"Israel’s offensive against Hezbollah in Lebanon in 2006 exposed the tank’s limitations. Expensive Israeli armour was hammered by cheap IEDs and low-tech missiles. Israeli generals have absorbed the lessons of that campaign."

They did, the israeli Army continued to build new tanks, the Merkava IV and other heavy armour like the Namer, an armoured personel carrier based on the Merkava tank
But they equipped them with the Trophy active protection system, designed to shoot down enemy projetiles before they hit the tank, tanks evolve.

As somebody closely involved in this issue (going back to 2014 when the scheme first proposed) I have not been impressed by the Ministers response to this crisis
He may have hoped it would go away but I can think of a number of things he could have done/said to mitigate the damage but he has done very little and his comments to the Daily Mail in May where he said he did not discuss the scheme were partially contradicted by what the Sunday Times reported on Sunday, that the Minister watched a video about the scheme at the fundraising dinner.

The benefit was £80 million
1. £40 million CIL
2. £40 million from allowing drop in affordable housing from 35% down to 21% and not really challenging it unlike Sir Ed Lister who in 2016 when presented with something similar in 2016 on the same site got it increased

The development is in my ward, Canary Wharf, I am the local Councillor, elected as a Conservative in May 2018. The Minister's decision was also the final reason why I quit as leader of the Conservative Group on Tower Hamlets Council and the Conservative party. I am now an independent Cllr but remain in the Conservative group. It was the final nail in the coffin for me.

As a Councillor, I spend too much time in Tower Hamlets investigating corruption, fraud, dodgy decisions etc etc etc as my fellow Councillor Peter Golds has repeatedly highlighted on this site. As an example, the investigation into our current MP, Apsana Begum over allegations of housing fraud started last November but has not yet concluded.

So when a Minister makes a decision so inexplicable which benefits a developer to such an extent (£80 million, not just the £40 million reported) it was too much to take. In my attempts to understand why the Minister made his decision, to reverse it and to ensure nobody repeats it, it looks as if damage is being done to the Ministers reputation and by extension the Conservative Party, that was not my intent but his original decision to approve the development remains inexplicable despite weeks of public discussion and my residents and I need to understand it what happened and why.

I did write a longer article for ConHome explaining more of the background but the cost impact of having it checked meant it could not be published, it is on the news section of my personal website cllr andrew wood com

I have said several times in public that I supported much of the original smaller 722 home scheme approved by Sir Ed Lister, I only objected to it in 2016 mainly because of the wind flow impact on the adjoining sailing centre which could have been resolved with a different layout.

But my ward has more development than any other in the country and nobody, neither the Council, GLA nor central government are supporting that growth properly and while the rest of London wants us to become like Manhattan, Pudong, HK, we locally are happy to take our fair share of development but not such huge numbers

What practical experience of reaching out to immigrant communities in the UK do you have?
And you completely ignore the fact that many immigrant communities in the UK are now 2nd or 3rd generation immigrants. That those 2nd or 3rd generation are skilled and educated and still do not like voting Conservative.

This is completely wrong here in the UK. Your American experience does not transpose to the UK as you suggest.

There are two Londons, the Whitehall village and the rest of London. The Whitehall Village ignores the whole of Britain including the rest of London.

The next election is 5 years from now, the one after that is 10 year away, the young will be middle aged by then. You are ignoring the point that things change including the fact that east London takes in lots of young people from across the country, they then move away after they get into the habit of voting Labour.
As happened to the Jewish community the Muslim community will also start moving away from younger for the same reasons that previous generations did.

Most of what you proscribe is not in the gift of government
And why did they stick with Labour despite all of the baggage they carried?
Do you not think it is a good thing for the governing party to commit itself to stop sending mixed messages about Islam given the lessons of anti-semitism in Labour?
And just because France does not do something is that really an argument for us not to do something different?

These are growing groups in society by the way, and groups moving out of London
The lesson from Labour is not give up your base and Conservatives are in power because of the south east & west of England as well not just northern seats
What in what I have written would lose us seats in the north?