It is theories like this which give intellectualism a bad name. The author assumes that Israel is operating in a vacumn, without outside pressures such as the Egypt, Syria, Palestinians, US, UN etc. None of these entities are ever mentioned. No, it is assumed that Israel is a militant state and behind that assumption is the idea that this is Israel's choice. Well, you must live in an alternate universe. Let's look at the last "war of choice". 10,000 shells fell on the south, Hamas felt free to escalate since there were no consequences and then Israel attacked, using a strategy that minimized Israeli casualties. At the end of the war, most shelling stopped and few Israelis were injured. Sounds like a success to me. Not a war of choice, but a well supervised war because the idea of war is to hurt your enemy and minimize your casualties and this was accomplished. So let me tell you what I think this is really about. It is not about the civilian control of the military, it is about delegitimizing Israel is a subtle way--talking about choice when there is none, criticizing militarism when there is no choice (except to die or leave the country). It is a phony analysis with a hidden agenda. I for one was not fooled.
Death toll from car bombs in Iraq rises to 56 (AP)
from the article: A critical look at Israeli militarism