In this article Fred Kaplan, column writer for the Slate Magazine, argues why the Israelite invasion of Gaza makes sense if short-termed but its a crazy idea if turns out to be a long campaign. Kaplan states that a short-term campaign letting the infantry come in and do the job since the missile here and there thing isn't working should work. But if this Israeli invasion on Gaza crushes Hamas, the terrorist group, how should the Israeli people occupy the strip of Gaza having to clean up all the war destruction and the possible rebel groups that might even rise and create danger for civilians. Kaplan also cites that a journalist from New Yorker had said in an article that he had talked to Mahmoud Abbas, the President of Palestinian Authority, about allying with the West banks to crush Hamas but it led to nothing. Israel keeps talking about peace with Gaza but still hasn't moved their war checkpoints from the map. Now this war stands each one by themselves, some with the same goal but alone in the fight against the terrorism of Hamas.
Fred Kaplan bases most of his argument that the long-term campaign will be bad for Israel on his own assumptions of what might happen. He uses lots of info from the past of this Gaza vs. Israel conflict to show why he thinks things will go bad towards Israel even if Hamas gets crushed. Kaplan abuses of irony sometimes to make the idea of invading Gaza sound even worse and also to criticize some of the United States' involvement in some of these things; He also repeatedly uses the numbers of casualties for both sides to show how disproportionate this war is so far even though its only starting.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/war_stories/2014/07/israel_launches_ground_assault_on_gaza_the_israeli_government_no_longer.html
No comments:
Post a Comment