Refusing to win(?)

[Winner]

An interesting opinion piece from the Jerusalem Post:

Refusing to win
By DANIEL DORON

Imagine that at the outbreak of World War II RAF bombers had managed to bomb Berlin by surprise and inflict enormous material damage, but had deliberately refused to hit sites that housed top Nazi brass. Imagine that only after several days of bombing, the British finally attacked the German headquarters, after warning of the impending attack.

How would the British public have reacted?

How would it have reacted if its government willfully missed the chance to kill many Nazi leaders? Would it have accepted the explanation that every leader can be replaced, that one must warn enemy leaders of a planned attack to prevent hitting innocent neighbors? Wouldn't the killing of many Nazi leaders shorten the war, it would probably ask. Is it not moral to save hundreds of thousands of lives and prevent the terrible suffering of a prolonged war even if this requires hurting some innocent civilians?

Such questions were not raised in Israel. Only after three days of bombing did the IAF finally bomb Hamas headquarters, and it took 16 days before it bombed the residence of Hamas's top commander. This country did not exploit the surprise it achieved to kill as many top Hamas commanders as possible (just as in the past it has neglected to do so) - even though this would have most likely led to the collapse of its war machine and shortened the war.

Exploiting the surprise of the attack to the fullest would have also made unnecessary the land incursion and the many casualties it involves. Hamas could be destroyed as an effective war machine by simply killing or chasing away, in short order, many of those who operate its war machine. When we forgo such effective action, we are forced to take other, less effective actions, such as massive closures and bombardments and prolonged land incursions. These cause much greater humanitarian damage without securing victory.

SO WHY is our government so reluctant to win? Some claim that politicians become more risk averse on the eve of elections. Others blame sharp internal divisions, confusion and lack of determination that inflict the unholy trinity governing the country. Still others claim that leaders who believe that "peace must be made with enemies" make sure they survive so as to have "partners" for a deal after "teaching them a lesson." Finally there are those who claim that a crushing victory will be a great embarrassment to our leaders. "If victory was possible," the public will say, "why did you wait almost eight years before liberating us from Hamas's terror?"

There is a kernel of truth in these explanations. But every terrible mess in Israel originates in "a conception." Against all historical evidence, and against common sense, most leaders, egged on by the media, have sold themselves on the conception that "there are no wars in existence anymore that can be won like the wars of yore" (as stated by a headline to a special Ma'ariv supplement "Not By Force" preaching against seeking victory); in other words that "terror cannot be vanquished by force."

This is nonsense, of course. Almost every terrorist movement was vanquished by force, from the 11th century Assassins to the 1936 Arab Revolt, from the post World War II communist insurrections in Greece or Malaya to terrors groups in Italy, Germany, Japan, etc.

It is also absurd to claim that the IDF, which is supposed to fight several Arab armies simultaneously, cannot vanquish a ragtag guerrilla force of 20,000 fighters lacking armor or airpower. The IDF cannot win only if - like in Lebanon - it fights without a clear plan for victory and under a leadership that does not enable it to win.

The goal of the "plan" annunciated by the Olmert-Barak-Livni government is "to stop the firing of Kassams from Gaza and to stop the smuggling of war materiel into it" (not, God forbid, to win a decisive victory over Hamas). It is based on relying on the Egyptians to stop the huge volume of arms smuggled from the Sinai into Gaza.

IT SEEMS likely that Egypt does not want an Iranian- controlled Hamas, and that it therefore welcomed Israel's beating Hamas enough to make it seek Egyptian protection again. But Egypt will do all it can to prevent us from finally vanquishing Hamas. Since Egypt has realized that its chances of beating us by direct military confrontation are not great, it has used Hamas for a proxy war of attrition, as the Syrians do with Hizbullah. Egypt hopes to gradually bleed us to death and then get rid of us when an opportunity arises.

This is why Egypt resisted all efforts to make it stop the massive arming of Hamas (does anyone still believe that moving thousands of tons of war material and digging hundreds of smuggling tunnels could take place without Egyptian cooperation?) and this is why it will rehabilitate Hamas once Israel accepts a truce, so that Hamas will be able to resume bleeding us, albeit more cautiously.

Since our war against Hamas - an Iranian proxy - is part of the worldwide war against terror, our failure to vanquish Hamas will also have grave repercussions for the stability of Egypt and Jordan, besides negatively affecting our deterrent capacity and international standing.

The upshot is that if you do not seek victory in war you become the loser, even if the spin doctors convince you, like they did during the Lebanon war, that defeat is actually victory.

Is this guy right? What do you think? Discuss

(note the bolded parts)

 

[happy_Alex]

I think that Hamas are not terrorists but are legitimate freedom fighters. I think Egypt are justified in supporting them too. I think Israel should cease its ethnic cleansing of the Gaza strip.

 

[Alpine Trooper]

The Israelis are fairly adept at exploiting the advantage of surprise if I remember my history. Furthermore, it has been repeatedly said that Hamas is not just a political movement within Palestine but something far greater ingrained in their society.

 

[Winner]

I think that Hamas are not terrorists but are legitimate freedom fighters. I think Egypt are justified in supporting them too. I think Israel should cease its ethnic cleansing of the Gaza strip.

I think you're a terrorist supporter

 

[happy_Alex]

Define terrorist. Funny how the Israelis generally don't consider those who blew the King David Hotel to be... ...or how about resistors in the second world war ?

