Hot Air » Blog Archive » CNN: IDF surrounds Gaza City

CNN: IDF surrounds Gaza City

posted at 9:30 pm on January 5, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Time to set up camp and wait for the inevitable UN condemnation, or are they going in to look for Hamas leaders? Hmmm. The Guardian claims the scope of the mission might have very quietly broadened:

As the onslaught progresses, officials are more confident of “changing the equation” in Gaza and are predicting the collapse of the Hamas administration…

The head of the Shin Bet internal security service, Yuval Diskin, told the Israeli cabinet that Hamas was finding it increasingly difficult to govern with its leadership in hiding from Israeli rockets and much of its infrastructure blown to pieces.

He was backed by the chief of the general staff, Lieutenant General Gabi Ashkenazi, who said “not much” remained of the Hamas government, and by the head of military intelligence, Major General Amos Yadlin. “Hamas has absorbed a very hard blow…

Diana Buttu, a Palestinian negotiator involved in talks with Israel over its 2005 withdrawal of settlers from Gaza, said the Israeli assault had strengthened short-term solidarity with Hamas, but was likely to have weakened the group politically.

“People in Gaza are under assault right now so they’re going to support Hamas. But when the dust settles I think we’ll get a very different perspective, a lot of questioning about whether Hamas has the right strategy. Not so much blaming Hamas for the onslaught but more questioning of whether Hamas is taking us in the right direction,” she said.

Olmert insists they’re not trying to get rid of Hamas, but just in case, European leaders are scrambling to put together a settlement that would place international monitors on the Egyptian border to watch for weapons smuggling. See Anne Applebaum, among others, for why that means little more than kicking the can down the road. Quote: “Further negotiations will make sense only when Hamas’ leadership — currently emboldened by a combination of popular indignation and Iranian support — finally arrives at the same conclusion as its secular counterparts [that Israel can't be eliminated], and a new generation of Israelis is again convinced to believe them.”

Here’s The One once again voting present on the subject this afternoon, supposedly in the interest of not stepping on Bush’s toes even though his thinking matters a lot more to Israel’s timeline now than Dubya’s does.

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: « Previous 1 2

Yobama represents the absolute worst our great country has to offer.

By virtue of the color of his skin – he has been afforded opportunity regardless of talent, by virtue of the color of his skin – he has been elevated to Messiah status in spite of the evidence that shows him to be nothing more than a career politician, by virtue of the color of his skin – he is the poster child for any minority group to selfishly push its particular agenda down the throats of the “silent majority”, by the virtue of the color of his skin – any and all challenges of his preordained greatness are to be meet with unhinged primal emotion and not intellectual honesty, by the virtue of the color of his skin – this country will self destruct in the mythical quest for fictional healing from a historic wound that is deliberately kept open to exploit the inherent selflessness of the American people!

Healing that will kill us all…..

dmann on January 5, 2009 at 11:17 PM

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:02 PM
I can only speak for myself, but, when someone speaks, who is actually doing something about a problem, I tend to shut up, listen, and learn.

OldEnglish on January 5, 2009 at 11:15 PM

Hear,hear

thomasaur on January 5, 2009 at 11:17 PM

It seems that a lot of folks want us to either ignore the threat of radical Islam or “negotiate” some type of accord with them. We can do the first and enter into isolationism. But the threat will not go away, we just kick the can down the road and when we have to deal with it, the terrorist will be more emboldened and probably better armed (WMDs). You can’t negotiate with them. So what is left? Eradication.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:24 PM

Tough crowd. Am I alone in here? Crickets…

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:26 PM

Surround the northern part of the Gaza strip. Give the terrorists and their supporters (Palestinians) 48 hours to evacuate to the south and then flatten the place. Rinse and repeat southward until they’ve all been evacuated into Egypt.

If the terrorists attack Israel from their new host countries, give those countries a very short time to crush the terrorists or else it will be considered an act of war.

Most of those countries will deal harshly, without international condemnation, with the Palestinians if they try to bring a hopeless war down upon them. Those that do support terrorism will be destroyed.

Problem solved.

