.jpg)
Stella, now 2 plus, at Pittsburgh airport on way to Tybee!
.jpg)
Thirty years ago, Elliot, our grandson was born and he is now married to Elizabeth.
===
Three wealthy Americans conclude they could come together and craft an acceptable Immigration Plan notwithstanding the fact they come from totally different political perspectives.
My problem is they blame a 'do nothing Congress' exclusively and make no reference to a 'do nothing president.' (See 1 below.)
===
The Rajun Cahun's wife believes Obama has no soul. (See 2 below.)
Prager writes trust is gone. (See 2a below.)
Obama and The middle East Mess (See 2b below.)
Obama takes a page from Pelosi's playbook - pass my $4 billion supplemental immigration program immediately for the mess I created and find out what is in it later!
Our petulant president rolls up his sleeves and blames Republicans. Seems to be getting an old ploy but he has that phone and pen and that is how he governs.
In less than six years, Obama has turned a nation founded on the principle of law into a lawless society whose borders are breached by rapists, thugs, dope peddlers and MS -13 lawless gang hoodlums
===
Iran's strategy is to attack Israel from another front.
This is the same Iran, Obama believes is willing to renounce its nuclear capability. (See 3 below.)
IDF goals and how to achieve them. (See 3a below.)
===
This from a dear friend, a man whose family had to flee Egypt and a fellow memo reader.
This is his take on Obama: "Sorry, Obama is not stupid. He is very shrewd. He is a cunning person. It comes from having been brought up by a Muslim cleric like the ones still infesting the Middle East., plus living in the US among the influence of the blacks who still resent past slavery and discrimination. Suddenly he is in control of the strongest country on earth. He goes to the Middle Eas tand don't forget he is fluent in Arabic. He proceeds to express sentiments about an arrogant America. Later he says we need to change our flag because it hurts the feelings of our Middle Eastern energy suppliers and we should also change our anthem.
The Fort Hood cold blood assassin is still alive and Guantanamo war prisoners are liberated so they can continue their killing wars. Do we forget the transpired words from an still connected microphone when he said to Putin " wait, I'll fix it when reelected" .
He eliminated all the defense of Europe against attacks. And now our borders are open and our armies out of the countries we tried so much to liberate from their dictator.
In school we were taught to add fractions with common denominators. Here we have plenty of "infractions.". It doesn't tell us anything of the target against our country? Our country is being destroyed slowly and surely, nothing else."
===
Dick--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1) Break the Immigration Impasse
AMERICAN citizens are paying 535 people to take care of the legislative needs of the country. We are getting shortchanged. Here’s an example: On June 10, an incumbent congressman in Virginia lost a primary election in which his opponent garnered only 36,105 votes. Immediately, many Washington legislators threw up their hands and declared that this one event would produce paralysis in the United States Congress for at least five months. In particular, they are telling us that immigration reform — long overdue — is now hopeless.
Americans deserve better than this.
The three of us vary in our politics and would differ also in our preferences about the details of an immigration reform bill. But we could without doubt come together to draft a bill acceptable to each of us. We hope that fact holds a lesson: You don’t have to agree on everything in order to cooperate on matters about which you are reasonably close to agreement. It’s time that this brand of thinking finds its way to Washington.
Most Americans believe that our country has a clear and present interest in enacting immigration legislation that is both humane to immigrants living here and a contribution to the well-being of our citizens. Reaching these goals is possible. Our present policy, however, fails badly on both counts.
We believe it borders on insanity to train intelligent and motivated people in our universities — often subsidizing their education — and then to deport them when they graduate. Many of these people, of course, want to return to their home country — and that’s fine. But for those who wish to stay and work in computer science or technology, fields badly in need of their services, let’s roll out the welcome mat.
A “talented graduate” reform was included in a bill that the Senate approved last year by a 68-to-32 vote. It would remove the worldwide cap on the number of visas that could be awarded to legal immigrants who had earned a graduate degree in science, technology, engineering or mathematics from an accredited institution of higher education in the United States, provided they had an offer of employment. The bill also included a sensible plan that would have allowed illegal residents to obtain citizenship, though only after they had earned the right to do so.
Americans are a forgiving and generous people, and who among us is not happy that their forebears — whatever their motivation or means of entry — made it to our soil?
For the future, the United States should take all steps to ensure that every prospective immigrant follows all rules and that people breaking these rules, including any facilitators, are severely punished. No one wants a replay of the present mess.
