What the heck did Israel expect?!?! What were they thinking?!?! I thought they had stopped listening to Ms. Albright years ago! Would Sharon approve? I have sooooooooo many questions...

How could Israel have thought withdrawing from Gaza could possibly contribute to a peace process in the Middle East? Her leaders are bright enough to know better. Israel extened an olive branch and the Palestinians poked them in the eye with it. Was this whole thing staged? Did Israel withdraw from Gaza knowing Hamas and other radical Palestinians would use the opportunity to stage attacks against her people, giving her an excuse to launch strikes against them? Is Hezbollah just a little bonus that happens to have fallen into their hands? Or is something in the way of unbelievably brilliant orchestration afoot?

I've spent the past two days trying to figure out what is going on over there. At first, I wanted to simply blame the radical Muslims who have sought to exterminate the Jews for centuries and call it a day. Of course, they are to blame in the overall scheme of things; they are responsible for almost all current violence in the world (that is a topic for another blog), but what about these most recent incidents? In my admittedly naive mind, there is no explanation for this sudden escalation in violence at the hands of Israel other than a master plan. Can we agree Israel's response is a little over the top considering? Don't get me wrong--I am a conservative who supports Israel. What I still have not figured out about this current situation is how Israel can be so be so confident in attacking Muslims on two different fronts in a situation where they are wedged between so many countries who fundamentally believe they have no right to exist and have waited for an excuse to obliterate them for years. Relatively few Israelis were affected by the incursions, but hundreds of Muslims (good and bad) have paid the price. I believe the answer I sought for the past 48 hours is explained by a perfect storm of realization and opportunity in the Jewish state combined with careful long term planning. Bear with me for a moment (or a day or two).

Sharon and Arafat were near-extinct mammals still playing a game of cat and mouse left over from battles of the days of old. Once valliant warriors were trying to continue a legacy which could not survive through the World's inevitable evolution toward a fundamental loss of stomach for all-out war.

Bush was right to brand Arafat a terrorist and refuse to negotiate with the Palestinians until he was out of the picture and a more moderate leader was installed and quantifiable milestones were achieved. This position is in sharp contrast to the Clinton administration which was more than willing to attempt to negotiate with a person and a people who can never be trusted to execute a truce, accord, agreement, treaty, or anything of like resemblance. They will never renounce their desire to destroy Israel no matter what documents they may sign. The Clinton approach was absolutely futile--especially considering Israel had to agree to all sorts of concessions and the PLO simply had to "agree" to stop bombing civilans. I just hope the Bushies were sharp enough to see what was coming. Maybe I'm too optimistic.

I will never forget seeing for the fist time the footage of Ms. Albright chasing Mr. Arafat across the Rose Garden lawn begging him to return to peace talks. A high-ranking US official was begging a trivial terrorist to make peace. So much for the American mantra regarding how to interface with the world's scourge. Don't they understand that any deviation from the "We do not negotiate with terrorists" creed just serves to encourage them to create more terror?  The blanket was pulled from my head and body that day. Israel could have killed Arafat at any time. They did not simply because he was a convenient and toothless (yip-yap) attack dog. There was no other reason to let him live.  And the Clinton administration was more than willing to be complicit in the futile process, because any temporary agreement for peace was a winning mark in their column regardless of the long-term outcome. Israel was never fooled--they were preparing and waiting for the opportune moment.

Israel has known for years that negotiating with terrorists is futile. OK, that does not explain why Israel has executed prisoner exchanges in the past. I cannot explain that part. Perhaps a simple lapse in judgement? Michael Medved beat me to the punch, but Israel knows they do not need a peace process. They need a victory process. This week's events are their beginning of a victory process. Maybe the result won't be any different than the eight other wars they have waged since 1947. Maybe they will only buy a few years of peace before the next round. They are clearly willing to take the risk. Did they learn from WWI and WWII and are thinking of taking out the enemy when fewer overall casualties will be realized?  Has Sharon's incapacitation finally opened a window for others in the Israeli government to begin to execute a long-coming philosophy?

And I haven't even gotten into the role of Iran, Syria, China, and Russia in this whole thing. But you'll have to wait for tommorrow's blog for that connection. A preview sez all they (the Muslims) understand is violence and Israel and the USA are better at it than anyone else...