Only, do it before the terrorist nations get nukes, Israel, because then it will be too late for a real solution and your chances of survival will be slim to none.

FloatingRock on January 5, 2009 at 11:28 PM

tank…..
Hope yours is a C upgrade, kill’m all!

dmann on January 5, 2009 at 11:29 PM

So what is left? Eradication.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:24 PM

Stoking the wood stove, Eradication is the only answer and anyone who thinks differently hasn’t been paying attention.

thomasaur on January 5, 2009 at 11:29 PM

Oh, and I was literally stoking the fire, it’s -5.

thomasaur on January 5, 2009 at 11:30 PM

dmann…are you referring to the A-10? Haven’t flown that in 7 years and it was the caveman A model. Not sure about the Reaper I am going to or what blocks they have, but it will be fun to unleash some AF diplomacy once again!

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:31 PM

thomasaur
-5 ouch!! It is 41 here and I am freezing…and to think, I grew up in Nebraska!

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:32 PM

I guess I would expect that as islamitization occurs, the Nations in question will become more hostile and kick us out. It isn’t a military defeat, we stay on foreign nations soil at their request. They can boot us out anytime they wish. Am I missing your point? Sorry.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:13 PM

But Islamisation will not be a peaceful process. When the NATO troops are caught in the middle of several civil wars what then? Even if the islamisation of the continent were entirely peaceful there would still be some dilemmas:-

1) Is the US comfortable presiding over the transformation of over 25 European democracies into Islamic dictatorships? How can that be reconciled with the American ideal of spreading freedom?

2) The fact that the new ruling (Islamic) classes will be anti-American Muslim terrorists engaged in a war to conquer America how does the US justify ceding territory (an entire continent) to its mortal enemies?

3) Considering that the only way to win wars is through the acquisition of territory why would the US Armed Forces surrender and withdraw from crucial territories when the resulting vulnerability would make the re-taking of the exact same territories inevitable?

aengus on January 5, 2009 at 11:33 PM

Caveman kept you honest and made you think, skills that will ensure you see your grandchildren! Godspeed and good hunting.

dmann on January 5, 2009 at 11:34 PM

aengus
Great questions and I wish I had the answers. If those democracies willing cede to Sharia and Islam, what could we do? We aren’t a thugocracy. It is a frustrating situation and, hopefully, we or others like us will be able to find an answer…but it seems out of reach presently.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:37 PM

There is no such thing as living with these animals and that only leaves the option of living without them. There is no meeting half way with them.

thomasaur on January 5, 2009 at 11:38 PM

dmann
Thanks…America is such a great country!!!!

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:38 PM

thomasaur
I agree. Unfortunately most of our elected officials think they can make concessions and cut deals with them. Until they wake up and realize what our only option is, we are going to lose a lot of treasure and souls to this plague.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:40 PM

Thanks for the great discussion tonight. I need to help Mrs. Tank with algebra and hit the hay. God bless.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:42 PM

Thanks for the great discussion tonight. I need to help Mrs. Tank with algebra and hit the hay. God bless.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:42 PM

Thanks for dropping by and God Speed Sir.

thomasaur on January 5, 2009 at 11:47 PM

Great questions and I wish I had the answers. If those democracies willing cede to Sharia and Islam, what could we do? We aren’t a thugocracy. It is a frustrating situation and, hopefully, we or others like us will be able to find an answer…but it seems out of reach presently.

There would be nothing, I repeat nothing, thuggish about the US asserting its control against Muslim invaders in the territories in which its soldiers are stationed. After all the US Armed Forces would never have accepted a Russian invasion of those European territories it protected during the Cold War. If the US is not serious about preventing conflict then it should remove all troops from Europe (and Germany) immediately. Indeciveness, more than anything else, would be the worst war posture that any country could ever take.

I’m off to bed. Good night, God bless.

aengus on January 5, 2009 at 11:47 PM

1) Is the US comfortable presiding over the transformation of over 25 European democracies into Islamic dictatorships? How can that be reconciled with the American ideal of spreading freedom?

