Proud Member of The Moms Clean Air Force
Print This Post
Dec
29
As for the Palestinians, they plan to declare victory regardless of what happens. If the IDF withdraws rapidly, without a ground operation and without having seriously reduced the rocket fire, Hamas will boast that it survived and Israel blinked first.
But Hamas officials and analysts said Monday that the organization would actually like Israel to launch a ground operation; it hopes this would let it inflict such heavy losses on Israeli tanks and infantry that Israel would flee with its tail between its legs.
Coupled with Ehud Barak declaring that they’ll fight to the bitter end?
What happened to Tzipi Livni’s get them to stop launching rockets?
What the hell governs the moves over there?
Someone I respect mentioned to me a perspective that should be considered: the embryonic nature of the nation building going on for the Palestinians. But does that mean that relations too must be characterized by immaturity – from both the Israelis and Hamas?
Come on, Arab League. Get in there.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 9:22 pm December 29th, 2008 in democracy, Foreign Affairs, Gaza, Israel, middle east, Politics
Comments
3 Responses to “The hopelessness in Gaza-Israel relationship”
Voted into Top 25 Political Mom Blogs
Now on sale-WLST essay included!
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
The political prematurity by Hamas could be a subsequent factor for the current miniature war. For Hamas, this is perhaps a good opportunity, from their own perspective, to stir up piling aggression towards Israel when certain things are open for grab. The agreement in 2005 between Israel perhaps is too tight as Hamas is facing political pressure to deliver what they had promised to Palestinians. As the election time nearing in Israel, Hamas could have seen this as an opportunity to agitate the hated neighbor. Key things to look at, among other things, are the level of military action on both sides and reactions by other neighboring nations. You can call it a immaturity, but from my view, it is all politics with both sides taking questionable risks.
Marcus – I’d agree with your analysis. Thanks for reading and commenting. I guess the major question is, for people who must make decisions, what does this analysis mean?
Hamas’s charter is the demise of Israel, it declares that in it’s charter. Through Jihad which literally translates into a “struggle”. They are provoking to get a reaction, it’s been going on for some time. They use the reaction to gain or seek support, as to say look at what a monster Israel is and how ruthless and brutal her attack on us is. Then they call out Jihad, which appeals to the devout, it calls for the support of Muslim brothers. They get that but not to the extent of a military backing, they get it covertly and or allegedly.
Israel cannot allow this, it is a security risk, they cannot allow them to grow or strengthen. It is not complex if Hamas’s charter is Israel’s destruction then it either is contained or restrained or destroyed.
The scenario will produce what if the charter does not change? If left unchecked and the charter does not change then what? If Israel lost support of the US and that is not related directly to opinion it is directly related to funding it would be weaker, these military events consume resources, they consume capital. A weaker Israel is more subjective to an assault. They are threatening the relationship and its backing, and also forcing the consumption of the resources.
That is the definitive answer to why do they pull the tigers tail.