The closer the enemy is to Israel's population, the more damage is done. This is obvious from experience in Gaza and now in the north. Yet the current Israeli government apparently still intends - through unilaterally realigning - to bring the enemy closer still to Israel's population centers. Why? Why? Why? Repeatedly I have seen comments in talkbacks here and elsewhere from people who used to be opposed to unilateral withdrawals, land for peace, etc. saying that, since the increased hostility from Gaza and now from Lebanon they have changed their minds and have concluded that withdrawing from the West Bank is a bad idea. JUST FOR THE RECORD, IS THERE ANYONE OUT THERE WHO USED TO BE OPPOSED TO UNILATERAL WITHDRAWALS BUT, BECAUSE OF RECENT DEVELOPMENTS, HAS NOW DECIDED THAT WITHDRAWALS ARE A GOOD IDEA?
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Saudi troop deployment in Syria linked to U.S.-led coalition against ISIS, FM says (Reuters)
from the article: Army to decide on lowering alert in north; Qassams hit Negev