Netanyahu Should Step Down
Because of many issues, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should step down…writes Gil Solomon.
Gil Solomon
The Israel of today under his leadership is a country where Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria has been effectively brought to a halt but Illegal “Palestinian” construction goes on in Jerusalem, the Negev and elsewhere with the latest loss of sovereignty being a highway being built by the Palestinian Authority (PA) from Gush Etzion to the Dead Sea all financed by the EU. It seems that all it takes for the Israeli Government to back off is for the PA to erect an EU log at any construction site.
In respect to tunnels, residents of northern Israel and those living in the Israel/Gaza region have been saying for ages that they can hear tunnelling going on late at night and into the early hours of the morning but the IDF, under the control of Ya’alon (Defence Minister) takes no effective action but resorts to mild platitudes supposedly to reassure residents that their concerns will be addressed. Netanyahu’s latest comment that he would take stronger action than in operation “Protective Edge” if terrorists came out of tunnels and actually killed Jews is, on close examination, not reassuring. The bottom line is that by this weak posture a clear message has been sent to Israel’s enemies that under this leadership, Israel will forever be reactive and never proactive in the defence of its citizens. It is worth remembering that operation “Protective Edge” ended in the usual fashion both prematurely and inconclusively and with nothing remotely resembling a military victory.
It should also be remembered that even after the previous Gaza conflict in 2014, Israel allowed the resumption millions of tons of cement to be imported back into Gaza from primarily Ramallah based cement factories. Did some fool in this administration think that this time the material would not go into tunnel construction?
One has to ask what is wrong with Jews?
Do we have some suicidal gene buried deep in our DNA?
Both Netanyahu and Ya’alon could learn something by paying close attention to how el-Sisi of Egypt deals with terrorist tunnels found in the Egyptian/Gaza border region.
Netanyahu’s call to the international community to put an end to the PA’s incitement to terror can only be described as pathetic. The only nation that can and should put an end to Palestinian incitement, in all its forms, is Israel, but under this man, Israel may have the means but has lost the will to do so. Netanyahu apparently hasn’t woken up to the fact that the international community couldn’t care less about murdered Jews. The PA and Hamas need to be crushed and brought to their knees but unfortunately he keeps reiterating how he is willing to meet that arch chief terrorist Abbas, the leader of the PA, to resume “peace talks” with no preconditions! It is Israel’s job to end the murderous terrorism running rampant throughout the streets by dealing with terrorists in the only language they understand and in the process if that requires imposing martial law in many areas, incarceration and eventual deportation for many so-called Arab “citizens” then so be it. It should be remembered that these same Arab “citizens” were granted citizenship as if it were confetti thrown at a passing parade without even so much as a pledge of allegiance in return. It appears that in respect to this folly, the chickens have come home to roost.
Netanyahu even continues to refer to the “two state solution” which any thinking person knows is dead and buried. He again recently called for the Knesset to impose “sanctions” on Arab Knesset members, those so-called “citizens” who incite terrorism, treason and hatred at every opportunity from within and without the walls of the Knesset.
Is that it, “sanctions”?
Is that the best he can do?
This leader has made no recent attempt to debunk the fictitious so called “Palestinian narrative” and thanks to this inaction, the world now believes the propaganda set forth by the PA well before the disastrous Oslo accords, which was nothing less than an abandonment of sovereignty. It seems that Israel is out manoeuvred at every step.
The insane magnanimous gesture by Moshe Dayan after the 1967 military victory by allowing the Muslim WAQF to maintain administrative control over the Temple Mount has been seriously compounded by Netanyahu. Dayan in one fell swoop turned the victory of 1967 into defeat and now Netanyahu, some five decades later has in effect abandoned the heritage of this site by strictly maintaining a “status quo”, with Israeli police doing the work of the WAQF in making the site “Judenfrei”.
Israel is incapable of confronting other serious issues such as hostile NGO’ (both foreign and domestic) and a leftist press which undermine the country at every opportunity. Enough with the nonsense that these entities represent some thriving democracy, enough. They are turning this “democracy” into a political basket case.
