<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>It looks Obvious - Latest Comments in Reading the partial report</title><link>http://rogelsview.disqus.com/</link><description></description><atom:link href="https://rogelsview.disqus.com/reading_the_partial_report/latest.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 05:11:32 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Reading the partial report</title><link>http://www.rogelsview.com/in-the-news/reading-the-partial-report/#comment-1354662</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well, just to through some spice in... &lt;br&gt;1. Had we not pulled out, would that have insured us against these so called limited wars? &lt;br&gt;2. Is a tactical victory possible in these conditions? I mean, the report itself states that the damage caused to the enemy is in no doubt greater than that caused to our ownâ€¦ What would have been considered a tactical victory?&lt;br&gt;3. Will we really learn about our deficiencies?  I've been hearing about many lessons learnt in the army itself since last summer. Yet, I can seriously debate the extent to which any of these treat any of our real deficiencies. I've not yet seen any real development in our conceptualization of threat and response. I hate to say it, butâ€¦ we're not learning half as much as we think we are. And this self conviction has always been our chief deficiency. &lt;br&gt;Oh well, at least there's more to watch on TV.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">zoolish</dc:creator><pubDate>Tue, 01 May 2007 05:11:32 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Reading the partial report</title><link>http://www.rogelsview.com/in-the-news/reading-the-partial-report/#comment-1354661</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Well, we have to keep the coin under the street light :)&lt;br&gt;I don't know if this report is holding THE answer but it has very important observations and insights (at least as far as I got already).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;Here are two points I was thinking about while reading the report:&lt;br&gt;1. Would we not pull out of Lebanon, in 2000, what would be the price (in casualties and economic damage)? Can we compare it to a limited war every few years?&lt;br&gt;2. Would we learn more or less about the deficiencies of Israel national security concepts (or lack of) would we achieve tactical victory?&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Rogel</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 20:28:04 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Reading the partial report</title><link>http://www.rogelsview.com/in-the-news/reading-the-partial-report/#comment-1354660</link><description>&lt;p&gt;You knowâ€¦ I keep getting reminded of a saying about healthâ€¦ It goes something like this: "Be careful reading health books. You might die of a misprint".&lt;br&gt;These reports are indeed important, and this one too should be read and learnt. That said - I have a gut feeling that this one isn't the answer to our problem. Non of them are...&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">zoolish</dc:creator><pubDate>Mon, 30 Apr 2007 16:30:30 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>