Name one European country on the brink of dictatorship let alone an Islamic one. Give examples of how democracy is being eroded. If anything… the advent of the EU means more rights to legal recourse across the treaty countries while the US suspends habeus corpus.

2) The fact that the new ruling (Islamic) classes will be anti-American Muslim terrorists engaged in a war to conquer America how does the US justify ceding territory (an entire continent) to its mortal enemies?

Umm… there is no new ruling class and it is not Islamic. Europe is more secular than it has ever been.

3) Considering that the only way to win wars is through the acquisition of territory why would the US Armed Forces surrender and withdraw from crucial territories when the resulting vulnerability would make the re-taking of the exact same territories inevitable?

What are you suggesting? You fought two wars so Europe could have an independent future. Are you suggesting something Soviet here?

lexhamfox on January 5, 2009 at 11:58 PM

aengus on January 5, 2009 at 11:47 PM

Good point.

FloatingRock on January 6, 2009 at 12:00 AM

Please don’t fall for another hudna Israel.

omnipotent on January 6, 2009 at 12:04 AM

What Obama said is disturbing to say the least.

…Unfortunately most of our elected officials think they can make concessions and cut deals with them. Until they wake up and realize what our only option is, we are going to lose a lot of treasure and souls to this plague.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:40 PM

Excellent observation. A good portion of elected officials are true narcissistic egocentric thinkers, unable to reconcile that others think and act differently than they do. They truly believe that some amount of reasoning or persuasion will elicit the other party to come around, because at the core they think everyone is the same as them. This is the ultimate form of prejudice: not accepting what people say & do for exactly what they present.

If a man says he will kill you you must believe him and act accordingly.

batterup on January 6, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Here’s The One once again voting present on the subject this afternoon, supposedly in the interest of not stepping on Bush’s toes even though his thinking matters a lot more to Israel’s timeline now than Dubya’s does.

I don’t trust Obama’s foreign policy at all, but he’s doing the right thing by not commenting now. We have to assume that at least some indication of Obama’s thinking on Gaza is getting to the Israelis, and there is no reason for him to make a mistake before he’s even in office.

My policy is always to wait for someone to make a mistake before criticizing them. You can pretend to be fair that way.

thuja on January 6, 2009 at 12:07 AM

I think Obama is doing the right thing. He’s listening for once, not speaking. It’s not his turn to speak — until Jan 20, he is a private citizen like the rest of us. Or rather, he’s a private citizen in a worse position than the rest of us because a single misplaced word coming from his mouth can undo hundreds of hours of work by the current administration to keep the Arabs from rendering aid to Hamas. Think about it — no matter what Obama says, it will not sit with the likes of Egypt or Saudi Arabia, because any critical words against Israel will encourage arms supply to Hamas, and any critical words against Hamas will look like “piling on” by the Americans. We can yak all we want, but words from us mean nothing to the belligerents or their allies.

He’s finally thinking about the totality of his Presidency, and has realized that what goes around comes around.

I’m impressed at his silence, for it is truly a golden one.

unclesmrgol on January 6, 2009 at 12:51 AM

I don’t trust Obama’s foreign policy at all, but he’s doing the right thing by not commenting now. We have to assume that at least some indication of Obama’s thinking on Gaza is getting to the Israelis, and there is no reason for him to make a mistake before he’s even in office.

My policy is always to wait for someone to make a mistake before criticizing them. You can pretend to be fair that way.

thuja on January 6, 2009 at 12:07 AM

I see where you are coming from and if Obama and the democrats actually applied this out of respect for the Presidency and what is best for the nation,it would apply.
But that is not the case.
Obama had no problem making comments like”Russia and Georgia need to show restraint”when Russia invaded Georgia.He made many comments about an international affair and was not even
elected.
Obama struts around with his”President elect” seal while his supporters keep yelling “Why can’t he start now”.
Obama is also commenting and putting policy out regarding
domestic issues.How is this not “acting like the President”.
Our domestic issues are just as important as our international ones.
When and Who made up the rule that there is only one President at a time concerning international affairs but not domestic.

