I don't know. Do you think that it would be worth risking?
Again, is it worth taking that risk?
So the Cheney doctrine, then?
"If there is even a 1% chance we must treat it as a 100% chance," is that it?
Under that criteria, you are saying Israel should bomb Gaza forever, right?
You can never be sure that the risk is zero, so bomb.
No. Only until Hamas surrenders and gives up the hostages. Do you agree that Hamas should surrender so Israel can call off their assault?
Of course.
Hamas is pretty horrific.
But "Hamas surrenders" doesn't solve your problem, does it?
Since they can always start attacks again, you have to keep on bombing.
There haven't been any in almost 20 years. Einstein said it's time to change things up unless you are insane.
So there have been no elections, therefore there should never be elections?
Or is it elections happen when the bombing stops, which is never?
Or is it "no elections, just rule by Israel"?
Again - as I mentioned earlier in the thread - what is the end game here besides "keep bombing"?
Israel has the finest intelligence in the world. The proof is in the pudding. They knew exactly how to find those 7 Hamas terrorists in Lebanon two days ago. So yes, Israel will indeed know.
So no criteria or plan, just "Israel will stop when it feels like it"?