We also believe that America’s self-interest should be reflected in our immigration policy. For example, the EB-5 “immigrant investor program,” created by Congress in 1990, was intended to allow a limited number of foreigners with financial resources or unique abilities to move to our country, bringing with them substantial and enduring purchasing power. Reports of fraud have surfaced with this program, and we believe it should be reformed to prevent abuse but also expanded to become more effective. People willing to invest in America and create jobs deserve the opportunity to do so.
Their citizenship could be provisional — dependent, for example, on their making investments of a certain size in new businesses or homes. Expanded investments of that kind would help us jolt the demand side of our economy. These immigrants would impose minimal social costs on the United States, compared with the resources they would contribute. New citizens like these would make hefty deposits in our economy, not withdrawals.
Whatever the precise provisions of a law, it’s time for the House to draft and pass a bill that reflects both our country’s humanity and its self-interest. Differences with the Senate should be hammered out by members of a conference committee, committed to a deal.
A Congress that does nothing about these problems is extending an irrational policy by default; that is, if lawmakers don’t act to change it, it stays the way it is, irrational. The current stalemate — in which greater pride is attached to thwarting the opposition than to advancing the nation’s interests — is depressing to most Americans and virtually all of its business managers. The impasse certainly depresses the three of us.
Signs of a more productive attitude in Washington — which passage of a well-designed immigration bill would provide — might well lift spirits and thereby stimulate the economy. It’s time for 535 of America’s citizens to remember what they owe to the 318 million who employ them.
Sheldon G. Adelson is the chairman and chief executive of the Las Vegas Sands Corporation.
Warren E. Buffett is the chairman and chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway.
Bill Gates, former chairman and chief executive of Microsoft, is co-chairman of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2) Mary Matalin: Obama Has No 'Soul'
President Barack Obama's refusal to visit the U.S.-Texas border, followed by a beer drinking, pool-shooting session with the governor of Colorado, proves the commander-in-chief has no soul, veteran GOP political consultant Mary Matalin says.
"I've known and have worked with … many politicians and they have a soul. I keep looking for this man's soul and I can't find it. '' Matalin told "The Steve Malzberg Show" Thursday on Newsmax TV.
"He has no empathy. There's no understanding. It's just, everything's a celebration of him or some self-consciousness-raising of him.
"I've known and have worked with … many politicians and they have a soul. I keep looking for this man's soul and I can't find it. '' Matalin told "The Steve Malzberg Show" Thursday on Newsmax TV.
"He has no empathy. There's no understanding. It's just, everything's a celebration of him or some self-consciousness-raising of him.
"It's just like he's always laughing and beering around … I don't understand it.''
Matalin says she has heard Obama's refusal to visit the border being compared to President George W. Bush's slow response to the devastation in New Orleans caused by Hurricane Katrina.
"For the politicians [and] pundits who are saying this is Obama's Katrina, let me tell you something about his soul: to this day, George W. Bush and Laura Bush are still very, although quietly, very, very involved in the recovery of New Orleans and surrounding areas,'' Matalin said.
"[Obama] cares about nothing and this is so immoral … [He] offers nothing but perverse incentives like legal aid for these illegals or humanitarian aid …
"He wants chaos at the borders and it's hard for us to analyze why a president would initiate and sanction and incentivize such chaos. That's exactly what it is and what he's seeking to do.''
Mary Matalin — who was campaign director for President George H. W. Bush, former assistant to President George W. Bush, and former chief counselor to Vice President Dick Cheney — said she fears for the children who are now being warehoused at the border.
"What do you think is going to happen to these kids? Do you really think they're going to be reunited with families? Do you think they're going to be sold into sex trafficking or they're going to be used for drug mules?'' she asked.
"Who's going to take care of these kids? Who's going to place them? … I cannot think of a worse crisis for any children anywhere in the world including our own when these unvaccinated and sick children make their way across the country. It's a humanitarian threat to us, to us it's a health threat to us.''
Matalin said she approved of the choice of Cleveland, Ohio, for the next GOP presidential convention.
"You and I would agree that the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame [in Cleveland] is one badass place. I love it,'' she said.
"Ohio's a good place to do it … Of course, I would always be an advocate for all conventions to come to New Orleans. There's nothing like drive-thru daiquiri places all over the city to encourage a fun time for any kind of event.''
