There is a general disagreement as to what would have been better to have built, concentrated settlement blocs in a few fixed points, or dispersed, smaller settlements and outposts.

Both were actually built. On one have we have cities like Ariel and Maaleh Adumim, and settlement blocs like Gush Etzion (actually made up of smaller dispersed villages), and we have dispersed smaller villages and “outposts” (like the Gilad Zar farm).

The argument for concentrated settlement blocs is that supposedly they are harder to give up, whereas smaller, dispersed towns are easier for Israel to divest from.

After watching Israel expel the residents of the Gush Katif bloc, and the Northern Gaza settlements (adjoining the green line), I think that argument is rather flimsy. Once the Left gets the strength to destroy, they aren’t particularly concerned whether it is a big bloc or small sites they are destroying.

Look at Har Homa, that’s a serious neighborhood (and inside Jerusalem too), and the Left can’t wait for the opportunity to rip it down, once it’s permitted.

On the other hand, smaller dispersed settlement give us more control over larger swaths of Eretz Yisrael with fewer people.

All it takes is one house and that region is effectively liberated and conquered.

Furthermore, when the army has the assistance of local Jewish villages, then controlling a sector becomes much easier.

Compare how difficult it is for the army to operate now in Gaza without the backup and support of Gush Katif.

And of course, it may actually be more difficult for the left to uproot many small and dispersed villages, as opposed to large blocs.

As for the kids building and rebuilding their outposts – good for them.

That is exactly what is needed if we are to win in this war.