Ceasing Fire

American Thinker ^ | November 21, 2012 | Shoshana Bryen

[Ooh-Ah]

It is an odd thing, this ceasing of fire proposed to be negotiated between Israel and Hamas. A throwback to wars of old, it postulates that in the absence of shooting, the parties will retrieve their dead, celebrate their festivals (see the 1914 Christmas truce on the battlefield of Flanders), or even, possibly, figure out what to do in the longer term. It is entirely in-applicable to Israel -- first and foremost because the shooting is not the greatest problem Israel faces.

Israel's problem is more of certainty and uncertainty.

The concentration of Israeli brainpower and American funds on the problem of Gaza yielded Iron Dome -- a homegrown Israeli system that not only tracks and hits incoming rockets and missiles, but differentiates spatially between those that will hit populated areas and those that will fall outside the boundaries of major population centers. So when you read that Iron Dome has hit X percent of the rockets overall, it has hit a much greater proportion of rockets that would have caused substantial damage and death. Couple that with the excellent civil defense system in Israel and the readiness of the population to do what the government tells it to do in an emergency, and you have a disconnect between the volume of criminal fire emanating from Gaza (all of the fire emanating from Gaza is criminal, because many of the rockets don't have guidance to be shot at specific targets, and the ones that might aren't fired at military targets) and Israeli casualty figures.

Is that why CNN and Fox show only Palestinian children running, wailing, and screaming -- because their leadership put the launchers among them and didn't spend a nickel on safe rooms, civil defense, shelters, or anti-missile systems? (Hint: no.)

[Ooh-Ah]

Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/ceasing_fire.html#ixzz2Cu75otaM

[GeronL]

A one-sided ceasefire is simply ridiculous

[Ron C.]

I like the last few words of the piece...

So, what is Israel to do?

Cease fire.

Cease fire unilaterally at the moment Israel decides that it has done as much destruction of Hamas capabilities inside Gaza as its military command deems essential. And cease fire with a message -- that the ceasing of fire is indeed unilateral and is undertaken because the government of Israel has decided that it has done what it intended to do and therefore chooses to stop without regard to what Hamas wants. And that because it was unilaterally begun, it will last only as long as the government of Israel finds that it serves the interest of the State. If it doesn't, fire will recommence, and that without regard to Hamas as well.

That puts the problem of certainty and uncertainty on the other side.

It also is in spite of what Obama, Clinton, or anyone else says or does. Hamas won't contain itself - hence this will all begin again, at some point not far away.

[stboz]

Maybe we ought to loan the Israelis a wing of B52s and let the Palis get the Arc Light treatment....wall-to-wall, corner-to-corner. There won’t be any top-to-bottom....everything will be flat afterwards.

[Don Corleone]

A one-sided ceasefire is simply ridiculous

Exactly! Until IRAN is taken out of the equation no peace will ever exist. They keep the pot boiling until they can get the "Bomb" and then IRAN gets control or the ME is put to the torch .