1/ Obama tells Israel get out of the West Bank and free up Gaza or else no more US dollars and US weapons. 2/ The Israel government and the IDF top brass are carted off to the Hague for trial on war crimes charges. 3/ American settlers are sent back to where they came from (with no compensation). 4/ Ditto the Russians 5/ Ditto the French

Most of us would have liked the complete victory, but perhaps it is not possible. As it was, Israel is being condemned worldwide for the collateral casualties. Getting the last terrorist in the bunkers would have increased the civilian casualties. Let's not broadcast that nothing was accomplished. Hamas is now very scared of new retaliations. Some deterrence was established. The ceasefire in the north also holds up (99%).

Is truely the root problem with the intelectual core of our governmental and academic elite. Is has mentaly hamstrung our ability to act decisively in our own self defence.

I am not sure why the writer feels that, " even if attaining it may have meant suffering a higher rate of casualties - something which itself is extremely doubtful." Why would a decisive victory not have included a higher rate of Israeli casualties? Nevertheless, the basic point of the article is well stated, yet the question remains unanswered-what is holding Israel back? Post modernism? Guilt? International pressure?Feeling the pain of each soldier's loss?

to lose? "We lost" was the cry after 2006 war with HA was over. Today HA'd rather be caught dean than be implicated in another rocket attack on Israel. "We lost" is cry today and yet Hamas, at least with words, is trying to distance itself from current rocket firings from Gaza. What is it that you know in Israel and we cannot see in US? Please, clue me.

"tired" of defeating his country's enemies, etc. Is victory even in his vocabulary? There is one report going around that the IDF was prepared for a final operation that, within hours, would have resulted in the capture of much of the Hamas leadership, possibly even recovering Shalit. That may be hyperbole, but there's a general feeling that the IDF was prepared to do whatever was asked of it, but the political leadership chose not to ask.

I doubt that the loss of the notion of "victory" was-and still is the problem. even more so is the supposed assumptions of being poorly briefed," poorly equipped...etc all the other garbage of assumptions... Go back to the basic rules of zionism for real solutions? I almost pity you. never were happy with what God gave ya'll anyway, you made my day Mr. Sherman

But this article is still right in three key respects: (i) Israel may now offer Hamas (open crossings, prisoner exchange) what was on offer in September and October, when the rockets basically stopped but Israel did not reciprocate by opening the crossings and then launched an attack on November 4th. What a shame. Hundreds of innocent civilians dies. IDF soldiers and Israeli civilians died. And a murderous terrorist group has emerged stronger. Opening the crossings back in October may well not have worked - Hamas can't be trusted - but it would have been worth a try. (ii) I opposed the military action. But having killed hundreds of innocent civilians, even some of us who thought it was a terrible thing to have started wished that Israel would at least have finished it. Those deaths might at least have achieved something if Hamas had been removed. (iii) It's not the concept of victory you can't deal with, it's the idea of casualties. Israel is not alone. Western countries beat their breasts over casualty rates in wars several years long that in the past would have accounted for an hour's bloodletting on the Somme or in Ypres. Israel fought an artillery, aerial and tank war in Gaza against a guerilla army. It was an inevitable stalemate with high civilian casualties. Highest estimates are that the IDF killed around 100 of the Al Qassam brigades (as opposed to the child soldiers with AKs that Hamas sent out to fight) out of a deployable total of around 5000. That was inevitable if Israel would not engage ground troops. Personally, I don't think that there will ever be a military victory to the conflict. I stood in the West Bank yesterday looking at Tel Aviv. You could almost touch the planes landing in Ben Gurion. You might say that justifies the occupation - and I understand the security rationale. But in the long run, you and the Palestinians live in the same, small corner of the earth and you are going to have to find a way to share it in peace.

