A Non Existent Response to Terror… writes Gil Solomon
Like me, readers of this article may well be frustrated with and inundated by endless messages from Jewish organisations together with the meaningless action by Israeli authorities following the murder of three Israeli teenagers whose lives were snuffed out and whose souls sent prematurely to their maker.
Gil Solomon
Jewish organisations worldwide seem content with babbling on about the superiority of the Jewish value of life as opposed to barbarians who luxuriate in death. We see candles and vigils and watch as grieving families say Kaddish after Kaddish and hear pathetic meaningless comments by the politically correct urging world leaders to condemn the kidnapping and brutal murder of Israeli youth. Comments truly worthy of ghetto Jews of old.
Then we see Shimon Peres, that left wing ideologue, that elder “statesman” who brought Israel the disastrous Oslo Accords have the audacity to speak at memorial services for these young victims. This same Peres having stated years earlier that Abbas was in his opinion his good good friend and partner for peace.
Nowhere do we read about what effective steps need to be taken to devastate the terrorist infrastructure to the point where acts of terror will leave the terrorists, their accomplices, their families, their acquaintances in mortal fear of the consequences.
No, we see an Israel that is confused as to what to do next. A cabinet debating if any response they are contemplating will be seen by others as too harsh or “disproportional”, actions which may hinder a peace process which is already dead.
With this trepidation comes the usual IAF attack on an unused Hamas storage facility, a weapons production facility or some empty tunnel or deserted field – meaningless gestures to give the impression of action taken followed by meaningless comments of significant damage inflicted. Unfortunately all targets hit are invariably what was expected, their significance next to irrelevant, with the terrorists themselves having abandoned the site in anticipation of a strike.
One should ask oneself what would Vladimir Putin do were his country to be faced with constant rocket barrages from over the border? What would be his reaction if terrorists from over the border kidnapped and murdered Russian citizens?
What would be his reaction if he was expected to sit down with representatives of these same terrorists in “peace” negotiations? There is no need to take up space in this article in second guessing what Putin would do nor what any other country on the face of the earth would do if faced with Israel’s existential threats.
Fortunately for terrorists they face a nation of Jews.
They also face a worldwide Jewry so confused and disorientated that many urge restraint on “both sides”! A worldwide Jewry that often utters obscene comments about moral equivalence, in spite of the fact one side targets civilians and the other does everything possible to reduce civilian casualties.
The bottom line is that the so called “peace process” is over. Israel needs to go on the offensive, reply devastatingly and yes, if you want to call it that, disproportionally to any act of aggression.
Will anything on the lines I’m suggesting ever take place? Don’t hold your breath.
Recently the Israeli Ambassador to Australia was asked the following question:
“How cooperative was the Palestinian Authority in the search and rescue effort”
Ambassador: “Our main concern with the Palestinian Authority was the fact that they preferred reconciliation with Hamas – rather than resorting to continuing the peace process with Israel. All in all, we believe the Palestinian Authority should do more to confront Hamas rather than embrace Hamas”.
A more meaningless and pathetic commentary by an Ambassador I have never heard. The man refuses to even remotely answer the question for fear of offending the Palestinian Authority!
This apparently is the mindset of Israeli leadership today.
At best pathetic, at worst suicidal.
Author Gil Solomon is a retired finance manager who takes an intense interest in current affairs impacting on the Jewish community
Ellen, although you describe Gil’s article as an unedited rant, you overlook the fact that it had been moderated.
Further, if you describe it as a rant, you would gain more credence if you gave points of error or exaggeration rather than your own evaluation.
Your suggestion that Gil should stick with finance does have some substance: in highlighting the pusillanimous response of Jewish leadership to the unfolding crisis, Gil is calling it to account.
Under the circumstances, his view is balanced and does him credit. Unless you can contribute something positive, as far as I’m concerned, the ledger is closed.
approved
Mark Regev’s response (to questioning on ABC ‘Lateline’ a few nights ago) was well articulated outrage, not discreet or diplomatic, very much saying it how it is.
approved
approved
approved