Well it seems like we're fully entrenched back in gaza again. We've retaken Alei Sinai and Dugit. When I was last in the area, actually 2 times ago - the last time I helped setting up a moved greenhouse, but that's neither here nor there-, we went to the religious beach. Not a separate beach. There were both males and females there. What made it a religious beach (as it was called by the secular guy who we asked where we could find a beach) was the fact that most of the people were voluntarily wearing clothes. Women were covered properly (even in the water) and men were in the water without shirts. It was a very cool experience.
Back to politics.
Now that the plishtim have convinced us to retake part of the strip, how much longer before they convince us that we need a permanent presence there. Maybe we should build settlements there so we have an excuse for constant military protection. OH WAIT. we tried that already. The prime minister decided that it was in our best interest not to be there anymore. I must have missed the newspaper coverage on how wrong he was.
Maybe next time we take it over and start settlements, we will build one in Rafiach, so as to prevent terrorists coming in over the Egyptian border. What a concept, settlements for peace. The more settlements that are built, the less land they have to shoot rockets.
Unless you feel that we should go back to the original partition plan of 1948 and accept the "suicide borders." Then the Arabs will be happy. They think they have enough militarty might now to finish off what they tried back then. Throwing Israel into the sea. As Ahmadinejad said, the State of Israel was Europe's Final Solution as they hiped the Arabs would get rid of the couple Jews they left behind.
Stupid Europeans. Stupid Iranians. Stupid Prime Minister.
We're not leaving yet.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Thanks. You blogged exactly what I was thinking.
Now I can continue working on my "Placing Kids in Danger?" posting.
crazy world we live in....
Even-though this latest move may have been stupid, we are not "back in" Gaza. The Artillery and other associated units are stationed outside of Gaza's borders. There aren't any troops in the Dead Zone they've created. They've just said that they will shoot anybody who goes in there.
The real problem is that we haven't followed through on our threats. We've warned them that after the Disengagement, that any shot or rocket fired outside of Gaza will be concidered an act of agression, and that we'd act with full force. We haven't done that. We created this Dead Zone and said we'd shoot anybody that walks into it. We haven't done that. We haven't followed through on our warnings. That's the problem.
I really don't understand your strategy. Are you saying we should be building settlements inside Palestinian towns and cities? That that would prevent rocket firing? Your settlements for peace idea is reminiscent of Peres' remarks that building two hotels on the Golan Heights would be better than any Tank Batallion. Building a settlement in Rafiach would do nothing to stop terrorists from coming over the border, because they're digging tunnels underneath it.
-OC
That you don't understand my strategy does not surprise me in the least. You are a defeatist.
We are back in gaza. The fact that there are certain areas that they are not allowed to go into means that we are controlling the ground space there.
If you believed the threats beforehand that we would act with full force to any act of aggresssion - well I got a bridge to sell you.
Settlements is the only way to stop the rocket attacks, because then we have soldiers on the ground in the field where the action is happening. It would work better to disband the PA completely, and put the area under complete Israeli military rule.
Building a settlement in Rafiach would help prevent border crossings, because it would put our people closer to where the tunnels are being dug and we would be able to detect them easier, if they are going under the town.
Your strategy doesn't work, not because I'm a defeatist, but because you have no idea what you're talking about.
When the settlements were in Gaza, the military was in a complete defensive position, which is not a very good situation to be in (to put it mildly). They were NOT in the Palestinian cities, because they were too busy protecting the settlers. They were not on the ground where the action was happening. They may have been in the vicinity, but they were in no position to do anything about it, offensively. As good as the IDF is, last time I checked, they don't have the ability to be in two places at once. The officer that created the military strategy and defense policy for the Gaza settlements (the policy that the Army saw was the best one that they had ever seen in all the history of the settlements) knew that it could not hold up for very long. Every General involved with the oversight of Gaza and its settlements saw the situation and agreed. Now, unless, you think that they're all a bunch of retards, or you know something that they dont know, your strategy simply wouldn't work, would be ineffective, and would put the rest of the Army at risk (as the situation in Gaza did).
I had my doubts about the threats against Palestinian aggression, but that is besides the point. These threats with nothing but hot air behind them will back-fire. However, not likely anytime soon, as the PA and all the other terrorist groups are too busy waging a civil war to do anything to Israel right now.
We had a hard enough time finding and destroying the tunnels when we had settlements in Gaza, to say that building a settlement in Rafiach would improve the situationg is to not understand how these things work. These guys may be barbaric, but they're not completely stupid. Without divulging any pertinent information, by speaking with officers who were in charge of the Operating in 2002 in which they found over 30 tunnels operating in Gaza, their methods of location and digging these tunnels would put a jewish settlement in a suicide situation. They would dig the tunnels underneath peoples' houses and have no problem with using these people as pawns or hostages or even blowing up their houses. The Army wouldn't be able to protect the settlement against what they can't see. A year and a half ago, terrorists dug a tunnle under an Army fortification and blew it up. You think a settlement would suffer any better? The tunnels are part of the "tunnel industry" for smuggling weapons, not people. If people wanted to cross the border and saw that they couldn't get through Rafiach, they would just go a bit east and cross through into the Sinai, which a lot of people are doing anyway.
And, we have always been controlling the ground and air space in Gaza, since the Disengagement. That hasn't changed. We still maintain control over the borders and crossings from Gaza into Israel. That is controlling ground space. Creating a Dead Zone is essentially the same thing. It is no different than anything done before. It's just a stupid idea, that's all.
-OC
you post a lot of babble and spout what you recently heard from other people very well.
However, when Amram Mitzna proposed leaving gaza, everyone including the Labour party he was the head of went nutso on him. Now you may believe that the situation in a year has changed so dramatically that it suddenly became a good idea, but the situation was the same as it had been. The only good retreat from gaza would have been to give it to Egypt, and they refused to take it.
The way they're playing the game now, there is no way to stop the rockets and without our people in there, it is much harder for our people to go in and do what they have to.
Also, if you feel that I don't know what I'm talking about and my ideas are stupid, you are invited not to read my blog anymore.
Post a Comment