An interesting look at how America thinks about the conflict when cameras aren’t pointing at them. TL;DR they see themselves 20 years ago, and are trying to figure out how to convey all the lessons that experience taught them, including “branches” and “sequels”, which is jargon I haven’t heard mentioned before. Israel is not terribly receptive.
Aaand of course, Tom Cotton is at the end basically describing a genocide, which he would support.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
The paper said Yoav Gallant has been urging for a pre-emptive strike against Iran’s powerful Lebanon-based proxy militia Hezbollah, without success as the U.S. and others in the Israeli government warn against it.
He wrote that Biden has failed to persuade the Netanyahu government to think through the potential implications of a ground offensive without, at least, offering residents of Gaza any hope of a better political future without Hamas.
In a column titled, “Israel is about to make a terrible mistake,” he warned that a ground war without any talk of future Palestinian statehood could trigger a global conflagration.
Then, on Monday evening, The Times put it in the bluntest possible terms: reporting that the Biden administration fears Israel lacks achievable military objectives in Gaza, citing senior U.S. sources.
“This potential for a greater regional conflict takes a situation that’s already horrible and could turn it into a complete nightmare,” said Daniel Byman, an adviser to the State Department, a former U.S. government staffer, and now a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).
Sachs says he doubts the conflict will lead to U.S. boots on the ground, but would not be surprised to see American naval firepower used; two U.S. carrier strike groups are already mobilized for Israel’s defence.
The original article contains 965 words, the summary contains 209 words. Saved 78%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!