I conclude that Netanyahu is a leader who inspires absolutely no confidence and offers no solutions and should therefore step down. For those who keep giving him the benefit of the doubt and keep making the irrelevant comment that he is doing his best, I say in response that this man’s best is simply not good enough. Israel today can best be described as a ship adrift on the high seas without a rudder and requires a drastic turnaround on virtually every issue confronting the nation.
Gil Solomon is a retired finance manager who takes an intense interest in current affairs impacting on the Jewish community.
Dear Gil,
If you are really concerned with sticking to issues raised in your article,it would be best to stick to them yourself when responding to the comments of others. You make the mistake of using personal attack and put-down if anyone disagrees with what you have to say, or even if they express a point of view you might consider irrelevant. To call the posts of others ‘diatribe’and use insulting expressions such as ‘Jews with their heads in the sand’ (incidentally, why use the word ‘Jews’ prefacing this remark?) or utilise the old ’emotional’ therefore lacking reason or viability concept, does nothing but deflect from the very issues you wish to articulate. As an aside here, I recall your using David Singer’s occupation of lawyer against him in regard to some of his comments, as if in some way more should have been expected – this is not pertinent, as David is participating in the discussion in the fuller capacity of the whole human being he is with the passion and interest he has for the welfare of the State of Israel; being a lawyer is one element of him only. The fact that you’re a retired finance manager and I’m a writer/editor doesn’t rate high insofar as our actual opinions voiced on J-Wire are concerned. As a lawyer, I’m sure David knows how to cover himself; his particular occupation shouldn’t be used as an extra source of denigration by you.
You emphasise that you say it how it is. Well, so do I, so does David and so does Erica. If what we say differs from what you say in that context, it’s good to debate it or discuss it. But it’s not good to be personally attacked and sneered at. That shouldn’t come into the equation.
This response is not meant to have a go at you, just a request for equal respect. Strong opinion and brutal honesty need not be accompanied by disdain and derision.
Much of the diatribe expressed in the comments below represent the opinions of those who simply cannot summon up the courage to calmly address the many issues I have raised in my post. Many seem obsessed with defending the status quo at all costs and take umbrage that I dare to criticise the Netanyahu Government.
The statements that my response to many commentators was emotional is devoid of reality. My replies were simply strong, non denigrating (as Mr Singer implies) and to the point, and I apologise to no one for not pulling my punches. I for one always have and always will, call a spade a spade.
David Singer in his various replies has called for me to name a possible successor to Netanyahu should he in fact step down. For the record I will not engage Mr Singer in his attempts to steer the conversation away from the issues raised in the post, issues he will not address.
Mr Singer’s audacious call to the Jwire editor to consider not publishing my future articles smacks of fascism. It is a disgraceful call that he will have to live with and one that he should be ashamed of.
Below are a summary of some of Mr Singer’s comments, that for a lawyer I find disgraceful:
To Paul Winter: “Get a grip of yourself”.
To myself in asking who I would nominate to replace Netanyahu: “Two words please – not another diatribe”.
In reply to Henry Herzog: “Do you or Paul know if Gil has the three qualities Paul sees as essential – “brains, backbone and male gonads”?
In reply to Erica: “Gil has lost the plot”, “his attack on you is gutter commentary”, “I still await his sage advice”.
Endless talk by various commentators has been made of timing. The essence of my approach is that the Jewish world simply cannot wait for a well co-ordinated surprise attack. The slogan “Never Again” means something to me. I was in Israel at the time of the 1973 Yom Kippur War and it taught me one thing. It is time Israel went from the usual reactive posture to a pro-active posture especially now in this highly perilous environment.
In conclusion, I never have and never will try to win a popularity contest. I just tell it as I see it and those who disagree with me for one reason or another should rise above the personal attacks and address the many issues I have taken the time to clearly document in my posting. Maybe it’s time you read the article again and try to address the issues raised. What I find disgraceful is that those who comment on an article rise up in moral indignation when the author of the article pulls them up in no uncertain terms to face reality.
GIl
In answer to your specific criticisms of me you state:
1 “My replies were simply strong, non denigrating (as Mr Singer implies)”
They were denigrating.
2. “David Singer in his various replies has called for me to name a possible successor to Netanyahu should he in fact step down. For the record I will not engage Mr Singer in his attempts to steer the conversation away from the issues raised in the post, issues he will not address.”