On the subject of the ongoing IRS tea party-targeting scandal, and the IRS' supposed loss of key emails written by former agency official Lois Lerner, Matalin said:
"The level of corruption here far transcends Lois Lerner. It is corrupt at the highest levels.''
2a)
You're looking at the most political liar in American history.
2b)
Obama and the Middle East Mess
Author: Jonathan S. Tobin
Source: Commentary Magazine.
Source: Commentary Magazine.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict worsened today as Hamas launched more missiles into Israel, including one long-range rocket aimed at Tel Aviv. Israel responded by calling up more reserves and striking back at the terrorist launching points. But while the world reproaches both sides today President Obama reminded us why he deserves a good deal of the blame for the mess.
Obama has largely held himself aloof from the conflict in recent weeks other than warning Israel to show “restraint” in response to both terror attacks and a missile barrage on its territory. But he did choose to contribute an op-ed to the left-wing Israeli newspaper Haaretz today as part of its “Israel Conference on Peace” in which he extolled the two-state solution and declared “peace is the only true path to security for Israel and the Palestinians.”
Despite the boost from the president and the appearance of Israeli President Shimon Peres, the Haaretz conference will be probably best remembered for proving just how intolerant the left can be. To his credit, Economy Minister Naftali Bennett accepted an invitation to speak to the forum but the leader of the right-wing Jewish Home Party was repeatedly interrupted by insults from the crowd of peaceniks calling him a “murderer” and “fascist.” As the Jerusalem Post reports (Haaretz has yet to file a story on the incident on its website), when he concluded his effort “dozens of people” stormed toward him. While the minister’s bodyguards fended off most of the attackers, one managed to get close enough to punch him in the back before he was whisked away. This is yet another reminder that for the left, especially the Israeli left, tolerance for opposing views is not consistent with their idea of democracy.
But despite these histrionics, Obama’s op-ed provided Israelis with a timely statement of how destructive U.S. policy has been. In the piece, Obama did extol the U.S.-Israel relationship in the same laudatory terms he used during his 2013 trip to the Jewish state. But he also went out of his way to praise Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas as a peace partner while pointedly offering no kind words for Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu. Even more tellingly, especially in the midst of a crisis provoked by a Hamas terror attack and prolonged by the Islamist group’s missile fire from Gaza, he also ignored the role that the Fatah-Hamas unity pact had played in torpedoing peace talks this spring and inspiring the current round of violence.
This is consistent with U.S. policy on Hamas in the months since Abbas embraced his erstwhile Islamist rivals. Though the PA government is now hopelessly compromised by the deal with Hamas, the U.S. has decided to pretend as if Abbas’s decision to make peace with the terror group rather than with Israel has no meaning or consequences. The administration blatantly violated U.S. law by continuing to funnel aid to the Palestinians in spite of provisions that prohibit such transfers in the event of Hamas participation in the PA. It has also made it clear that it believes Israel should treat Abbas’s new coalition as a viable partner in spite of Hamas’s refusal to adhere to the terms of mutual recognition and commitment to peace that Obama repeats in his op-ed.
What has this to do with the current violence? Everything.
Hamas’s decision to escalate the fight with Israel, both by sanctioning the kidnapping and murder of three Israeli teens and the subsequent missile attacks, is directly related to its belief that the unity pact marked a turning point in its long struggle with Abbas’s Fatah. Though Hamas was forced to make a deal with Fatah in large measure because of its cash shortages and isolation after its break with Iran and the fall of Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood government, it has revived its political fortunes by reverting to violence. If Hamas is allowed to stay in the PA without penalty and Israel is constrained by American demands for “restraint” from the sort of military offensive that will truly make the group pay a heavy price for its behavior, then its prospects for eventual victory over Abbas are improved.
The slide into what may be another intifada or at least another round of fighting in Gaza is blamed on Netanyahu’s supposedly belligerent attitude. But this is exactly what many observers feared would be the inevitable aftermath to another failed U.S. peace initiative. Secretary of State John Kerry’s peace talks were acclaimed as a noble effort even if the odds were always against success. But by raising the stakes in the region at a point when everyone knew the Palestinian leadership was unready for peace, he set the stage for a chance for Hamas to interject itself into the process in this manner.
Even worse, by deciding to treat the Fatah-Hamas pact as no big deal, the U.S. sent exactly the wrong signal to both Abbas and Hamas. While Abbas was allowed to think there would be no price to pay for abandoning the peace process and embracing unreconstructed terrorists, Hamas soon realized that it could literally get away with murder without the U.S. blinking an eye or rethinking its determination to restrain Israeli efforts to deal with the terror group. The result is the current escalation that has damaged Abbas while allowing the Islamists to reclaim their status as the address for “resistance” against Israel.