Yes Israel suffered a diplomatic defeat but thats nothing new. If an Israeli soilder told a palestinian to tie his shoe laces so he didn't trip over the press would be Israeli soilder harassing palestinian. Israel should never try to fight for the hearts and minds because it will never win them round instead the attitude should be what it was during our glory years before oslo when we said up yours to the rest of the world said we don't care about what you think we care about Israels interests. This is something we have forgotton how to do. If cast lead had been done properly the diplomatic backlash would have been the same but Hamas as a fighting force would be smashed, the rocket attacks ended and maybe even Gilad Shalit. The IDF were doing a great job and achieving most their tactical goals but just when they were on their way to victory. Also despite the fact that Bush was saying nothing because he supported the operation Olmert & co called for a unilateral ceasefire. Pulled out all the troops no strings. Better to be the good guys and pull out all the troops now then later on we can negototiate with Hamas from a position of weakness. This policy of start something but not finish because you can't handle the criticis means the job doesn't get done so the goals are not achieved and we get criticised anyway. If Olmert had allowed cast lead to reach its natural conclusion because the job was done Hamas would be left looking humiliated and the palestinian street would see Hamas are not as strong as they claim to be. Lebanon ended up in such a humiliation because the IDF got their tactics wring to begin with but just as they were starting to get their act together Olmert decided for a ceasefire and we got 1701 which Livni is so proud of being resopnsible for. Again with Lebanon Bush was going out of his way to delay the UN in calling for a ceasefire so Olmert could finish the job but once again the man wasn't interesting in finishing what he started so its we loose

Hamas has won ... the experience not to mess with IDF.

....can believe that "victory is like God, if one believes in it, it exists". That's why they had to be freed by people who believed that victory is if you defeat or substantially damage your enemy

srael suffered diplomatic defeat in Gaza, while Hamas emerged victorious BECAUSE OF THE WEAKNESS OF THE GOVERNMENTAL PERSONS. IF YOUR - WILL/RESOLVE -IS WEAK OR NOTHING, THEN IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW MUCH CAPACITY YOU HAVE, THE EQUATION WILL BECOME NOTHING. CONSERNING THE IDF, THE CAPACITY, THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG. CONCERNING THE GOVERNMENTAL PERSONS, THE PM,DM,AND FM, THEY WHERE ALL JERKS. Orao.

a high price

Government who seeks "Victory" as the only way to Impose "Its" Peace? Hamas as this scribe suggests, Has not only won the war... But will Dictate the terms of any Peace.

with Bibi and Lieberman at the helm...

Well diplomatic means crap, who needs to be diplomatic with loosers. The facts on the ground show rubble where there was once a house, a shop, an arms depot.

sherman spouts fancy words and theories that prove him to be a beilinist dreamer and imbecile.No army can " defeat" an guerilla force which has the support of the populace. Going into the heart of gaza house to house was illogical and unnecessary. Israel has good tactics, were well led but were constrained by several factors: 1) Barak did not want to fight and was hesitant unlike Yaalon in defensive shield. 2) IDF did not retake philadelphia 3) IDf id not remove all of the top leadership. Finally, since rockets were not stopped and you declare hamas the winner, tell me why the idiots in tel aviv don't launch terror rockets in reverse at gaza, whose people would soon beg hamas to stop. Even erdogan says rockets are no big deal.look at israeli leaders_- a) Olmert , mother of all cowards who cannot stand one drop of blood, runs out of the room and who dosen't see a line between 2 points, rather a curve b) Livni,serves olmert while asking him to resign, repeats the word understanding endlessly, and appears dim-witted, like retarded when it comes to lets withdraw and then what 3) Barak-when he did not react to the public lynching of 2 soldiers in ramaalh, he showed himself to be detached, unconnected to reality. Downtown Ramallah should have been levelled.During his PM ship, he did nothing about suicide bombing, it was yaalon who overcame it. Barak can give advice on commando tactics only.His is way overrated and may also be suffering failure of nerve at 67.And finally Mazuz- a proper person who could be a good lawyer working at a university law department. But h also is overcautious, and takes forever whether its olmert or katsav, and constrains the idf with every breath they take. He is not a practising lawyer and that's why he takes forever. He is unsure of himself.

we had goals in the so called Second Lebanon War (of First Gaza war) and the (second) Gaza war. But the political leadership stopped short of reaching its goals. Why? Because we want to pretend we can have peace with the Arabs. And so, we still have rockets raining down on our heads. And what reason will we give in the next war? We have an obligation to stop rocket attacks, especially on our civilians. Livni you are Pathetic, Olmert you and not Barak is now the worst PM the state has ever had.

or building walls, but arabs opposed, and resolved to terror

Retard says what?