No one disputes that the issues you listed are problems that Israel faces. The question is ” how should these issues be dealt with”? Your solution – Netanyahu should stand down.
When I query who should then replace him and what qualities should such replacement possess – you run for cover.
Not good enough Gil. You are obliged to tell us who in your opinion could handle the issues you listed better than Netanyahu if you want to have any credibility.
Can’t understand why you are so reticent.
3. “Mr Singer’s audacious call to the Jwire editor to consider not publishing my future articles smacks of fascism. It is a disgraceful call that he will have to live with and one that he should be ashamed of.”
Strange you should use the word “fascism” from one who use phrases such as :
“I say it as I see it, case closed”
“And by the way David, I have nothing to apologise for to anyone. I call a spade a spade and if you or anyone else don’t like what I say, then so be it.
4. If you care to post any comments that you found disgraceful in answer to remarks made by me to posts by Henry Herzog and Paul Winter then I will answer them there so the thread can be maintained.
Champion reply, David Singer. The name of the article is, after all, “Netanyahu should step down”. The most obvious and first question should, would and could be “For Whom?”. I, too, am at a loss to understand why Mr Solomon wouldn’t answer and indeed took offense at the question.
I’ve met many “Mr Solomon s” in my day – push them into a corner and they become belligerent and disrespectful in the hope that the noise of their “noise” will divert attention from real issues.
But enough of Mr Solomon. He has had FAR TOO MUCH attention.
What really requires attention is indeed the glaring fact that Netanyahu needs a clear and concise and brave plan to counteract the harmful rhetoric put forward by : Holocaust deniers, anti-Semites, Israel haters, BDS supporters, Security Council ignoramuses, anti-Zionists, Terrorists, murderers, Hamas and Hezbollah affiliates and their proxies and two-faced Arab nations who smile with a knife in their left hand and Kill with it in their right hand. Just to mention a few who have a very real chance at changing our world forever.
I’ve asked Michael Kuttner, who also writes for J Wire to start talking/reporting in the vein of SOLUTIONS or STRATEGIES or at the very least put VERBS in sentences with regard to the action that ISRAEL and other democratic nations NEED to take to start improving our globe. To alter the extremely dangerous trajectory its on.
No LEADER will EVER change what they don’t acknowledge.
And while the current round of STUPID and IGNORANT and GULLIBLE hits the MEDIA – once again TIMING is everything. (And NO, Mr Solomon and his followers, bombing everything in sight is NOT the answer).
The globe must pull together a GIANT INFLUENTIAL THINK TANK. A tank full of SHARKS. BRAVE Sharks with ideas on how to quiet the RULING masses and stop this glaringly evident BLIND-SIGHTEDNESS before it’s ALL too late.
To David and Erica,
Take note of what I say to you here as this will be my last response to either of you.
For the record, I state the following:
I run for cover from no one David, least of all from your questions.
And David, don’t concern yourself about my credibility.
Concentrate on your own.
From the responses I receive, my credibility is just fine.
The reason I did not and will not go down the road of naming who I think should replace Netanyahu, is that firstly I will not let myself be diverted from the main thrust of the issues raised, issues that need to be addressed even by the most ardent Netanyahu supporters.
Secondly, it is simply not for me to nominate anyone.
Should Netanyahu step down, it is for Israel (firstly the coalition and followed possibly by another election) to decide on a future leader, not me.
However, it is my hope that the next Israeli leader be a proud Jew, one who ceases the endless pleading to the international community, ceases the endless procrastination and timidity, acts with the full lethal force at his disposal in crushing terrorists and the terrorist infrastructure, puts effective Hasbara in place, reclaims lost sovereignty and heritage (Temple Mount in particular) and above all else be a man who possesses a spine.
And finally, specifically for Erica.
It is amazing that someone hasn’t told you already that writing comments where every paragraph or so has words written in capitals so as to emphasise what you think is ever so important, does not, to say the least, present well.
Gil
You state:
1. “Take note of what I say to you here as this will be my last response to either of you.”
Glad to hear you do not intend replying any further to Erica or myself.
2. “I will not let myself be diverted from the main thrust of the issues raised,”
The issue you raised is in the headline “Netanyahu should step down”
3. “Should Netanyahu step down, it is for Israel (firstly the coalition and followed possibly by another election) to decide on a future leader, not me.”
