"Mark L. stated "Even so, many did not want to preempt. Eshkol only did so because Israel could not afford to be in a high alert status for months on end." Ah the old what if scenario." - Jacob Blues Sorry Jacob, that is the reason Levi Eshkol gave for making his decision. There were many urging him to attack, but the situation was not clear. Israel had no solid evidence Egypt was massing for an attack. It did have unexplained actions and words which caused such tension that Israel had to go on alert. The US was assuring Israel of support and at the same time urging restraint. The US should (I feel) have supplied all of the evidence we had which showed that Egypt's deployments in the Sinai were defensive. In fact, the Soviets had fed the Egyptians and Syrians forged intelligence which 'showed' Israel was about to attack them. The war was a mistake, the final straw was internal to Israel. The high cost of keeping the reserves mobilized. I think Eshkol did the right thing.
Syrian army troops make gains near Aleppo, retake nearby village (AP)
from the article: An alibi for the Arrow
After Netanyahu says he would wait for a new U.S. president to reach a better military deal for Israel, American officials fire back.00:09 08.02.16 | 9 comments
Plan recognizes that two-state solution is not imminent, seeks to separate dozens of Jerusalem-area Palestinian villages from the city itself among other measures.11:26 08.02.16 | 0 comments
Prime minister says system deprives ministers of powers they were elected to exercise; remarks come amid drive by politicians to regain control over appointments and dismissals of senior officials.11:55 08.02.16 | 1 comments