Here are some prominent democrats doing exactly the opposite of what Obama is saying and Obama had no words of condemnation for them when they were trying to undercut the
Bush administration:

Kerry: U.S. A “Pariah” Nation Under Bush

DAVOS, Switzerland, Jan. 27, 2007
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/27/politics/main2404562.shtml

Massachusetts Sen. John Kerry slammed the foreign policy of the Bush administration on Saturday, saying it has caused the United States to become “a sort of international pariah.”

The statement came as the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee responded to a question today at the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, Switzerland, where the tumult in Iraq and the Middle East took center stage.

Kucinich Sells Out U.S. to Syrian Infobabe
Bottom Line Up Front: Dennis Kucinich is a lunatic.

U.S. Congressman and presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich met with Syrian President Bashar Assad this week and subsequently interviewed with Syrian TV on September 3, 2007. In the interview with a Syrian infobabe, he suggested the U.S. seek the help of Syria and Iran as an international peacekeeping force to replace U.S. troops so there will be no vacuum for the bad guys to fill! He also said the U.S. should pay reparation to Iraqis for freeing them from decades of brutality under Saddam Hussein and that the U.S. is repsonsible for MILLIONS of Iraqis dying in the war. What??

Dennis Kucinich:

I’ve repeatedly challenged the thinking behind the surge. What I have said in offering a plan to our Congress, embodied in a resolution known as House Resolution 1234, is that the United States must end the occupation, close the bases, bring the troops home, but we must have a parallel political process that reaches out to the international community, with the help of Syria and Iran, that would bring an international peace-keeping force, move it in as our troops , so there is no vacuum. That’s the beginning – it’s not the whole plan – but that’s the beginning of a plan. Certainly, increasing the occupation with a surge is counter-productive. It can only result in more deaths.

Gore Laments U.S. ‘Abuses’ Against Arabs
Feb 12 10:08 PM US/Eastern
By JIM KRANE
Associated Press Writer
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D8FNUKEO0&show_article=1

JIDDAH, Saudi Arabia (AP) – Former Vice President Al Gore told a mainly Saudi audience on Sunday that the U.S. government committed “terrible abuses” against Arabs after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, and that most Americans did not support such treatment.

Gore said Arabs had been “indiscriminately rounded up” and held in “unforgivable” conditions. The former vice president said the Bush administration was playing into al-Qaida’s hands by routinely blocking Saudi visa applications.

The democrats were okay with undercutting the President when it benefited them politically.
Not only were these accusations as stupid and baseless as the “Bush lied” theme they yelled for so long,suggesting having Iran and Syria oversee Iraq is just plane insane.

Obama is taking the safe route avoiding having to support Israel strongly in public which will infuriate his left wing base and friends at the UN.
Obama and democrats in general,by their actions,totally contradict the line “There is only one President at a time”
that Obama is laying out here.

Baxter Greene on January 6, 2009 at 1:11 AM

thomasaur
I agree. Unfortunately most of our elected officials think they can make concessions and cut deals with them. Until they wake up and realize what our only option is, we are going to lose a lot of treasure and souls to this plague.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:40 PM

Making concessions and cutting deals with the Barbary pirates didn’t work, but giving them the deep six did.

Johan Klaus on January 6, 2009 at 1:11 AM

lexhamfox on January 5, 2009 at 11:58 PM

Have you seen where the muslims are trying to get sharia law in European countries? The camel’s nose under the tent.

Johan Klaus on January 6, 2009 at 1:15 AM

Excellent observation. A good portion of elected officials are true narcissistic egocentric thinkers, unable to

reconcile that others think and act differently than they do. They truly believe that some amount of reasoning or persuasion will elicit the other party to come around, because at the core they think everyone is the same as them. This is the ultimate form of prejudice: not accepting what people say & do for exactly what they present.

If a man says he will kill you you must believe him and act accordingly.

batterup on January 6, 2009 at 12:05 AM

Hell, reasoning and persuasion worked with Hitler, didn’t it? Well, didn’t it?