So you would be happy to replace Israel’s second longest serving Prime Minister after Ben-Gurion with an unknown and untried replacement. You need to do better than that and come out and state specifically who in your opinion would do a better job.
Your stated qualifications of the person to replace Netanyahu mean nothing.
At least Paul Winter chose to throw three names into the ring. You just wimped it.
No point again asking you to give us your choice for PM because you have made it clear you will not respond.
If you weren’t so smart David Singer, this would
Be awful. How on earth is Israel going to solve
Her problems when we have a mini-riot here!
Yes, Gil, that’s right I was responding to your response to Erica E. as being her ‘usual emotional lecture’ – that was my focus. And it was with those words that you kicked yourself in the foot insofar as a credible response to her is concerned. I made no comment on harshness, which I agree is sometimes called for in argument or debate. Better for you not to use the old stereotype of a woman’s argument or discussion being redundant due to ’emotionalism’. To do that is a form of attempted dis-empowerment and humiliation. Also, it evades or avoids the issue discussed.
The posting threads to Gil’s article are gob-smacking. What strikes me most is that writers abuse Gil and then have the chutzpah of claiming that his factual responses are abusive and irrational. The term for such writers is “cry-bullies”.
Something else is worrying too. Gil’s article list a great deal that is wrong with the Netanyahu administration. Instead of defending the administration, writers demand the naming of an alternative. When an alternative is suggested, it is dismissed as being impractical.
That is the typical illogical political approach: contrasting one’s ideal with the claimed reality of one’s opponents. Perhaps, by illustration, one might consider that just because there was no cure for cholera, the handle should not have been removed from the village pump.
Another worrying aspect is the defence of Netanyahu along the lines that one does not know what is really going on. Really? How on earth can writers who do not know what is going defend Netanyahu documented poor performance on the presumption that he is acting on good advice and logic? Such beliefs are appropriate for religion but not for politics.
Gil,
Erica Edelman’s responses are never ’emotional’; in fact always articulate, calmly expressed and insightful. I don’t know Erica personally and don’t always agree with everything she says, but I do admire the way she says it and respect her obvious intelligence. If we read your prose and hers, it’s yours that comes over as emotional in tenor, not hers. It’s a common old stereotype to brand a woman’s response as ’emotional’ if you disagree with it. Best to be aware of that and respond with more discussion specific to her response.
Israel does need firm, visionary politicians with ‘tough spine’ (so, I agree with you there), but it also needs to take into account ‘timing’ and have the capacity to hold on and be patient if the situation demands it (I agree with Erica in that regard) for better end results. And the latter is a difficult thing to do and achieve.
Liat,
I have in clear, unambiguous and unemotional terms stated the appalling situation that Israel finds itself in today, all primarily due to a lack of leadership.
Among things covered were:
The issue of illegal PA construction going on with the accompanying loss of sovereignty.
Gaza tunnels and their potential for disaster to Israelis living in the border region.
The issue of cement foolishly allowed in to Gaza by a naïve leadership.
The PA incitement to terror and Netanyahu’s timid response and pleading to a world that does not care less.
The fact that the “two state solution” should be declared dead and buried.
The Temple Mount issue.
NGOs and the leftist media.
You basically comment on none of these but confirm that: “Israel does need firm, visionary politicians with ‘tough spine’”.
So is that it from you?
You address none of the real and pressing issues I have raised?
In a nutshell, your whole commentary was who, in your judgement wrote emotionally and who did not.
If you think my response to Erica was harsh, then so be it.
And for your information, harshness as in this case, has nothing to do with emotion.
I say it as I see it, case closed.
Liat
As usual you hit the nail on the head.
Gil’s refusal to withdraw his “usual emotional lecture” comment about Erica whilst also accusing Erica of “typical head in the sand ghetto Jew mentality” in responding to him is to be regretted.
The quick fix that Gil wants to see is a recipe for disaster and timing is indeed of the essence and you and Erica are entitled to express that view without being personally denigrated by Gil.
Everyone is entitled to an opinion and have that opinion debated calmly and rationally without being intimidated by personal attack from the person whose opinion is being challenged.