Barack Obama may not have wanted the current fighting to happen and, indeed, he would very much like it to stop. But the administration’s maneuvering led inevitably to another blowup that had the ironic effect of weakening Abbas, the one figure in this mess the president actually likes.
America’s mixed messages are not the sole reason why the situation has deteriorated but they have played an outsize role in making things worse. If the president really wants to advance the cause of peace, he should forget about more bland pronouncements such as his op-ed, and start reminding both Abbas and Hamas that they will suffer if they don’t embrace the cost of peace. Anything short of that is a continuation of a policy that is exacerbating the conflict rather than solving it.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3)
Rocket fired from Lebanon strikes near Metula
Two rockets fired from southern Lebanon, one malfunctioning en route; Israel responds with artillery fire at targets across the border. Roi Kais, Itay Blumenthal
IDF Spokesman Brig.-Gen. Motti Almoz said a rocket fell near Kibbutz Kfar Yuval and that the military was checking for more details on the source of the firing. There were no casualties or damage.
It was unclear who was behind the attack. Southern Lebanon is a stronghold of Hezbollah, a Shi'ite Muslim group that battled Israel seven years ago and is engaged in Syria's civil war in support of President Bashar Assad; but there are also Palestinian groups in the same area.
Lebanon's news agency NNA reported that at 6:30am two rockets were fired from the Hasbaya area.
There were five rockets fired in total from southern Lebanon, Lebanese security sources said. Two entered Israel, one fell into Lebanese territory and two more were intercepted. Israel has only confirmed the firing of two rockets - one that entered Israel and the other that exploded inside Lebanon at around 2am because of a technical failure. Lebanese security forces and United Nations peacekeepers immediately arrived in the area and began searching for the perpetrators of the rocket fire. Israel responded to the rocket fire nearly an hour later with a barrage of artillery fire at targets across the border. Lebanese sources said Israel shot back around 25 shells. The IDF sent a message to UNIFIL forces in Lebanon informing them of the rocket fire as is customary in cases of a breach in agreements between the two countries. Meanwhile, security forces in Israel continued searching for a second rocket that was reported by Lebanese media but was unconfirmed by Israel. A Polish aircraft which was due to land at Ben-Gurion Airport Friday turned around mid-flight due to the rocket fired from Lebanon. The LOT pilot was told to wait in midair before beginning his approach to Ben-Gurion. The pilot decided to land in Larnaca, Cyprus and after waiting there for some time he took off again and flew back to Poland. IDF spokesperson Lt. Col. Peter Lerner said Israel has suspected that Lebanese militants may try to join the fray as Israel exchange fire with Islamic Hamas militants in Gaza. However, he said it was still unclear whether Friday's attack was "symbolic or something more substantial."
There have been several exchanges across the border in the past year.
In December, rockets launched from Lebanon struck northern Israel, provoking a response across a border that had been largely quiet since a war in 2006. In August, Brigades of Abdullah Azzam, an organization linked to al-Qaeda claimed a rocket barrage from Lebanon. But this rocket is the first to be fired from Israel's northern neighbor since the beginning of increasing tensions with Gaza where Hamas and Islamic Jihad have been launched hundrerds of rockets, including long-range missiles, bring most of Israel within their range. 3a) Operation Protective Edge: The Goals, and the Strategy to Achieve Them
On the evening of July 7, 2014, it finally became clear that Hamas was not prepared to cooperate with the Israeli government’s policy of restraint and Egypt’s mediation efforts to restore a ceasefire and return to the understandings achieved after Operation Pillar of Defense. Hamas’ demands for a different agreement that restricts Israeli actions; its demands that the Rafah border crossing be opened and that prisoners from the Shalit deal who have been sent back to prison be released; and the rocket barrages that have not stopped notwithstanding Israel's restraint, have forced Israel to enter a campaign it did not want.
What follows are twelve understandings about the objectives of the current campaign, Operation Protective Edge, and how it differs from Operations Cast Lead and Pillar of Defense.
