Posted on 06/28/2006 2:47:02 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
JERUSALEM (AP) - The Israeli military operation in the Gaza Strip began with a limited objective: to secure the release of a captive Israeli soldier. But it risks turning into a protracted conflict less than year after Israel left Gaza.
Q: What did Israel do Wednesday?
Israel dispatched thousands of troops, backed by warplanes and tanks, into Gaza and sent warplanes screaming over the summer residence of Syrian President Bashar Assad to pressure Palestinian militants into freeing Cpl. Gilad Shalit.
Israeli airstrikes knocked out bridges and electricity to much of Gaza, sonic booms rocked Gaza City and the strip's borders were sealed. It was the first large-scale ground operation in Gaza since Israel withdrew last September.
The operation was focused on southern Gaza - the area where the 19-year-old soldier is believed to be held. There were no reports of Israeli or Palestinian casualties.
Q: Why did Israel invade?
Military officials said the show of force was meant to pressure the Hamas-led government into securing Shalit's release and to prevent militants from smuggling the soldier into neighboring Egypt. Shalit was seized Sunday by Hamas-linked militants who infiltrated Israel through a tunnel near the Gaza border.
However, the operation also has a deeper goal of pressuring Hamas, which controls the Palestinian government, to renounce violence, recognize Israel and halt the daily barrages of homemade rockets into Israel.
Q: Why target Syria?
Hamas' top leader, Khaled Mashaal, lives in Syria, and Israel has long called on the Syrian government to rein in militants it is harboring.
Q: How long does Israel intend to stay?
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said Israel has no intention of reoccupying Gaza. Military officials say there is no timeline for a pullout, and the length of the military presence will depend on the Palestinian response.
Military officials say Israel will quickly withdraw if the soldier is rescued or released safely. But if the situation drags on, Israel is expected to step up the military pressure. This could mean more power outages, an extended troop presence in Gaza and expanding the operation to other parts of the strip.
In the worst-case scenario - militants killing Shalit - Israel has pledged to resume the assassinations of Hamas leaders, both inside Gaza and outside. Israel halted the practice after a February 2005 cease-fire.
This would likely prompt Hamas to begin sending suicide bombers into Israel. The Islamic militant group halted the attacks, which have killed more than 250 Israelis, after the 2005 truce.
Q: What has the Palestinian reaction been?
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, a moderate who has been locked in a power struggle with Hamas, has called for the immediate release of Shalit while deploring the incursion as a "crime against humanity."
The Hamas-led government called on Israel to release some of the thousands of Palestinian prisoners it is holding in exchange for the soldier. The militants holding the soldier have made similar demands.
Q: Will Israel give in?
Olmert has ruled out a prisoner swap and demanded the unconditional release of Shalit.
Israel has released prisoners in deals with the Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah and radical Palestinian groups based in Lebanon. But Israel has never negotiated a swap with the Palestinian Authority and believes to do so now would set a dangerous precedent. Israelis and Palestinians come into frequent contact with each other, and releasing prisoners would run the risk of inviting more kidnappings.
Q: Hamas has sent out mixed signals during the crisis, with some officials looking for a peaceful resolution and others rejecting the Israeli pressure. Why?
Hamas is comprised of a political wing and a military wing, along with its exiled leadership in Syria. Political leaders in Gaza have insisted they had no prior knowledge that the military wing was planning Sunday's abduction.
While the Gaza-based political leaders, who control the Palestinian government, have an interest in calming tensions so they can remain in power, the hard-line leadership in Syria does not face such concerns. The military wing, which is believed to be holding Shalit, is believed to take its orders from the exiled leaders.
--
It has been my opinion that the "Road to Peace" was a plan to give the Palistinians a state of their own and if they didn't behave themselves as a state they would be destroyed once and for all. The idea was to expose the lie that a state is what they wanted other than the destruction of the Jews and of Israel.
We may soon see.
I've been saying that for over two years. They can no longer claim victim status now that they are a sovereign, self-governing state. It's put-up or shut-up time.
I remebered several of us argued that point but that we were in the minority. The majority were happier bashing Bush for being stupid.
When the pull-outs were first announced, I had the same initial reaction that most did. But when you analyze the situation, it was the smartest move. The Isrealis gave them the rope, now the Palis are hanging themselves with it.
And now, when hamas does what it does best, it's not terrorism, its an act of war and the Isrealis are free to respond to it as such.
The Palis should have been a little more careful about what they wished for.
But convincing people that this would be the case two years ago was almost futile. The only other options were to maintain the infatada-status-quo, or to begin "ethnic cleansing".
There are things the Bush administration does with which I don't agree. However, after more thought or as the details emerge or as history plays out, more often than not it was a smart move. His stance on the Israel/PLA is one of those.
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.