JWire should take note of Gil’s dismissive responses to readers comments and think very carefully before it decides to publish further articles by him.
I value JWire publishing my articles and am always happy to respond to those who question or disagree with my point of view without descending to personal abuse of those who take the time and effort to respond.
Shooting the messenger and ignoring the message never pays off.
Firstly, thank you to Liat and David who have gone in to bat for my “honor” – I am humbled. I have, however, a thick skin.
What I have far less tolerance of and for is blatant rudeness, smutty authorship and a deep personal attack in this (netizen)forum.
Whereas I would like the power to control more people (and what they have to say on-line) it is actually empowering to recognize how little power I have and if I was a betting person I would bet Mr Solomon is not so much “attacking me” because I’m female but because that is his way with most people – male or female.
To be fair (in the face of adversity) Mr Solomon listed some crucial “items” – items which bother him and cause him much disdain. One can only assume this disdain rests upon his great love of Israel and her ultimate survival in the face of many powerful enemies. From this point of view, Mr Solomon is to be commended.
But Mr Solomon associates difference of opinion with conflict. Mr Solomon, you need to separate the argument from the person/author. Speaking up and calling it “as you see it” is all very well if you are respectful. And Respectful, you are not. So how is that working for you? You have now incurred the wrath of some authors who have a great standing with JWire. And perhaps JWire readers. And perhaps JWire itself.
But here’s the thing. Your “way with telling it how it is” and your recalcitrance and obvious dismissive UN-remorselessness, not to mention your “typical head in the sand Jew mentality” comment speaks more (and louder) about your lack of humanity than about your “feelings for Israel”. And that is never going to be good.
And there-in lies the tale.
Here’s an old proverb to mull over:
He who would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy from oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach to himself – Thomas Paine, philosopher and writer. (1737-1809)
So Mr Solomon, it’s all very well having an opinion. Accepting that of others (no less worthy than yours) is what being human is all about.
And Mr Netanyahu, in this case, leaves you for dead. Gonads and all.
I’ve been waiting for you to pop up again, Mr Solomon, with your wide-eyed penchant for the “all or nothingness” of life in Israel. David Singer has asked you some pertinent questions – I’m hoping you will answer them.
But first:
With respect to the building in Judea and Samaria ; Mr Solomon, timing is EVERYTHING. And yes, I know, YOU have no time left, but Israel does. And so does Bibi. The timing of events is crucial to Netanyahu’s slow but sure victories over his enemies. YOUR suggestions on the other hand would immediately Destabilize global/world peace and threaten the very nature of achieving ANY peace in the Mid East – Israel included!
With respect to the tunnels: If you know anything about drug trafficking/policing you will know the cops don’t immediately “pounce” on the shakers and bakers. They wait undercover until there is something worth pouncing on. Netanyahu knows EXACTLY where EVERY tunnel is (half-constructed ones too). He and his Defense Minister know EXACTLY when to strike, where to strike and when to warn. Timing is everything again, Mr Solomon, but YOU are in a HUGE rush. Be “assured” they know exactly what they are doing and where every bit of cement is going. And it was re-miss of you to refer to how Egypt is handling their enemies. Israel would NEVER want to mimic punishment “the Egyptian way”.
Your constant diatribe is vexatious to say the least.
You are full of criticism about Netanyahu however I don’t see you putting your hand up to go into politics in Israel – or is it that you can be as brave as can be from behind your computer?
Read David Singer’s questions again. And again. I’m looking forward to your answers.
Erica,
You would be better off if you attempted to seriously address the many issues I have raised instead of responding with your usual emotional lecture whose theme seems to be that typical head in the sand ghetto Jew mentality of not wanting to criticise the actions of Netanyahu or his Government no matter how idiotic many of their decisions were.
The days of trying to rationalise the irrational are over.
And by the way, there is a war going on and as far as how Egypt is handling the tunnel situation is concerned, at least el-Sisi is doing something positive about it, unlike Israel.
Erica
Gil has lost the plot.
His attack on you is gutter commentary and I would hope he is man enough to apologise to you.
I too still await his sage advice on the name of the person who Gil would want to see replace Netanyahu.
