Unless I missed something, they reported that the cabinet met to discuss how the war should go. There seems to be debate on its aims. Now debate? Shouldn't there have been clear war aims before we attacked the Gazan missile launchers on Shabbat?
The TV journalists are interviewing a government official and keep asking about cease fire and what's the war aim. All he could say was that the government wants a "significant change." That doesn't say much. Ambiguous is the best word I can think of.
Avigdor Lieberman is now on the program. He's speaking clearly. He said that an attack like this should have happened from the very beginning seven years ago, when the terrorists first began launching kassams at Sderot and Gush Katif. He's right. He'll get support for telling the truth. He also calls it a lie that there's international pressure on us to stop. That's a myth. I agree with him on that, too.
Now someone else (a Prof. Stern) is on saying that without a clear war aim this war is a waste. And I agree with that too. This is starting to be like Olmert-Livni's first war, which I likened to A bissel ointment on the gangrene.
To quote King Solomon: