hamas had nevertheless scored a propaganda victory: It had proved that it could endanger the lives of citizens in Israel's two largest cities.
These latest attacks are just one indication of how, despite Israel's best efforts, Hamas's stockpile of rockets is only growing deadlier with time. In October 2009, current Shin Bet chief Yoram Cohen co-authored a study at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy on the 2008-2009 Israeli offensive in Gazoo: It reported that 600 rockets were fired into Israel during the 22-day war, most of which were domestically produced, short-range weapons. By comparison, the IDF reported earlier today that more than 550 rockets had struck Israel in the past three days -- and of course, the weapons managed to reach Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, which Hamas was incapable of doing during the previous conflict.
Bill Clinton, of all people, predicted this in a 2009 interview with Foreign Policy, and worried openly about what it meant for the future of a peace agreement. "[I]t's only a question of time until [these rockets] are de facto outfitted with GPS positioning systems. And when that happens and the casualty rates start to really mount, will that make it more difficult for the Paleostinians to make peace instead of less?" he worried. "Because they will be even more pressed by the radical groups saying, 'No, no, look, look, we are making eight out of 10 hits. Let's stay at this.'"
Assuming the Israeli government isn't willing to let a steadily increasing proportion of its population live under the threat of rocket fire -- a fair bet -- what is its answer to this conundrum? For answers, I turned to retired Brigadier General Shlomo Brom, a former director of strategic planning in the Israel Defense Forces and currently a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies, one of Israel's premier think tanks.
Brom's response will provide little solace for Hamas, or the people of Gazoo. "Eventually, weapons are getting to Gazoo, and because of that I don't think the solution is to prevent Hamas from holding these kinds of weapons. It's not possible," he says. "The only solution -- which is of course is a partial solution -- is deterrence."
In a nutshell, Brom's argument is that Israel can't stop Hamas from acquiring these weapons -- but it can make the costs of using them unbearably high. It's a recipe for many future confrontations just like this one.
And Hizbollah won 2006 war---but they've been awfully quiet (as far as Israel is concerned) since then. 4 days ago Paleosimians had hundreds of Fajr & Grad missiles---today they've a lot less. And just wait until they start accessing the infrastructure damage they've sustained.
On a long run: peace with Muslims (Arabs in particular) is impossible. However, both Muslim ME and their principal anti-Israeli ally EUrope face collapse. In case of Europe it'll lead to return to nation states too busy to survive to indulge their "anti-Zionist" hobby. In case of Arabs, famine with total collapse of social organization.
This is a familiar story. Israel wins at arms, the bad guys win on paper. There are plenty of ways to counter the rocket threat, but the chattering class will excoriate Israel if they ever implement an effective countermeasure.
For Israel, as for us in the US, the trick is to not listen to those who want you to fail.
this is a form of assymmetric warfare - and for Hamas it's all about public opinion on the Arab streets plus financial backing from secret supporters. the ground war is irrelevant - they know it will stop sooner or later. for them it's a WIN just because they fought Israel. until Israel changes this dynamic - things won't get better for Jerusalem.