Jeez, I wish I had originated the above quote, so kudos to the poster who did. It sums up the present relationship between the military command and the political leadership in a nutshell. In all democracies the will of the people is expressed through its elected representatives and not to any outside group who have no accountability to the people. This does not appear to be the case in Israel - as the article points out: "the military tail wags the political dog". This type of situation would not be tolerated in any functioning democracy - if the military refused to follow the policies of the Cabinet, they would be relieved of duty (witness MacArthur and Truman). In the past few months whenever Olmert or some other Cabinet member was to meet with someone who might begin to initiate a peace process or to make accommodations, it seemed like the IDF caused some provocative "operation" with the sole aim of sabotaging that process. Why are these counter-productive actions tolerated?
from the article: Not Peretz alone