If the gazans are still living in tents in a year will Hamas still have won? I agree that it's hard to understand why the job wasn't finished. The terrorists always win by not losing. But these terrorists want to rule in Gaza. They can't just hide in a cave somewhere. If they are thrown out by their own in a few months who will have won? Hillary has said that the gazans don't get the 900 mill if the Pal govt doesn't accept the three demands. I think that will make the Hamas rulers' heads explode.

I blieve your position is a bit naive on one count, namely the media/"PR" front. What am I talking about? The sheer fact that the so-called intl. media is deliberately silencing/manipulating/skewing/lying about key aspects of this conflict which do not jibe with its political biases [namely, its intense and burning pro-Palestinian, in effect Hamas-whitewashing approach, say what you want Sir!] makes it therefore totally unwarranted for Israel/Israel's friends to BELIEVE that a course of action what you suggest (having a go at the openings of crossings etc. and if Hamas will violate the whole stuff a due condemnation by everyone is called for) is what I call naive, unrealistic and self-defeating. Yes, I am THAT MUCH (extremely) disillusioned by the general "fairness" of the worldwide media that I in the end came to this very conclusion.

Ha. Tricked a couple of people into opening up this talkback hoping for some inflammatory stuff. No-one opens up a subject line that says something like "I agree". That's the tragedy of this kind of debate - it polarises rather than informs or finds common ground. #24 actually made a very sensible point. I am a very strong opponent of the occupation and of the war in Gaza. But I agree that the level of debate in the Western press often embarrasses me. The naivety over Hamas is one aspect. I think we have to engage and talk to them: but I don't think that because they are decent, democratically elected people. I find them repugnant. I support engagement because I think that, in the end, Hamas can only be defeated politically. And it is in the vital interests of Israel, the Palestinians and the rest of the world that that happens. One problem with the Western media is that they portray Israel and Israelis as evil. You will never convince anyone that they are evil. And Israelis are not evil. In the past they have taken risks for peace that few other nations have. What you might be able to convince people - though even that is very hard - is that they are wrong. I think Israel is wrong to guarantee its short term security at the expense of (i) the Palestinians (ii) it's long term strategic security. Sadly that kind of debate is rarely heard and it normally descends into silly slogans about "child killers" vs. "terrorist sympathisers".

Martin, you've missed the point, just like Olmert and co. Israel does not need or want Gaza. If it had no claim (or control) over it, any act of voilence could be considered a true act of war, and be dealt with to its conclusion. The problem is the continued relationship with Gaza. Hopefully, the new government will simply close the border, shut off all relations (including money and power), and manage Israel's borders properly. Let Egypt, the EU and the rest of the world help Gaza. Oh, and if this doesn't create 2 states, perhaps Egypt can do what it should have done years ago (incorporate Gaza in Egypt) and the West Bank be addressed separately. End of Game.

And in reality this article offers nothing. No outline of disengagement, withdrawal, different modes of operations, etc. Here is what Israel should do: As much as we love the IAF because it is indeed the best air force in the world, every time it bombs a civilian populated area it breeds more militants. Hamas breeds militants as well of course. But, one may ask why Israel did not take more advantage of their covert operatives squad before bombing gaza. I know, i know...Israel's military policy has the utmost concern for its own soldiers but surely the sniper units and ground troops are not excellent as well? If I do indeed choose to make Aliyah to Israel after my higher education I'd want to enlist in such a unit, for the multi-lateral reasoning that it is more useful in terms of taking out direct threats and minimizing civilians casualties.

its own internal divisions;its dirty selfserving politics and politicians;its hellenization. When Israel restarts looking inward,it will restart winning. The house must be urgently cleaned in order to keep on properly and efficiently .