TEHRAN- On October 11, 19FortyFive.com published an analysis titled “What Does Hamas Hope To Gain In Attacking Israel Now?”

Clifton Sherrill, the writer, went through an effort to look into the recent Palestine-Israeli war with a different perspective. However, some parts of the analysis are very different from the ongoing massacre in the Gaza Strip. Since this website and other military websites grab the interests many Westerners, the wrong conclusions of the author can cause miscalculations on a bigger scale.

Like many other analysts, Sherill analyzed the Israeli defeats from some major points, such as disrupting negotiations aimed at normalizing Israeli-Saudi relations, restoring the world’s fading attention to the Palestinian issue, and the intelligence and security failure of Tel Aviv.

Despite the recent speech by the Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei that Iran had no role in the Al-Aqsa Storm Operation, some analysts still consider Iran as an orchestrator of the operation.

The article also claimed that Hamas launched the operation to give Israel an excuse to raid Gaza and take control, as it was deemed incapable of governing the enclave.

“It may be that a key goal of Hamas’ attack was to cause an Israeli invasion and the removal of Hamas from power in Gaza. However, Hamas has found that governing is exponentially more difficult than it anticipated,” claimed the analysis.

Elsewhere the analysis stated that due to “overpopulation” and “resource poverty,” Hamas would not be able to manage the Gaza Strip, which makes the analysis seem ridiculous.

The claims about the inability of Hamas are uttered while it has the upper hand in the current war, forcing Israel to ask the Westerners for more support. Logically speaking, the side with the superior position in a war does behave like an underdog; meanwhile, the scale of the Hamas operation has no sign of giving up.  

Basically, surrender is in deep contrast with the resistance terminology. Those claiming that Hamas will give up are not familiar with the essence of the movement.

Hamas operated a very well-managed operation via the plans it had been designed secretly a long time ago in coordination with other resistance groups. Hamas exploited the extreme weakness of Israel's security and intelligence agencies.

The group most probably had taken Israel’s response into serious consideration.  

How can it be imaginable that the allegedly Iran-backed operation leave the ground for Israel’s presence?
 
The analysis, written in the 19FortyFive, has provided the chance for the Tehran Times’ readers that Western analyses may sometimes be that much superficial with countless contradictions in their content.

In cases such analyses turn to the roadmap of the Western policymakers and officials, there would be a catastrophe ahead.

The Israelis may consider the ground attack as an option to lessen the magnitude of their defeat, yet would the result meet their expectations? Surely not.

The ground attack is very different from the air attack, which runs through the latest technology.

Resistance performs much better in the latter case since it enjoys the brave Palestinians waiting for the chance to defend their homeland.

More surprises may wait for Israel if it runs the ground attack.