 Israeli forces along the border with the Gaza Strip, July 9, 2014. (AFP/Getty Images)
1. The strategic purpose of the operation is derived from the state’s obligation to fulfill its basic obligation to protect its citizens and enable them to pursue a normal way of life. Restoring deterrence to achieve another period of quiet was a major strategic achievement of prior operations and is a primary objective of the current campaign. While deterrence addresses the motivation to fire at Israel, the current operation should also deal with the capabilities of Hamas and smaller terrorist organizations, particularly Islamic jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees. The operation must be directed mainly against the military wing of Hamas and the other terrorist organizations, and strike a severe blow against their commanders, operatives, launching capabilities, and production capacity. Another important objective of the operation, which was not defined and thus not achieved in the past, is to prevent Hamas from undertaking a military buildup in the period after the operation. The fact that the tunnels used by Hamas for its military buildup after Cast Lead and Pillar of Defense were destroyed and closed by the Egyptians will make it possible to ensure that after a significant blow is struck at production facilities in Gaza, the post-operation buildup, if there is any, will be slow and limited.
2. As in previous operations, the military objective should not be to occupy Gaza for the purpose of toppling Hamas. Israel disengaged from Gaza and relinquished responsibility for the territory and its 1.5 million Palestinian residents. Hamas is weak politically and economically, and it should be weakened militarily as well. A harsh blow against Hamas to achieve deterrence and deny it the ability to grow stronger in the future is the correct objective. However, turning Gaza into an area without a government that can be held responsible would be a strategic error.
3. One of Hamas’ main elements of power, designed to offset Israel's advantages in high quality intelligence and precise firing capabilities, is its underground network. Hamas has built underground capabilities on a large scale for both defense and offense. Gaza has a network of underground tunnels and shelters, which are used not only by the Hamas leadership but also by a large number of military operatives. The attack prepared in a Hamas offensive tunnel in southern Gaza was supposed to be a strategic surprise by the group, and its prevention is an important achievement for the IDF. This is also true of the killing of the terrorists who attempted, under cover of fire, to land on the Zikim beach and carry out an attack. A squadron of terrorists that comes out of an offensive tunnel into Israeli territory, and it is correct to assume that there are other such tunnels, can carry out a major attack with serious consequences. It is important that the IDF succeed in uncovering other offensive tunnels and in finding creative ways to turn the defensive tunnels into a trap that Hamas has dug for itself.
4. It is important to note the loss of the “surprise first move.” In the two previous operations, the IDF was able to achieve tactical surprise and strike manned headquarters (in Cast Lead), and the head of the Hamas military wing and long range launchers (in Operation Pillar of Defense). On the evening of July 7, 2014, Hamas proved that it learns from its experience. It was able to dictate the time of the campaign, a time when it is well entrenched and less exposed than in the past. Hamas has attempted and is attempting to surprise Israel with additional capabilities, long range rockets that go beyond Tel Aviv, ground invasions, and unmanned aerial vehicles. Thus far, it has not succeeded in surprising the IDF, which has thwarted its “new” capabilities. At the same time, Hamas will presumably continue in its attempts to surprise.
5. The resilience of the Israeli home front: The ability of the Israeli home front to withstand a campaign that lasts for more than a week is a key factor in the outcome of the campaign. A recurrent public behavior pattern in campaigns against semi-state terrorist organizations (Hizbollah and Hamas) in the past decade is anticipated this time as well. The public goes through a number of cycles. Initially, there is a consensus in favor of a campaign, and in the first days there is sweeping support, particularly if there are noteworthy achievements. Then, as injuries to the home front and soldiers increase and there is a realization that there will be no total victory, the public becomes impatient and critical. The military operation’s success must be based on a high level of legitimacy, which the government had when it started the operation, thanks to its policy of restraint, and also on good protection for the home front, in which Iron Dome is a key factor. However, the ability of the IAF and maneuvering troops to strike the launchers is also very important. Furthermore, success depends on proven, unequivocal achievements against the enemy. The Israeli public is prepared to withstand a great deal if it sees significant strategic achievements.
6. The time factor: The Israeli public’s impatience, international pressure, the danger of escalation, and collateral damage to uninvolved civilians could force an end to the operation before its strategic objectives are achieved. Therefore, in the coming days, a gradual approach should be avoided as much as possible and full force used. The extent of the attack and the value of the targets are very important for achieving the goals of the operation.
