Soccer Dad

In israel's defense

William Kristol in "Why Israel Fights," may be excessively optimistic. However he makes a point that seems lost on most analysts of the current war against Hamas.

And, of course, not all military efforts against terror fail. Recall Israel's incursion into the West Bank in the spring of 2002, when, under the leadership of Ariel Sharon, Israel succeeded in ripping up established terror networks and began the defeat of the second intifada. Israel also was able to avoid a long-term re-occupation, while retaining the ability to go back in on anti-terror missions. What's more, the 2002 bloodshed didn't seem to do lasting damage to hopes for progress or moderation on the West Bank. After all, it's Gaza, from which Israel withdrew in 2005, not the West Bank, that became a Hamas stronghold.

When the Washington Post and others compare the current war with the Hezbollah war of 2006, it's easy to get the impression that they want Israel to lose. (Part of Kristol's optimism is that he views the unsuccessful war against Hezbollah as a success on some level.) The idea that Israel could successfully defend itself is alien or abhorrent to many who comment on the Middle East. They're slaves to the idea of negotiation, incapable of comprehending that there are some villains with whom compromise and diplomacy are useless. Or worse.

Crossposted on Yourish.