Johan Klaus on January 6, 2009 at 1:26 AM

There is no such thing as living with these animals and that only leaves the option of living without them. There is no meeting half way with them.

thomasaur on January 5, 2009 at 11:38 PM

Regarding the Jewish Question, the Führer is determined to clear the table. He warned the Jews that if they were to cause another world war, it would lead to their own destruction. Those were not empty words. Now the world war has come. The destruction of the Jews must be its necessary consequence. We cannot be sentimental about it. It is not for us to feel sympathy for the Jews. We should have sympathy rather with our own German people. If the German people have to sacrifice 160,000 victims in yet another campaign in the east, then those responsible for this bloody conflict will have to pay for it with their lives.

joegoebbels on December 13, 1941 at 11:38 PM

unclesmrgol on January 6, 2009 at 1:29 AM

unclesmrgol on January 6, 2009 at 1:29 AM

You are not equating the terrorist with the Jews and the U.S. with the NAZI’s are you? It seems like the left was doing that to President Bush.

Johan Klaus on January 6, 2009 at 1:52 AM

You are not equating the terrorist with the Jews and the U.S. with the NAZI’s are you? It seems like the left was doing that to President Bush.

Johan Klaus on January 6, 2009 at 1:52 AM

No, but I am equating the sentiment expressed by Mr. thomasaur (that all the Palestinians should be wiped from the face of the earth) with that expressed by Joseph Goebbels (that all the Jews should be wiped from the face of the earth).

unclesmrgol on January 6, 2009 at 1:56 AM

Israel has to finish the job themselves.

Disband the worthless UN, and boot them out of New York. If given the chance, all they’d do is muck up Gaza.

byteshredder on January 6, 2009 at 1:57 AM

The Israelis are out there clinking bottles together … “Warriors, come out and playyyyyy”.

If I were the IDF I would be booming out loudspeakers in the neighborhoods telling Hamas to come out from under their mother’s beds and fight like men. The idea being to so humiliate them that when the IDF leaves, Hamas would be so shamed for hiding that nobody would vote for them ever again.

crosspatch on January 6, 2009 at 2:00 AM

If I were the IDF I would be booming out loudspeakers in the neighborhoods telling Hamas to come out from under their mother’s beds and fight like men.

crosspatch on January 6, 2009 at 2:00 AM

They seek them here, they seek them there
The IDF seeks them everywhere
If you should see them, please do give a yell!
Those demmed elusive Hammas terrorists from Hell
They seek them here, they seek them there
The IDF seeks them everywhere
Oh, Hamas Sissies, how the IDF does implore you
Simply to come out from behind your women or from under your bed
With all your hiding
It’s a chore to smash your fracken heads!
They seek them here, they seek them there
The IDF seeks them everywhere!
They give the IDF nothing but frustration
Sink me! They’re spoilsports
Each and every demmed face to face battle
They run and cut short
They seek them here, they seek them there
The IDF seeks them everywhere
Are they hiding under Gazi City
Just playing with their dity?
One thing we know for sure
They’re going to be sent to Hell!

PercyB on January 6, 2009 at 2:40 AM

I think Obama is doing the right thing. He’s listening for once, not speaking. It’s not his turn to speak — until Jan 20, he is a private citizen like the rest of us. Or rather, he’s a private citizen in a worse position than the rest of us because a single misplaced word coming from his mouth can undo hundreds of hours of work by the current administration to keep the Arabs from rendering aid to Hamas. Think about it — no matter what Obama says, it will not sit with the likes of Egypt or Saudi Arabia, because any critical words against Israel will encourage arms supply to Hamas, and any critical words against Hamas will look like “piling on” by the Americans. We can yak all we want, but words from us mean nothing to the belligerents or their allies.

He’s finally thinking about the totality of his Presidency, and has realized that what goes around comes around.

