Why did Israel do it? To feel good about itself after Lebanon, right? Maybe just kill a lot of Arabs? Or to capture Saddam? We'll never know, will we? Professor and TV expert on the military, Anthony Cordesman-- a former assistant to McCain-- says the whole thing is "misguided" and Israel is facing "strategic defeat" in Gaza. Basically it never even said what it meant to achieve and it's not clear that it ever figured that out.
Says my military friend who sent this to me, My opinion: if Israel is really concerned about addressing the rocket issue why not just insert forces into the Philadelphia corridor (Gaza - Egyptian border) and advance north as far as necessary to take over the tunnels (2-3 miles). Such an operation would allow non-combatants to flee and would result in far less destruction and bloodshed -- and might even succeed in cutting off the supply of rockets.
Haaretz is reporting that Livni and Barak what a ceasefire now. Olmert does not.
Israel's plan is to convince the Gazans to move to Egypt.
Israel's plan (beyond boosting their politicians' standing in the polls) is to stir up such a orgy of hatred and killing in the region, that any attempt by an Obama administration at an imposed peace will have become inconceivable.
Best of all would be a terrorist attack on the U.S.
(Remember, this is the fourth largest army in the world. "Peace" is the last thing it needs.)
Phil, by an UNCANNY coincidence, a cordon sanitaire, or rather a strip of completely bare scorched earth, at least 300m wide, on EACH SIDE of the border, is exactly what they are currently demanding.
"if Israel is really concerned about addressing the rocket issue why not just insert forces into the Philadelphia corridor"
Israel is not concerned about the rocket issue. That was just a pretext. In fact, the rockets have a positive value as far as Israel's concerned, as they allow it the pretext to completely level much of Gaza every 5-10 years, and thereby prevent the development of an independent industry, trade, etc. Basically, Israel wants sovereignty over Israel without responsibility for its inhabitants. Israel's siege — especially the one at sea — means that Israel is effectively an occupying power and has responsibility to provide for the needs of the Strip's 1.5 million inhabitants. But Israel wants the control without the responsibility. Israel's maintenance of the siege and its arguments that the occupation is over were based primarily on the "fact" that Israel had the right to close its borders as it saw fit (the fact that the sea was also blocked for shipments is routinely ignored and dismissed — because that is where the real problem is — and when not, some argument or another about smuggling of weapons by sea is made). The argument was, Egypt has control over Gaza's southern border, and therefore, it is not our responsibility what Egypt is doing. If Egypt is closing the border, then it's Egypt's problem, not ours, so go complain to Egypt. Of course, Egypt was closing its border on behalf of the Israelis, and Mubarak's regime has no real alternative because it has been ordered to close the border, by the U.S., which keeps his regime afloat… And guess why the U.S is pressuring him to do so? Because Israel has put its fifth column population in the U.S. (the zionist Jews) to work to put pressure on the U.S. to force the U.S. to do so. What Israel does not do directly and explicitly, it does through backdoor channels. The uses of a fifth column population in the heart of a superpower…….. for Israel, these people more useful staying put rather than contributing to the Jewish demographic boost that Israel is desperate for. Demographics is not really a problem as far as Israeli decision-making is concerned, because Israelis function on the assumption that no matter what the demographic balance, they will not cede control. They will continue to control all the land and impose their minority apartheid rule on the majority of the land's inhabitants, even if it is called apartheid and condemned. Which is why Israel's focus is not on peacemaking, but on stonewalling efforts to pressure it — whether by merely calling it an apartheid regime or introducing sanctions against it …
So Phil, the answer to your question about taking the so-called Philadelphi corridor, is that it is not in Israel's interest to do so. Israel is extra-careful about being stuck with control over it after it occupies it with the intention of boosting its bargaining position. What if Egypt refuses to get back control over the border? And what if international forces are not available, because no country wants to put its soldiers in risk of sure death because Hamas has said it would consider any international forces anywhere in Gaza to be invading and occupying forces and will treat them accordingly? What would Israel do then? Retreat it wouldn't be able to do, as that would be akin to handing over the only "achievement" in its weeks-long war on Gaza. And being stuck with the corridor would place all of the Gaza Strip effectively under Israeli occupation and therefore Israeli responsibility for providing Gaza with decent levels of sustenance, all its needs, reconstruction, etc. Back to square 1. Israel does not want the responsibility, only the control. That is the dilemma. That is why Israel does not dare take the corridor — not that it would be able to do even if it tried. Israel's interests have been to separate Gaza from the West Bank, and the only effective way of doing so is to hand Gaza over to full Egyptian control. This is another reason why Israel has been trying to make Gaza reliant on Egyptian sustenance more than on Israeli goods.
"Haaretz is reporting that Livni and Barak what a ceasefire now. Olmert does not."
That makes sense. Olmert knows he is politically dead anyway. His career was finished with July 2006 and the corruption charges. He knows that the IDF has failed to achieve its objectives in Gaza. A pullback would crown him the worst prime minister in Israel's history. He is still hoping that at least he could save himself from that kind of embarrassment, even if he cannot save his political career. Livni and Barak, on the other hand, realizing that the operation has failed, are looking for a way out before it is too late, and to do so in such a way that they can present their failure as an achievement. They also realize that they need to wrap this up before Obama is sworn in. Olmert couldn't care less. Livni and Barak do, because they have hopes for re-election. Right now, Netanyahu must be praying for an expansion of the operation, because he is afraid that Livni and Barak are going to play some game of gift-wrapping an abysmal failure as a kind of victory. If that happens, Likud would lose its standing significantly prior to the elections. The real winner would be Kadima, but Labor too. Surely the public would want Barak as defense minister. They would want the Livni-Barak duo to run Israel's affairs. Netanyahu would end up in the dustbin, at least until the next elections.
b from l, no one ever claimed the philadelphi corridor problem was rockets, they claimed it was tunnels.