David,
Nowhere in my article did I remotely suggest that I would come out and name who should replace Netanyahu if he were to step down. That is for the Coalition to decide. I certainly do not have to name my choice to you or anybody but will only reiterate what I said to you before, that this time the candidate should hopefully possess a spine. The many issues I have raised are valid and need to be addressed.
And by the way David, I have nothing to apologise for to anyone.
I call a spade a spade and if you or anyone else don’t like what I say, then so be it.
Gil
It seems commonsense that if you want Netanyahu to stand down – then you should be in a position to suggest his replacement to rectify the faults you see in current Israeli policy failures.
Otherwise your article is just a lot of hot air offering no better alternative and indeed possibly laying the groundwork for an even worse alternative. I am sure you would not want that to happen.
Come on Gil – who in your opinion is the person in the Coalition who possesses the “spine” to take over from Netanyahu?
Two words please – not another diatribe.
Mr Solomon, perhaps you can replace Netanyahu.
Henry
I wonder if Paul agrees with you. Maybe Gil is too modest to put himself forward as Netanyahu’s replacement.
Do you or Paul know if Gil has the three qualities Paul sees as essential – “brains, backbone and male gonads”?
Gil
Who do you think should replace Netanyahu if he takes your advice and steps down?
What qualities would such replacement have that Netanyahu lacks?
You are of course entitled to express your opinion.
However the voters have expressed their confidence in Netanyahu and his policies as he has become the second longest serving Prime Minister in Israel’s history and the only one to have served four terms, three of them in a row in 2009, 2013 and 2015.
Not a bad record in anyone’s opinion – don’t you agree?
David,
You ask: “What qualities would such replacement have that Netanyahu lacks?”. I can answer this in one word – a SPINE.
I have analysed the current situation and highlighted Netanyahu’s failings but you seem obsessed with his past electoral victories.
Past electoral victories do not concern me. I only care and am highly concerned about the fact that this so called “leader” of many years is taking the country on a path to national suicide.
Gil
Just answer the question I put to you:
“Who do you think should replace Netanyahu if he takes your advice and steps down?”
OK now you tell us he must have a SPINE. But what is his NAME? Identify your choice as Netanyahu’s replacement.
I presume that Gil will respond, but until he does, permit me to put in my tuppence.
The leaders should be a group of people like Lieberman, Bennett and Feiglin plus a few of the gloriously feisty female MKs. The cabinet under Bibi is a cowardly ghetto leadership which imagines that its ego enhancing diplomacy is succeeding. It never worked. The feeding frenzy of bullies is only enhanced by their victim’s cooperation in their suffering and they then ratchet up the abuse.
The qualities Bibi lacks are the 3 ‘B’s I have previously noted: brains, backbone and male gonads. Please don’t forget that Obama humiliated Bibi and then correctly described him as chickens**t.
Being the second oldest serving PM means no more than that the party system could organise no-one better. It does not say much for the Israeli elites who are out of touch with the electorate.
Bibi talks right and acts as a wobbler around the centre. He leads an establishment that tries to suck up to the EU, The USA, the UN and any passing mohammedan whose braying hints at possible conciliation. It does not work. It does not even promise to work when judges pretend that the ME is a paradise of fair play and when the police and the army are led by politicising social worker elites from the old guard with one eye on a seat in the knesset.
Isreal’s an Bibi’s record is poor. A nation must be guided by self-interest. A Jewish nation must be guided by principles based on its heritage; at present it is guided by kindness to the cruel which every nation demands and no nation gives any credit for it to Israel.
Paul
Liberman, Bennett and Feiglin do not have the electoral support to replace Netanyahu and form a coalition Government.
Feiglin is not even a member of the Knesset.
Get a grip on yourself.
David, in case you were not aware, Israel is a democracy and Feiglin is eligible for election.
Your comment regarding who does or doesn’t have electoral support is a non- sequitur. The question was a theoretical one, viz. who could do a better job than Bibi.
You will be pleased to know that I have a grip of myself as well as a grip of facts and of logic.
Paul
If Netanyahu steps down in response to Gil’s call that does not necessarily mean there will be an election.
Feiglin will be sidelined until an election happens and he is regarded as the pea for the job of PM.
Who runs the show and makes the decisions until this happens?
Your grip on facts and logic is not very firm.