I’m impressed at his silence, for it is truly a golden one.

unclesmrgol on January 6, 2009 at 12:51 AM

You are right. I didn’t listen to the video. I don’t want to be negative at this point. Knowing he is going to lead our Country still angers me. But, nothing can be done. Yes, his silence is a Golden One for sure!

sheebe on January 6, 2009 at 2:47 AM

From the Obamese to English Translator:

I don’t know what the fark to do about the Middle East situation, so I’m going to pretend to have unselfish motives when I don’t answer any questions.

hillbillyjim on January 6, 2009 at 3:06 AM

Here’s The One once again voting present on the subject this afternoon, supposedly in the interest of not stepping on Bush’s toes even though his thinking matters a lot more to Israel’s timeline now than Dubya’s does.

I gotta say, the silver lining to Obama’s impending coronation is that he won’t be able to vote “present” anymore. He’ll have to actually take a stand on matters like these.

And I’ll get to watch him try and be decisive.

Hope he succeeds in office, but I’ve no guilt in relishing the thought of watching him squirm should he flounder. (Unlike the Left, I can oppose Obama without wanting him dead, and comparing him to Hitler.)

You wanted it, Obama.

Now it’s yours.

Can’t do “above my paygrade” on January 20th.

Hawkins1701 on January 6, 2009 at 3:18 AM

Can’t do “above my paygrade” on January 20th.

Hawkins1701

Wanna bet? There’s nothing Obama can’t do. Just wait. I’m giddy with anticipation.

SKYFOX on January 6, 2009 at 6:45 AM

Hawkins1701 on January 6, 2009 at 3:18 AM

I expect you are right. I can’t envision Obama not supporting Israel. It’s hard to imagine what it means to Israel if he doesn’t. 4 years is a long time when the wolves are at your door. Israel’s survival is resting on what decision Obama makes. I hope he has the wisdon to make the right one.

kanda on January 6, 2009 at 7:40 AM

I’m impressed at his silence, for it is truly a golden one.

unclesmrgol on January 6, 2009 at 12:51 AM

I think I agree less with this point, and more with this one:

I don’t trust Obama’s foreign policy at all, but he’s doing the right thing by not commenting now.

thuja on January 6, 2009 at 12:07 AM

Or maybe you are saying the same thing. Let me try:

Obama is doing Israel a favor, I think accidentally, by voting “present” so far. He’s letting Bush take the lead because he doesn’t have the guts or the moral clarity to stand with Israel publicly, so he’s hiding behind Daddy.

But this effing pansy is the new President, and at some point he’s going to have to make decisions. And I have no doubt that if he were speaking on Gaza right now, he’d be wobbling around undercutting Israel’s defense efforts.

Does anyone seriously think otherwise?

Jaibones on January 6, 2009 at 7:51 AM

So what is left? Eradication.

tank_killer69 on January 5, 2009 at 11:24 PM
Stoking the wood stove, Eradication is the only answer and anyone who thinks differently hasn’t been paying attention.

thomasaur on January 5, 2009 at 11:29 PM

I always thought Ann Coulter had a good plan:
“We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”

CarolynM on January 6, 2009 at 7:56 AM

…questioning of whether Hamas is taking us in the right direction,”

Heh.

labrat on January 6, 2009 at 8:06 AM

Time to set up camp and wait for the inevitable UN condemnation,…

This will not be another Lebanon debacle. Count on it.

labrat on January 6, 2009 at 8:09 AM

The Israelis are out there clinking bottles together … “Warriors, come out and playyyyyy”.

If I were the IDF I would be booming out loudspeakers in the neighborhoods telling Hamas to come out from under their mother’s beds and fight like men. The idea being to so humiliate them that when the IDF leaves, Hamas would be so shamed for hiding that nobody would vote for them ever again.

crosspatch on January 6, 2009 at 2:00 AM

LMAO.

Jaibones on January 6, 2009 at 8:11 AM

I always thought Ann Coulter had a good plan:
“We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity.”

CarolynM on January 6, 2009 at 7:56 AM

Old School.

Jaibones on January 6, 2009 at 8:12 AM

The IDF should NOT send ground troops in until they have sufficiently flattened the entire city. Then send in ground troops to collect DNA samples, instead of becoming hostages for crazy savages.

dogsoldier on January 6, 2009 at 1:22 PM

Comment pages: « Previous 1 2

You must be logged in to post a comment.