Sharon.

This is coolbert:

One reason the nation of Israel has done so well in warfare for over a period of almost sixty years is that as a people the Jews have recreated an ancient tradition.

In the time of Herod the Great and prior to that, Jewish fighters had a fearsome reputation and were highly sought after as mercenaries.

After the dispersal of the Jews among the "nations" of the world, this reputation became extinct. Jews became the opposite. Passive, non-violent, victims of violence. And this trend lasted for almost two thousand years. When the founders of modern Israel began their task of creating a new nation, they realized early in the game that this legacy of passivity for two thousand years had to go.

"Many of these early Zionist thinkers felt that centuries of ghettoization and persecution had robbed the Jews of their pride and strength. To build a homeland required a proud, self-sufficient Jew: a Jew who could farm, defend himself, and build the land.

The pious, poor, ghettoized Jew -- who presented a pathetic image of a man stooped-over and always at the mercy of his persecutors -- had to be done away with."

To do this, do away with this pathetic image, persons such as David Ben Gurion set out to create a fighting Jew. And Ben Gurion and his colleagues were successful! Almost too successful perhaps!?

The archetype of the fighting Jew is Ariel Sharon. Now Prime Minister of Israel and a hated figure in the eyes of the Arabs. Now, the personality of Sharon as a military man leaves little to be desired. Sharon's nickname among Israelis is "bulldozer". A man who sets out to accomplish his goals and does so in the manner of a bulldozer, plowing all obstacles out of his way to do so. Ben Gurion held Sharon up as the epitome of the fighting Jew, a person he was very proud of.

Now, the character of Sharon does possess some very positive features for a military man. Sharon, in his career did possess the quality of elan. Spirited, energetic action. Something that the civilian leadership of a country look for in military leaders. Military leaders that are docile and timid do not win wars! In his military career, Sharon commanded the most elite Israeli military units, including Unit 101, a special operations type unit used in the most difficult military operations by the Israelis, operations usually entailing cross border raids into Arab territory.

Sharon does seem to also have a glaring contradiction in his character that does not sit well with being a military man. He tends to be insubordinate. And impetuous. This impetuosity has led him into some controversial situations during his long career, both as a military man and as a politician.

Sharon first made headlines when he led a cross border raid against a "terrorist" hideout in Jordan in the 1950's. Seems a whole bunch of civilians were killed.

In the 1956 war, Sharon led a paratrooper assault that while being successful, also resulted in excessive Israeli casualties.

In the 1973 war, Sharon, leading an Israeli "ugdah" [a divisional size unit], was so insubordinate, and insubordinate on a number of occasions in such a short period of time, that serious consideration was given to relieving him of his command. This was not done!! [the reputation of Sharon as possessing elan was so great, and his reputation and direct line over the head of his direct superiors to the civilian command authority in Israel enabled Sharon to convince such persons as Meir and Dayan that he was correct]. Sharon would argue that in these many cases, he was exercising initiative. Initiative that he felt was vital to the mission. And in many cases, he did turn out to be correct.

Nonetheless, in any lesser man, such insubordination would have resulted in being relieved of command almost instantly.

And of course, the infamous massacre of Palestinians by Christian Falange fighters in Lebanon in 1982, while Sharon was Defense Minister of Israel, is always remembered.

Now, there is a real problem here. When you have superiors, you can be insubordinate. But what happens when you become top dog? Your attitude now becomes "the" attitude. Perhaps to the detriment of all you subordinates. And Sharon has, as Prime Minister, not shied away from his "bulldozer" tactics. It is felt that his visit to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem was a deliberate attempt to goad the Palestinians into another uprising, which the Palestinians foolishly obliged, much to their detriment. Excessive "elan", "bulldozer" tactics, and insubordination to whatever authority exists is not the traits you usually seek in a leader of your country. Forbearance is not a trait that can be described of Ariel Sharon.

coolbert.