Israeli victory is -and has always been -a sine qua non for the existence of the Jewish State.

Submitted by Israel Hazak (Denmark), Jan 12, 2009 at 03:34

I agree. Israelis were tired of fighting and elected a government whose intention was to make peace. Note the imperfect tense of the verb. Olmert´s words go back to that period. The decision of giving up Gaza confirmed this desire. Strategic decisions followed the spirit of this attitude. Thus, the very unintelligent way of fighting Hezbullah.

The international agreement still gives a feeling of peace in the north, yet the threat remains. The response to Gaza came at last, perhaps at the very last moment. Olmert´s credo that said "Restraint is strength" might have worked in the Western World, has proved wrong. During this time I urged some of the leaders of the Right to use hard-talk; "speak with your balls" as I put it! Hesitating in taking a decision about making war or not is the greatest strategic enemy.

Wars are won mainly by determination. Israel has two contiguous sworn enemies, Hamas and Hezbullah. Both must be defeated in the larger sense of the word "defeat", if not today, then tomorrow, also in the larger sense of time. Iran must and can be dealt with; strategies and tactics are surely under preparation.

The crucial thought at this time-point is the establishment of a sovereign Palestinian state; every philosophical, political and strategic sign that could have supported the idea is absent! There are other solutions and they must be examined. International pressure must be made irrelevant by a new stance in sovereign Israeli thinking. Victory must be on the Israeli side. The Palestinians must concede that suicide-bombs, rockets, charters stating the destruction of Israel, threats of intifadas have been the main factors of their losing the game.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".