Get the Ricochet app
Ricochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.

3 Whisky Happy Hour
The Ricochet Podcast
GLoP Culture
Beyond the Polls with Henry Olsen
Parsing Immigration Policy
Federalist Radio Hour
What the Hell Is Going On
Freedom to Learn
Daily Signal
The Erick Erickson Show
Chicks on The Right
3 Martini Lunch
The Learning Curve
The Conservative Woman’s Guide
Heritage Explains
Not Dead Yet
Giving Ventures
Who Funds that?
The Radio Free Hillsdale Hour
The Glenn Show
Call Me Back - with Dan Senor
Hillsdale Dialogues
Law Talk with Epstein, Yoo & Cooke
The Libertarian
The Report Card with Nat Malkus
The Kevin Roberts Show with Larry O’Connor
The American Idea
Madison’s Notes
Conservative Crossroads with Henry Olsen
Mom Wars
The Back of the Book
Gray Matters
Martini Shot
The Dave Carter Show
The Powerline Show
In Dissent
Heard at Heritage
Smart Girl Politics
James Lileks’ The Diner
Case in Point: The Legal Show on the Hottest Legal Cases in Politics and Culture
JobMakers
One on One with Robert Doar
Homeschooling Journeys with Curious MikeRicochet will work fine in a browser on your mobile devices, but for the best experience please download our app.
Tired of the toxicity of social media? Why not join Ricochet for just $5/month? Think of it as an online bar. Come in, have a drink, hang out, say whatever you want. But don’t badger, bully, or berate the other drinkers. That's our only rule.
As the decision to invade Gaza drags on, it’s becoming clear that there will be many losers in this war. We hope that Hamas will be the biggest loser by losing the bulk of its people. But it may not be an exaggeration to say the entire Middle East, if not the conditions of the world, may be at stake.
Israel is not going to make its decision freely. They now have to bow to the demands of the United States, which has pressured them not to invade. Apparently, they hope Hamas will release more hostages, and everyone should be satisfied that progress is being made. Meanwhile, we don’t know how many hostages are actually alive. Also, they have had to agree to humanitarian aid delivery, which up to this point is not subject to visual inspection and could include arms; the aid could also end up in the hands of Hamas. Israel is apparently complying with the U.S. requirements, since they have been told the U.S. could withhold essential armaments otherwise.
The United States believes it has the optimal viewpoint on dealing with Hamas, a group that has no intention of cooperating on anything unless it sets the terms. No matter how badly they are wiped out, they will never give up the fight. Never. They will never agree to an unconditional surrender and everything that would entail. But the United States, married to the idea of negotiation, will also never give up. Our leaders don’t realize that they have sacrificed their reputation and credibility on their own failed military actions. I suspect Israel is only going along with their demands because they think they must. The U.S. is also still trying to maintain a balancing act with Iran. It refuses to call out Iran, actually applying sanctions and starving the mullahs. (After all, they might get upset with us.) And there are rumors that the U.S. wants to manage the war jointly with Israel.
Give me a break.
There are no good solutions to this horrible situation. But Israel must prioritize the best options in this war:
It must invade Gaza sooner rather than later, taking out as many tunnels and terrorists as possible, knowing that the hostages may die as will many IDF soldiers.
The consequences will be terrible. The entire world will call them monsters. The U.S. will be furious, but once Israel goes in, I think the U.S. will finally give them the weapons they need; the U.S. doesn’t want to cause another Holocaust. Many people on all sides, including the hostages, will likely die.
But we have to ask the simple question: do we want Israel to survive? The main issue is existential, and all the other arguments and justifications are secondary. Israel jeopardizes its future if it does not destroy Hamas. The longer it waits, the more opportunities Hamas has to re-arm.
Israel must go in now.
This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet's members.
Discussion (91)
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Commitment is required. The US doesn't have it. We'll see if Israel does...
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
When in modern warfare has a defender been as well prepared to defend an urban conflict as Hamas is?
When in modern warfare has an invader been so handcuffed in tactics as Israel is (don't injure the human shields)?
When in modern warfare has an invader been so handcuffed in strategy as Israel is (e.g., risking bogging the entire army down in Gaza, having to shuttle some back north to fight Hezbollah, and then have Fatah police drive the center of Israel in to the Med.)?
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
Our "leaders" need to accept that this would be the case when the first terrorist crossed into Israel on 10/7 and committed murder.
To me, there's no point in waiting. I agree that the IDF should invade ASAP.
CHARTER MEMBER
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
I keep envisioning Biden speaking to Netanyahu like he did that Ukranian official about not getting that funding if Shokin (the prosecutor looking into Burisma) wasn't fired.
Was that 'talk' letting that 100 million in to Gaza? or I suspect, that Israel wouldn't get any replenishment of arms/stocks if they go in...."well son of a bitch, they didn't go in! (laughter from all the Leftists, Commies and Jew haters)".
To read this bio, please join Ricochet.
What about letters of Marque and Reprisal? It is kind of an old school thing, but against non-state actors (like pirates) it might make more sense than an invasion. It would be cheap and Israel would have less political blow back.
Letters of marque allowed governments to fight their wars using private captains and sailors, akin to mercenary soldiers, to hunt down enemies and fight their wars instead of using their navies. Oftentimes it was cheaper and easier for governments to issue letters of marque to privateers than to maintain a longstanding navy. Instead of building, funding, and maintaining a navy in times of peace and in times of war, governments would issue letters of marque to privateers so they could fight the nation's battles. This way, the government issuing the letter of marque were not responsible to fix or maintain any of the privateers' ships since they were owned by the privateers
You're seeing five of 91 comments. Sign in, or join for just $5 per month, to read them all and add your own.