It looks like the Law of Unintended Consequences has raised its head.

A problem with Israel unilaterally leaving the occupied territories is that Hamas and Islamic Jihad may see that as a sign of weakness (like when Israel left Lebanon). That may embolden them to continue their war while being safe in a Palestine that has never been serious in stopping these terrorists.

Letting your readers tell you what to think? Hmmm. . . .I think you're trying to give Friedman a thumbs up for poking the eye of the Israeli right, but don't want to bring down LGF wrath upon your head. . .

I think I'll go back to my 1 year old vow to never read Tom's colums again.

Retreat as a "sign of weakness":

I found this interpretation always astonishing. You don't want to appear weak, so you stay where you are. Is this one of the big and important principles of war taught to future generals at military academies? (Don't move, whatever! If you have to move, move forward! If you move, don't care about whether there is anybody behind you supporting what you're doing!)

The fact is, the border with Lebanon has been quite calm compared with the 'Palestinian border'. Looking at any statistic of Hizbollah attacks and Israeli casualties should make that clear.

Tom Friedman is the Idiot Savant of our Newspaper of Record. Idiot, because he gets stupid every time he writes about Israel, Savant, because through sheer force he was able to convince everybody that he knows something we don't. This particular column illustrates this theory well. No threat from the East? Hmm...And what about Iran? Oh I forgot, this is just the Israeli "right wing" thinking. Thank for enlightening us O Wise One.

By the way Old European, the Lebanese border is not as calm as you think, but even if it was, the withdrawal was interpreted by the Arab world not as a small tactical withdrawal but as some sort of mythical, strategic victory. The Palestinian strategy since then is to try to imitatate the Hezbollah model.

Marek,

Good idea. One of the best things I ever did was delete my cookies to the Times website. Now every time I'm tempted to poison my mind with their drivel I get the unfriendly registration page. Darn.

I've never felt more well-informed in my life.

What about the Syrian army?

What about the Syrian MERCENARIES?

I've been reviewing news stories of the summer about the march to Baghdad in April. One striking feature of many separate accounts by the embedded reporters is engagements with troops clearly known to be SYRIAN. Troops bought and paid for to come fight the Americans.

The Axis-of-Just-As-Evil is real. As I begin to hope for "soft power" propaganda and diplomatic forces to induce regime change in Iran, I begin too to consider the advantages to the free world of promoting Syria to the top of the target list.

But that, for another day.

Regarding Friedman, (meanwhile back at the Resturant, remember Alice? ...)
I'm almost offended by the comparison of the heroic U.S. military to Madman Jack Nicholson in "The Shining". Almost. But, again, reading the accounts of the battles of last April, (most recently, the "Thunder Run" story by David Zucchino in the LA Times) there is a justification for it. Though not one Friedman might make.

It's apparent from the record that the American Military is fu*king INSANE. They have perfectly good battle plans all worked out and then THEY IGNORE THEIR OWN PLANS!!! They even ignore their own DOCTRINE about how to develop NEW plans. Captains and Lt. Colonels go haring off with makeshift companies of put-together platoons, and take positions, and then LIE to their generals about whether or not they need reinforcements. Then the general get on civilian cell phones and leapfrog the chain-of-command to talk to sergeants-major and get advice, and then the danmed GENERAL issues orders based on the impressions of these enlisted goobers. Orders which, by the way, a Captain argues with and disregards so as to do something ELSE!!!

And it all works. How crazy is that?

To the Elder of Zion

"the withdrawal was interpreted by the Arab world not as a small tactical withdrawal but as some sort of mythical, strategic victory. The Palestinian strategy since then is to try to imitatate the Hezbollah model."

And what do you care about whether the Arab world thought it was a mythical victory? Because it hurts your pride?

In which ways would Israel have been better off if they had not retreated from Southern Lebanon compared to what they have now?

To The Old European

It has nothing to do with pride but everyting to do with the Arab view of this conflict. The Arab idea that Israel has been thoroughly defeated by a rag-tag group of terrorists has became a part of Arab mythology and is currently distorting their thinking. (By the way, not only about the Israeli Palestinian conflict but also about Iraq) It creates maximalist and un-realistic demands and destroys any attempt at compromise. The abandonment of Lebanese allies did not do us any good either. It made Barak look week and undecisive and succeptible to blackmail by Arafat. By their own addmission, the Palestinians decided to emulate the Hizbollah model.

No, I am not saying that the withdrawal was not the right option, but only that it should have been made after a complete destruction of Hizbollah. And yes, it was possible at the time, but Barak had no stomach for it. He was too influenced by his coalition partners from Meretz and too busy trying to keep at bay his competitors for the leadership of Labor.

This should be looked at this from a long term point of view. Isreal's long term goal is survival. Everyone commenting above seems to be thinking short term. A loss in the current battle, may be the only thing that lets them survive the long term war.

Isreal cannot change the demographic facts. Soon Jews will be the ruling minority in area formed by Isreal, Gaza and the West Bank. When that happens they will eventually loose support of the United States. The U.S. cannot back a minority ruled government (any more). Especially when democracy in the Arab world is our only hope to combat Islamic facism. What tactics will Isreal have to employ to impose their rule on the majority? What happens when a Palestinian leader finally wises up and emulates Ghandi or MLK Jr? Isreal will loose. It's a foregone conclusion.

Isreal has no need to worry about invasion from its neighbors. Jordan, Syria, and Eygpt learned their lesson and are not a credible threat. Iran cannot threaten them overland from that distance. Yes, Syria, a new Palestinian state and others will continue to back the terrorists if Isreal pulls back, but at least in pulling back from the occupied lands, they seize the moral high ground. From that high ground, they can combat terrorism with jets and bombs instead of bulldozers.

It is the only long term way to maintain a Jewish state.

Ah, so Uncle Sam is the crazed, ghost-demented Jack Nicholson of the world, axing down another door of the Overlook Hotel of the world in an attempt to kill the fearful, confused housewife Saddam Hussein.

Did I capture the moment? Did I?

We're not gonna hurt you, Saddam. We just wanna BASH YOUR F***ING HEAD IN!