Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: perche' il PRC non rivendica l'attentato di Eilat

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2011/08/why-has-no-one-taken-responsibility-for.html
One of the unanswered questions in the Eilat attacks last week is why
no one has officially taken responsibility for them?
Israeli intelligence has stated in no uncertain terms that the attacks
came from Gaza, and PM Benyamin Netanyahu said that the terrorists who
were behind the attack were killed in the retaliatory attack against
the Popular Resistance Committees.  It seems likely that the IDF
shared some of their evidence with Israeli reporters off the record,
as a Ha'aretz reporter says all of his sources show that the PRC was
responsible.
Yet the PRC has denied that they were responsible. It is somewhat
unusual for terrorist organizations not to race to take responsibility
- on the contrary in the past we've seen multiple organizations claim
responsibility for attacks even when they weren't involved.
The Israeli government would not make an explicit and specific
statement without some proof. It is likely that the terrorists that
were killed during the Eilat attack carried documentation that showed
who they were or what group they were from, evidence that cannot be
made public without compromising security.
So why didn't the PRC claim responsibility?
The PRC has worked in the past with Hamas on terror attacks, but its
main patron is Iran via Hezbollah. Its logo is even consciously based
on the Hezbollah logo.
IDF sources have stated that the attacks seem to have not been meant
just to kill Israelis, but to kidnap an IDF soldier.
It seems likely that this is the case. Among the terror groups in
Gaza, straight terror attacks against civilians has gone out of
fashion due to embarrassment as these attacks go not get any sympathy
from the world anymore. Since the beginning of Cast Lead, Hamas has
been disingenuously claiming to only target soldiers, and the massacre
of the Fogels in Itamar in March was not widely praised even by
Palestinian Arabs.
In other words, the operation in Eilat was a failure.
It would have been worth it if they had managed to kidnap a soldier as
they planned, because that success would have boosted the PRC stock a
great deal. That success would even outweigh the chances that Israel
would invade Gaza, because in the end - to them - a prisoner is worth
a thousand terrorists in Israeli jails.
It seems likely that Hezbollah would have had a hand in planning and
facilitating this operation. After all, although people don't remember
this, months before the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers that sparked
the 2006 Lebanon war Hassan Nasrallah had promised that "We are
working on making this year the year to free our brothers in Israeli
detention, Samir Kantar and his friends..." The kidnapping of  Eldad
regev and Ehud Goldwasser was planned for months specifically to
engineer a release of Kntar and others. And Hezbollah planned to do
more such kidnappings. This is Hezbollah's way of thinking, and from
its perspective, it has worked beautifully.
The reason that the PRC refuses to admit responsibility is because it
has nothing to gain by bragging about a failed operation that would
end up alienating the PRC from among other Gaza terror groups who know
they will pay the price of any Israeli retaliation. But if they had
succeeded in kidnapping a soldier, they would be heroes, and Hamas
would be the first to praise - and protect - them.
The terrorists killed a number of Egyptian soldiers, and that screw-up
is worse than failing to kidnap IDF soldiers. If they take credit for
the operation then they risk the wrath of the entire nation of Egypt.


Molto interessante, grazie
-- 
Io non gufo l'Inter. Le spacco le corna.