I share your confusion but am guessing the following based on the PM's comments last night. We began the operation as a response to the rocket fire. The operation was basically confined to airstrikes. We only sent in troops to eliminate the tunnel threat. Once all "attack tunnels" (as opposed to the hundreds of internal tunnels in Gaza) are found and destroyed, we return to the original plan: airstrikes to counter the rockets. No sense in leaving soldiers inside Gaza unless we are planning on taking over the whole thing - a far more dangerous and deadly operation then what was done until now.

basically, we were warned by the US to not attack Gaza, this despite the bi-partisan unity including everyone except the extreme-left wanting blood', and even with a blatant casus belli of the rockets flying into 'Israel', Hamas infiltrated with a tunnel and this gave Netanyahu a 'real' casus belli. So we went in to get the tunnels, frankly, that was the weenie objective from the beginning despite the united uproar, and Obama looking at his watch telling Netanyahu, that time is running up, and we better get out before he sets the world nad the UN on us with some Goldstone II. So now that the tunnels are almsot all blown up (supposedly) and the rocket fire from Gaza turned down a lot, we have to get our really fast.

I was hoping to be wrong this time, but the Netanyahu-Lieberman-Bennet-Lapid government proved my theory about the sitra achra, even more so than before: every time the Jews are united, it will come along and try hard to turn us back. This has been happening since Lebanon II, including Cast Lead and the Cloud Pillar, and the nurder of the three boys. This time was worse. Even the lefties were on board to stop the insanity of us taking the rockets and mortars, losing about 60 soldiers, and the strengthening of the national unity each time to get the job done. The people of the south even more resolved than the rest of us, to stay in their apartments for more months in order to stop the insanity of letting Hamas continue to keep them hostage, but the government weenies out on us.

Could be that they assessed the likelihood that Hamas woul capture a soldier or soldiers, which would really plunge the nation into crisis.

Law of diminished returns. At a certain point, the benefit to be gained by continuing the operation is outweighed by the potential losses. This is an opportune time to pull out, since:
(1) the tunnels that we know of have been destroyed;
(2) Hamas broke the ceasefire, so the pressure on us to accept a ceasefire will be less intense (or the guarantees that it will be kept will have to be more significant);
(3) Hamas was unsuccessful at kidnapping a live soldier, which would completely change the negotiating positions.

Taking all this into account, it was decided to pull back to a position which still allows us to attack if necessary, but reduces out exposure to heavily populated areas.

Slight corrections:
Law of diminishing returns
*our

Yes Michael, however people want a permanent solution, they don't wish to be dragged every 2 years or so into a war that gets progressively worse. If the solution is occupying Gaza, why is the army retreating? And if not, what is the alternative?

Rafi, C'mon! You've lived here too long to be "confused."

The Israeli government does the same thing over and over and over again.

Get hit by missiles
Go in and fight
Arabs cry
Goyim cry
Israel pulls out
Arabs get in a few more missiles just have the last word
Arabs spend the next period of time building better missiles, and gain better smuggling techniques
Arabs fire those missles.
Repeat

Similar pattern with Lebanon/Hezbollah, and other surrounding Arab nations.

The real question is why. Unfortunately, no one wants to hear the only possible answers, which are: 1) the Israeli Gov't cares more about what the goyim think of them than their constituents, 2) the people who are really giving the orders don't want us to win (don't want us to exist as we are), 3) the government needs to show us that we "need" them. The media orchestrates the war from the direction of highers ups with a basis on anti-Torah standards.

Tomer Devorah explains this best! Check out her post!

I was in the same state of confusion until I read this analysis.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/183670#.U96Czf90yUk

Esser, thanks for bring the post from TD.

If these explanations are right, then missiles will assuredly fall on Sderot and neighboring communities again.

Then why in the world should anyone who has a choice choose to continue to live there?

And would it make a difference if every member of the cabinet were required to live there with his family for a month at a time?

And whatever happened to the first obligation of every government to protect its citizens?

And whatever happened to the claim that "no country would ever tolerate missiles falling on its citizens"?