Israel's Grand Strategy?

The widely referenced mystery of Israel's poor performance in this war has puzzled me. They are the only modern military in the middle east, after all, and tend to positively wipe the floor with their enemies. So, I was thinking of possibilities for the grand strategy behind Israel's war against Lebanon, and I allowed myself to jog out into shadow-conspiracy territory. We've heard reports that the war was planned in detail years in advance, and that Israel was just waiting to spring the plan. That means the detailed war-plan that they followed was crafted by the Sharon government, not the Olmert. Therefore, they can't be considerred "squishy." This is the Butcher of Beruit's plan, after all.

So, setting aside for the moment the possibility that the Olmert government, endorsed by Sharon, just doesn't have the guts to follow the plan, then what the hell is going on? How can we make sense of all the handwringing about Israel's indecisiveness (which is really just a cover word for ineffectiveness)?

Well, just for giggles, what if they are following the plan? What if the IDF are trying to look somewhat ineffectual - using the number of rockets coming into Israel per day as a measuring stick? The argument would be that they can't simply squash all the Hezbos, but that they need to cut off the supply of weapons to Hezbollah in order to secure Israel... since those weapons are largely Iranian, that might mean that they feel compelled to strike against Iran. This would offer them the chance to strike at Iran's nuclear plant simultaneously.

If you believe that a Shiite Bomb seals the fate of Israel, then you have no choice but to destroy the nuclear capability before it becomes an existential threat. We just happen to have a crazy man as the President in Iran, thereby giving that view more credence. But luckily, he doens't have any power to do anything like that. The Supreme Jurisprudent holds those keys, and I'd like to think that a self-avowwed holy man would at least balk at the national suicide he would be committing by enabling nuclear terrorism against Israel.

It makes us not talking to Syria or Iran make more sense as well.

But the fact is, they still can't attack Iraq without using Iraqi airspace, and they really can't do that while we're there. I think that would spark an open revolt against our occupation that could be potentially painful. Here's the kicker: What if there is another way for them to strike the sites without sending sorties through Iraq? Bing-bing! There is another way. They're called low yeild nuclear weapons on the Jericho II missiles we helped them build.

Lord hear my prayer: stay the finger on the nuclear triggers. That would almost certainly be the end of my comfy lifestyle, and I am so attached to my comfy lifestyle.

No comments: