Posted on 12/10/2012 8:16:19 AM PST by SeekAndFind
Israel strengthened its military deterrence during the recent clash with Hamas by demonstrating that its Iron Dome missile defense intercepted Israel-bound rockets from Gaza 84 percent of the time. Most media accounts of Iron Dome in action marveled at its precision performance in preventing most of the rockets from reaching their targets in southern Israel - although a few did get through its new defensive net. Iron Dome was widely credited with keeping Israeli casualties to a bare minimum.
But that's not exactly the view of the Washington Post in its Sunday, Dec. 9, edition. In a front-page article that spills over two pages inside the paper, correspondent Scott Wilson sees a decidedly darker side to Iron Dome. Its very success, he argues, could prompt Israel henceforth to go into a defensive crouch and lose interest in advancing the peace process ("In Iron Dome, an emblem of Israel's unmet challenges").
"Iron Dome has become an emblem of the unmet challenges that sit at the center of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," Wilson writes. The key issue, he adds, is whether Iron Dome will motivate Israel's leaders to pursue peace with the Palestinians and the wider Arab world or insulate them from having to do so. "Israelis of various political leanings (not otherwise identified) see worrying evidence in the system's defensive nature that their country, rather than working to resolve its security problems through decisive military action or lasting peace treaties, is acquiescing to a siege mentality
"If only Israel's diplomacy could be as inventive, many Israelis (otherwise not identified) say, perhaps a solution to the Palestinian conflict could have been found by now."
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
THAT truly works for me. Glad the Washington Pist thinks so!
To the left, it's not Fair for someone to have an advantage over someone else; it's discrimination.
I remember during the Iraq liberation the left was complaining about American troops having an unfair advantage with their night-vision equipment/Sheesh
I’m betting that the New York Times locks the doors of their offices each night, and that they have security measures between their executive offices and the mean streets of the city.
Using their logic, they should be ashamed of themselves. How can they ever understand the problems of the street dwellers this way? How can they ever learn to co-exist with them?
They should destroy the locks and fire the guards. It’s only fair.
I truly believe my 6 year old grandson has more intellect than the writers at WaPo. What’s said is the writers are voicing the sentiment of a large part of the liberal media.
Liberalism is truly a mental disorder.
This guy’s formulation makes no sense. I could see how the dome might be blamed for encouraging Israel to be more aggressive. But to argue it puts Israel in a defensive crouch and allows them to sit back and not pursue peace, huh? If they are able to sit back and enjoy themselves that is peace, you boob.
What he means, probably, is that the defensive shield will dissuade them from sacrificing territory and helping create a freestanding, self-sufficient Palestinian state. Which is called “peace,” but is something else.
One of the (very) few things good things about the MSM in the present day is that they have removed any doubt that they have an almost complete lack of ability in virtually every field - save for lying.
However, they’d receive an “A” in Liberal Logic (the mother of all oxymorons)from any ivy league school.
Israel’s been pursuing peace since 1948. Maybe Iron Dome will prompt a few Palestinians to do the same; deterrence did prompt Israel’s other neigbours to back off.
Ah, the Soviet KGB’s disinformation campaign and arguments is still alive. Wilson’s arguments are basically the same the KGB funded American and European “Peace Movements” used against our nuclear missile forces, the deployment of anti-ballastice missile defenses (ground launched missiles which were actually developed and deployed to one site), and most famously to President Reagan’s Space Defenxe Initiative.
And we see the same today in President Obama’s move to dismantle all of the US’s remaining nuclear weapons under the theory “if we don’t have nukes, other nations won’t ‘fear us’ and will stop wanting their own nukes.”
The liberal mindset: Israel always has to Pursue peace. Even if that means they have to die to do it. If they choose to “not die” that is seen as a negative
You have a great message - wish the Washington Post, New York Times and all the other dying newspapers could read it. This is why people are dropping subscriptions... it's not the Internet, it's not bad spelling, it's not inadequate writing - it's the stupidity of their ideas.
The only peace that exists in the middle east is the peace within Israel’s well guarded borders. Outside those borders is chaos and savagery.
Neah.
Literally NOTHING will cause the Egyptian and Jordanian Arabs of Gaza and the West Bank to seek peace with Israel. These Arabs could be facing utter annihilation and the only thing that they would seek would be “hudna” or a fake truce while they rearmed, rebuilt and retrained.
The Israelis need to close off the gates to Gaza - nothing and no one, in or out. They also need to cut the water and power that they provide and for which the Arabs of Gaza do not pay. They need to control the border bewtween Gaza and Egypt and maintain a blockade of their coast.
The only thing to come in by sea or across the Egyptian Border should be food, medical supplies, and materials to build infrastructure (the Arabs need to build their own power water and agriculture systems...). If they’re busy farming and building, they might not have as much time for Jihad - and they’ll have something to lose if they DO try Jihad...
The same drivel came from the CPUSA (Communist Party USA aka the enemy within democrats) when Pres Reagan wanted a missile shield. The communists in the former USSR and China all agreed with our Communist Party that this was dangerous.
So the WPost is simply regurgitating their pro-communist agenda. Strength through weakness and lead from behind all in the name of fairness.
sheesh.. these lefties even believe in equality when it comes to warfare.
not fair that one side should be winning..
just not fair.. good lord these people are children.
Yes, that’s it exactly. The writer talks about three courses of action in responding to the rocket attacks: retaliate in a way that ensures victory (and peace), submit in a way that ensures peace ( in theory, but highly unlikely) or entrench (Iron Dome) and do nothing.
I’m not sure that entrenching is Israels best option here. It’s a much better alternative than submitting (in perpetuity, to an enemy that would never be satisfied). But a lesser one IMHO to going for an overwhelming win by putting the militaries of it’s opponents out of commission. Which it has the capability of accomplishing (without resorting to nukes ... Although a nuke dropped on an isolated Iranian military compound would send one heck of a strong message)
It is not fair. Muslims are too stupid to build their own.
Shouldn’t these washington pest “writers” stick their pencils deep into their eyes? That would save society the embarrassment of reading their liberal drivel.
No so sure about that. Its only unfair if those liberals disapprove have the upper hand. In all others cases its ‘fair’.
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.