Excerpt:
An armoured vehicle and troops can be seen in a video from the Israeli military which Israel says shows its operations in eastern Rafah.
The Israeli military says it has taken control of the Philadelphi Corridor - a strategic zone that acts as a buffer between Gaza and Egypt.
The Israeli military said its forces backed by tanks and artillery were operating in the center of Rafah, despite pressure from allies to ease up on its latest …
I still have a hard time understanding why anyone would insist that Israel “let up” on Hamas in any area, Rafah included/not excepted.
Why should terrorists be allowed to have a potential safe haven anywhere?
lol, you guys can’t handle the truth.
I’m curious about Israel’s tactics here, because it doesn’t look like they are making any serious attempts to hold any of the territories previously captured. So by moving through Gaza City, Khan Younis, now Rafah without holding the cleared cities aren’t they just setting themselves up to be doing it all again? I mean there are definitely less Hamas now, but seems like giving them opportunities to retrench is a tactical and strategic problem.
Not sure about the full extent of their operations, but if they are in fact not holding any of the territory in which they previously conducted operations, I would have to ask what their strategy/objective is with that.
Perhaps they are trying to avoid the appearance of being an “occupier,” which is a common anti-Israel narrative/trope on the other side.
It does seem to leave an opening for the enemy to regroup though.
I think that’s the idea. Perpetuity.
I mean if they are holding the Gazan cities, that is the definition of an occupier. No different than any other country when they take a city.
I definitely believe they are trying to put off the much harder part which is dealing with the aftermath of the war. Both because when it’s over the current Israeli government will be dealing with it’s politics again, which aren’t great. Plus I don’t think they have the resources or manpower to handle Gaza in a long term way.
This was in retaliation for the missile attacks by Hamas?
It’s been 7 months, nearly 8 since the Oct 7 attack.
How long is this going to be called “retaliation”?
It’s like Pearl Harbor.
The “retaliation” continues until the other side unconditionally surrenders.
Who’s still calling it “retaliation”. I haven’t seen anyone, anywhere call it that
Why would Hamas surrender? Again, that’s what I don’t understand.
The more civilians that Israel kill whether by accident or not, the worse it looks for Israel. It’ll keep getting worse and worse for them which at the end of the day, benefits Hamas.
It’s almost a no-win situation for Israel. It’s either Israel pulls back, or they will continue killing innocent people and having even worse long term ramifications.
Israel may destroy this version of Hamas while creating more Hamas’.
The missile attack from 5 days ago.
Okay gotcha, but even in that regard, both sides are going to play the game of who did what first
There’s nothing wrong with perpetually fighting when most of the world wants you dead. In my trips to Israel I never met a single person that fretted over war. It’s embedded in their DNA at this point. My uncle, who grew the Squirrel Hill neighborhood of Pittsburgh, never mentioned fighting in all the years I knew him. Yet he flew back and forth to Israel continuously the whole period.
So that’s what you’re calling it “retaliation”??
You can’t go into another country, murder women and children, take hostages (women and children), which is called WAR, and then when you’re getting your @$$ kicked you start trying to dictate terms.
It’s called WAR and there’s NOTHING about any WAR that’s ever been fought that isn’t ugly and where innocent people get killed. You want it to stop, lay down your arms and release the remaining hostages but this is NOT what Hamas wants.
Hamas rejects, refuses, and resists peace because war on Israel is the reason it exists. The people of Gaza? They don’t give a damn!!
For the WAR to end there would have to be a ceasefire (which Hamas has rejected).
Or it requires surrender (which Hamas has refused).
Or it requires regime change (which Hamas has resisted).
There’s no positive alternative to all out victory.
I don’t think Hamas is really getting their @$$e$ kicked because like i said, when Israel kills innocent people, Hamas wins.
Each time innocent people die, Hamas will scapegoat Israel and blame them.
That being said, the only reason the current situation could even be remotely considered “war” is because Israel is heavily restricted in terms of what they can do. Israel could obliterate the entire stripe of land we know as Gaza in a matter of minutes, but of course that would come with serious implications on a global scale much more than what they are already seeing right now.
Hamas is not going to surrender unless they get a good deal in any sort of negotiation. Why would Hamas surrender and not get anything in return?
Make it make sense
©Copyright 2017 Coogfans.com
