Posted on 12/30/2008 5:34:46 PM PST by goldstategop
Now that leaves the only effective alternative - for the Israel Defense Forces to take control of the rocket launching sites in the Gaza Strip. Over 60 years ago, in World War II, the Allies understood that the only way to put a stop to the shelling of London by German V2 rockets was for Allied armies to reach the launching sites in Western Europe.
Much has changed since then, but the rockets are essentially still the same (the Qassams and Grads fortunately have considerably less range than the V2s). So that leaves the job to the IDF ground forces.
Why has it been so difficult for our leaders - civilian and military - to understand this? The prospect of ground forces entering the Gaza Strip is not particularly attractive, especially after we have been told that "we have left the Gaza Strip forever." But nobody has yet found a way of defeating an enemy without invading their territory. Call it occupation or whatever else you like, but that is how wars have always been won, and if we are going to defeat Hamas and stop the rockets from raining on Israeli civilians that is what we will have to do.
"Once there, how are we going to get out?" is the ultimate argument sounded by those who oppose the only move that can attain our declared objective of providing security for Israel's citizens in the south. It is an argument that is based on the presumption that future events can be foretold with certainty; that the IDF, once in the Gaza Strip, will find it impossible to disentangle itself from there; and that Hamas, even after having been defeated, will continue to rule the Gaza Strip. Not very sound reasoning.
(Excerpt) Read more at haaretz.com ...
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Soviet Union.
And yes I am aware of the "incursion" -- don't think that counts.
Good parallel. Obvious, but I haven't seen it before.
The problem is the disproportionate response on the part of the allies, like Zbiggy Brzinski said. After years of provocation the Germans were just lobbing a few primitive, undirected rockets into their cities when Eisenhower and his imperialist thugs staged that over-the-top invasion, with millions of gunmen taking over the whole of Western Europe. No doubt about it. The lefties hold the moral high ground on this one.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
LOL!!!!!
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Stop. Feeding. Them.
No border crossings, no aid, no shipments of anything. Blow up the crossings into Egypt, blow up storehouses of anything in Gaza, and let them eat their rockets.
Duh!
We are surrounded by PC morons...
40 years ago it would have been simple. 50,000 foot high altitude pounding. Casualties? That’s the whole point. Eventually, there would be none of those scroungy muslims left.
With all due respect I think you misunderstood my statement or took it further than given: I said nothing about airpower. I merely countered the "no one ever..." claim, and if I am wrong, so be it.
I concur with you that one has to "eliminate the enemy's control." I am not yet convinced that this is impossible without invasion, but my cited example took many decades with a somewhat consistent pressure generally by different parties' presidents.
[Aside: I doubt that the 'non-invasion" approach would have worked with the Nazis, though perhaps they'd have yielded when all their cities and half their population had been put to the torch. (I am glad that was not necessary; one of my early professional mentors was a woman who as a teenager endured Berlin's fall.)]
Israel doesn't have this luxury. She has to win this NOW or likely chalk it up to yet another half-victory that solved nothing. And her choices aren't good; the "surgical" strikes chop off a few hydra heads, but more likely-productive measures are unacceptable to her enemies in the UN, the press and elsewhere.
I disagree. For every rocket attack on Israel, ten rockets should be sent back. This sounds simplistic and probably kills too many innocents due to Hamas hiding around civilians. Trust me, when enough civilians are killed, the remainder will most likely put a stop to Hamas from setting up in their neighborhood. If not, so be it.
If it is anything like Iraq, the rockets are lined up and then fired by some sort of timer, even if only a long fuse. It is amazing how fast an 18 year old can run if he knows counter fire is on the way. In effect, you only wind up pounding dirt.
As Nathaniel Bedford Forrest said “War means fightin. Fightin means killin’.” no way around it.
Maybe some sort of unmanned combination radar and missile launcher doohickey that would send back a missile for every one it detected heading for Israel.
They would, in effect, be launching the retaliatory missiles themselves.
All they would need to do to permanently stop the missiles from raining down on Gaza is to stop launching at Israel.
Make the retaliation launchers a permanent non-negotiable deterrent.
bingo.
Admiral Charles Lockwood must be spinning in his grave...
It didn't work on Germany. It didn't work on Japan, or North Korea, or Vietnam, or Iraq. Why do you think it would work on Gaza?
Bingo! Worked on Dresden.
You are comparing large areas of land and wars of yesteryear with the very small Gaza Strip. The reason boots will probably be put on the ground is that political correctness precludes indiscriminate force that may kill civilians. BTW, overwhelming force did seem to work in Japan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.