7. A combined operation, with air and ground attacks, based on intelligence: The public tends to see only two models of action, aerial or aerial with a large scale ground operation to occupy Gaza.Yet even if we do not intend to occupy Gaza, a ground operation is necessary and almost essential. There is a high level of synergy between an aerial operation and a ground operation. Without a ground operation, Hamas will remain underground. A ground operation against high value targets will create friction with the terrorist organizations’ military wing and allow both an aerial and a ground force to attack them and their operational infrastructures. In any case, even a ground operation, and certainly an aerial operation, are dependent on high quality intelligence. The higher the quality of the intelligence, the less need there is for a ground maneuver.
8. State responsibility: In the previous two operations, it was possible to view Gaza as a state controlled by Hamas, and under international law, attack government buildings, the political leadership, and even infrastructures. Operation Protective Edge started one moment after Hamas ostensibly relinquished responsibility for Gaza and formally “gave the keys” to Abu Mazen. It is convenient for Hamas to adopt the Hizbollah model of having a private army in a state for which it is not responsible. Israel must again make it clear that it sees Hamas as responsible for everything that takes place in Gaza. Proposals have been sounded to strike militarily at state infrastructures in Gaza. There is no political or military logic in doing so. If it wishes to exert pressure on Hamas, which controls Gaza, Israel has the ability to stop the supply of electricity, fuel, and food without firing a shot, since it controls the border crossings and the electric switches. The more the conflict develops and the longer it lasts, the more effort must be invested to ensure that a humanitarian crisis does not occur in Gaza. The Palestinians will attempt to depict events in a way that serves their needs, and we must make sure that we read the picture correctly and do not allow unnecessary harm to those not involved in the fighting.
9. Controlling regional escalation: Those assessing the situation from intelligence and planning perspectives must estimate how much freedom of action there is in Gaza and weigh it against the risk of escalation in other, more dangerous fronts. One of the reasons for the government’s restraint in the past week was the fear that riots would break out in the Palestinian Authority, in East Jerusalem, and among Israeli Arabs. This risk has not disappeared, and if operational errors occur and uninvolved civilians are hurt, the risk could be significant. Another more serious risk is that the northern front with Hizbollah or even Syria could heat up, though there is very little chance that this will indeed occur. Hizbollah and Damascus are busy with Syria’s civil war and have not responded in recent years to what purportedly were Israeli actions against them. However, the concept of low probability is loaded and dangerous. Even if it is unlikely, the possibility of a flare-up on the northern front, which would be very serious, means that working assumptions and the entire situation must be examined continuously.
10. Egypt: In previous operations against Hamas, Egypt served as both mediator and brakes. It is also an indirect target for Hamas fire, since the organization is attempting to ease the blockade of Gaza, i.e., open the Rafah border crossing and the tunnels. Egypt in 2014 is different from both Egypt under Mubarak (Cast Lead), which was very sensitive to the Egyptian “street” and its response to the operation, and Egypt under Morsi (Pillar of Defense), which viewed Hamas as an ally. Egypt under al-Sisi has not succeeded in preventing conflict and renewing the understandings from Pillar of Defense. This failure lies in Egypt’s hostility to Hamas and its eagerness for an Israeli attack on Hamas, but also in the fact that the agreements reached between Egypt and the Hamas political leadership have not been honored by the organization’s military wing, which operates independently. Egypt, however, makes a distinction between Hamas, which it is prepared to attack, and a broad attack on Palestinians in Gaza, which it does not find acceptable.
11. Iran: One of the arguments for continued restraint by the Israeli government is Israeli strategic priorities. There is no doubt that the Prime Minister sees the Iranian nuclear threat as a much greater threat than terror from Gaza. The world powers and Iran are moving toward the signing of an agreement on July 20, 2014. The Prime Minister does not want political, strategic, and media attention to be diverted from the issue he views as the most important. However, the conventional assessment is that the negotiations with Iran will not be concluded in the near future, which affords a period of time to deal with the terror from Gaza.
12. The exit mechanism: When it enters a military conflict, the military and political leadership must be certain that it has a viable exit mechanism. It can use international mechanisms, such as the United Nations Security Council, mediation, or indirect negotiations through a third country (Egypt, Turkey, or Qatar), as well as military mechanisms – escalation or unilateral withdrawal. Cast Lead was stopped unilaterally, and Hamas accepted the ceasefire because it had suffered a heavy blow. Pillar of Defense was stopped with the help of Egyptian mediation. It is very important for decision makers to have a clear understanding of the mechanism they wish to use to end the operation, and for the exit to take place when the IDF achieves the strategic goal for which the operation was launched.
|
--
No comments:
Post a Comment