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Ah, missed opportunities. Bin Laden could have been pushing up daisies right now. Though I'm not sure getting rid of Hamas' top brass will stop it for good.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

So bombing is the only way to win, but when it doesn't win the conflict (in effect ending it) that's just because israel bombed the wrong way. had they bombed the right way, they'd have won, the terrorists would have been defeated and all this mess would have been over.

Well, I haven't heard that excuse, I'm sorry, explanation before. Well, I'm sure they'll get it right next time

 

[Winner]

Define terrorist. Funny how the Israelis generally don't consider those who blew the King David Hotel to be... ...or how about resistors in the second world war ?

Any more crappy moral relativism? Anybody who's even basically sane sees that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

 

[SS-18 ICBM]

Define terrorist. Funny how the Israelis generally don't consider those who blew the King David Hotel to be... ...or how about resistors in the second world war ?

You're not going to convince him otherwise that Hamas needs to be eradicated off the face of the Earth. Don't even try.

 

[LordRahl]

I think that Hamas are not terrorists but are legitimate freedom fighters. I think Egypt are justified in supporting them too. I think Israel should cease its ethnic cleansing of the Gaza strip.

The next time anyone wonders why this world is so full of death, injustice, wars and destruction - look no further than the quote above (by happy_Alex). People like him make it possible...

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Edit article moved to the general thread to avoid derailing Winner's thread

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=7656205&postcount=731

 

[Winner]

So bombing is the only way to win, but when it doesn't win the conflict (in effect ending it) that's just because israel bombed the wrong way. had they bombed the right way, they'd have won, the terrorists would have been defeated and all this mess would have been over.

Well, I haven't heard that excuse, I'm sorry, explanation before. Well, I'm sure they'll get it right next time

Bože...

This is hardly what the guy is saying. It seems that the Israeli leadership is afraid to actually make a plan which would work. There are many considerations, many of them are political. People tend to overlook the fact that Israel is very diverse regarding to the political situation.

It wouldn't be the only government which is trying to do the right thing, but wrongly.

I really don't see any sense in this operation, if it ends with

a) Hamas still in power
b) rockets still falling on Israel
c) Gilat Shalit still in Hamas' captivity
d) weapons still being smuggled from Egypt

What would be the point? To waste money and lives of their soldiers for what? The status quo, as all the "peace negotiators" say? Status quo was so unacceptable that it brought about this operation! Peace with Hamas? How long would it last? 6 months, maybe even a year?

 

[bathsheba666]

Any more crappy moral relativism? Anybody who's even basically sane sees that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

But a much less efficient civilian killing machine than Israel.

I think the Palestinians are very brave in the face of difficult odds.

It would be a shame if the constant Israeli manipulations and murder were to succeed.

 

[Trajan12]

Too easy...

 

[Alpine Trooper]

Bastards, they attached the explosives to the kids balls.

 

[Masquerouge]

Very interesting article, Ziggy.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

This is hardly what the guy is saying. It seems that the Israeli leadership is afraid to actually make a plan which would work. There are many considerations, many of them are political. People tend to overlook the fact that Israel is very diverse regarding to the political situation.

A plan that would work would have to include a mentality change on both sides. Quite sceptical about that. You're right, Israel is diverse, but so is Hamas and a number of other clans in the Gaza region (who really don't like Hamas and would be all to glad if it was possible to eradicate them so they can take control)

edit: The more I read about this, the more I want to punch someone in the face just because he's a human being.

What does "Boze" mean?

 

[happy_Alex]

Any more crappy moral relativism? Anybody who's even basically sane sees that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

Sounds like you don't want to concede the point but whatever.

311 Palestinian children have been killed in the conflict so far... ...but hey if their "terrorists" does that make it okay.

There's a reason why they're defined as the occupied territories.And while we're using kids in our arguments...

 

[Winner]

A plan that would work would have to include a mentality change on both sides. Quite sceptical about that. You're right, Israel is diverse, but so is Hamas and a number of other clans in the Gaza region (who really don't like Hamas and would be all to glad if it was possible to eradicate them so they can take control)

By plan I mean something doable, not empty talk about "mentality change". As the guy said, any insurgent/guerilla/terrorist (you name it) movement can be extinguished by force. Irregular/terrorist tactic isn't unbeatable and history is full of examples.

Basically, you need to:

a) cut it from foreign support (weapons, supplies)
b) systematically reduce its presence by estabilishing control over the territory
c) destroy its infrastructure (bases, weapon stores, traning centers) and force it to keep hiding
c) carrot&stick applied to the populace

The problem is that this approach requires patience, money and the willingness to accept loses, because they're unavoidable.

Israeli gov. seems to be just like any other Western government - they want to finish this quickly, screw the long term consequences (there are general elections approaching and nobody sees beyond them). Anti-insurgency operations are long term and for most of the time, it's not clear who's winning - that has a devastating effect on the public morale in any open, free and democratic society.

What does "Boze" mean?

"God" in vocative.

 

[Winner]

Sounds like you don't want to concede the point but whatever.

There is nothing to concede, you're simply wrong.

311 Palestinian children have been killed in the conflict so far... ...but hey if their "terrorists" does that make it okay.

Not surprising, given that children make up nearly 50% of Gaza population Statistical chance of them being killed inadvertently is high enough even without Hamas putting them directly into harm's way.



Hamas is not terrorist only because it keeps murdering Israelis, it also murders its own people for propaganda purposes. They use media as a weapon and every dead Palie kid caught on camera is worth more than 1000 Qassam rockets.

Still, for some reason, Israel tolerates this abomination on its borders and certain useful idiots praise it.