To whom it may concern

[arpad]

I am pro-disengagement.

Comments

[gholam.livejournal.com]

However, there is disengagement, and then there is disengagement. You know my view on the subject matter, and in the current situation, it is pretty much impossible. "Disengagement" will mean free food, water, fuel and communications from Israel to Falastyn, and free explosives, express delivery, from Falastyn to Israel, and to this kind of disengagement, I'd rather prefer the current situation.

[arpad.livejournal.com]

Current situation slowly eats our society from within. You can argue that Jerusalem is not a place to retreat from. But you can't sell idea of living in Gaza to majority of the public.

Also true disengagement demand a border. Which can be outer border of the strip and which can not be inner borders of our settlement block that was built in for purpose of dividing the sector.

Etc blah-blah-blah

[gholam.livejournal.com]

But what will we say in five years? In ten? "You can't sell idea of living in Jerusalem to majority of the public", especially with 120mm mortar shells falling every few hours at random spots in the city. And launch sites are, as usually, masked by kindergardens and human right activists protecting the god-given right of arabs to kill jews.

To be sure, I'm not against leaving Gaza - as long as afterwards, there is a border, and I mean border. Iron fucking curtain. Nobody and nothing passes either way, and if I had my way, that would include photons. And every time something - anything - flies our way across, there is a counterbattery strike, by the book, regardless of where the launch site is, and ignoring the resulting squeals. On these conditions, I'd accept the fact that an Israeli will never set foot inside Gaza and West Bank, ever again. But alas, this is never going to happen, so we're stuck with what we're stuck with.

[arpad.livejournal.com]

You know strategy principles. Concentration of forces, etc. IMHO, every day that our brave settlers keep hold on their positions in Gaza bring us closer not to victory but to defeat. Because they can't advance, they are engaged, they waste propaganda resources and (unless there will be a major war in M-East) when they'll finally break, our fallback from Gaza will end in fighting for Jerusalem.

[gholam.livejournal.com]

As I said, I'm not against disengagement per se - I'm against disengagement that we're about to experience. Disengagement must be performed from a position of power, not from a position of weakness. We cannot afford to disengage in a fashion that will leave the enemy with a feeling of victory, because then, they'll pursue more of such "disengagements". Ideally, disengaging from Gaza, we should leave a glass desert there, but that's out of the question for obvious reasons. Therefore, iron curtain option is the next best thing. Unfortunately, it isn't that viable either, in the present circumstances, and current situation, however bad it is, is still better than an appeasement policy.

[wildernesscat.livejournal.com]

Count me in as well.