There is only one thing worse than reasserting Israel’s military control over Gaza: Losing southern Israel.
[..]
There is only one thing worse than reasserting Israel’s military control over Gaza: Losing southern Israel. So long as residents of the south fear returning to their homes, Israel is losing southern Israel.
This looming prospect of having to retake Gaza would be bad enough if Israel only had to concern itself with Gaza. But Israel enjoys no such luxury.
Far more dangerous that Hamas is Hezbollah. Whereas Hamas’s missiles are unguided, Hezbollah has guided missiles that are capable of reaching every centimeter of Israeli territory. And their payloads are big enough to destroy high-rise buildings.
Unlike Hamas, Hezbollah has anti-aircraft missiles and anti-ship missiles capable of disrupting air and naval operations.
Hezbollah has drones that it has launched successfully.
And the possibility that Hezbollah has some level of unconventional weapons cannot be ruled out.
Hezbollah commanders and fighters have gained massive experience fighting in Syria and Iraq. They have sophisticated intelligence gathering capabilities including human intelligence and signals intelligence assets.
They have advanced command and control systems.
And by all accounts, Hamas’s terror tunnels are nothing in comparison to Hezbollah’s extensive network of tunnels that run beneath the border with Israel.
Hezbollah’s announced war plans involve invading and taking control over communities in the Upper Galilee.
In the face of Hamas’s repeated aggression in recent years, many Israelis are now looking wistfully at our quiet northern border. It was the massive destruction Israel wreaked on Lebanon during the 2006 war, they say, that is responsible for this tranquility. We deterred Hezbollah.
Unfortunately, this is dangerous nonsense that bespeaks a fundamental refusal by those that express this view to reconcile themselves with the nature of Hezbollah and its decision making process.
Hezbollah’s decision to go to war in 2006 was made in Tehran, by Hezbollah’s Iranian masters. The decision not to go to war since has also been made by Tehran.
Tehran decided to deploy Hezbollah to Iraq and Syria.
And Tehran will decide, based on its own sense of priorities, when Hezbollah and its massive arsenal of terror should attack Israel.
The only way that Israel’s operations in 2006 have impacted Hezbollah’s future aggression is by enabling it. Israel agreed to a cease-fire that enabled Hezbollah to rearm, reassert control over southern Lebanon and expand its influence over the Lebanese military and state. Had Israel routed Hezbollah in 2006 or refused to accept the pro-Hezbollah cease-fire terms embodied in UN Security Council resolution 1701 then the situation would be different.
This brings us to Iran, the hidden hand behind the 2006 war, and at least to some degree behind the present war with Gaza, and the direct threat that it constitutes for Israel.
Last month US President Barack Obama bought himself and Iran four more months. Iran can continue to develop its nuclear weapons until after the US midterm election unconstrained by international scrutiny.
Obama can pretend for four more months that he is going to achieve a nuclear deal that will prevent Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
Israel however, was not given four months.
Without the Iranian nuclear umbrella, Iran’s terror proxies in Gaza were able to develop weapons to attack nearly the entire country. What will they develop if that nuclear umbrella is instated? Prime Minister Netanyahu is correct. Iran’s nuclear weapons program is an existential threat to Israel. And it needs to be wiped out.
Given the threats from Lebanon and Iran, it is clear that Israel’s decision to try to limit its operations in Gaza was necessary. Israel cannot afford to tie its forces down indefinitely. And if Israel is forced to retake control over Gaza, it will need to deploy its forces in such a way that it maintains sufficient reserve capacity to handle Gaza, Lebanon and Iran simultaneously.
This would be challenging enough under the best of circumstances. Unfortunately, the situation is made all the more complicated by the Obama administration’s strategic aim of appeasing Iran by enabling it to develop nuclear weapons and by siding with Hamas against Israel and the US’s traditional Sunni Arab allies.
The administration’s unswerving devotion to this policy aim was again clarified on Monday when Palestinian sources at the Cairo talks told the media that the US had again joined forces with Hamas-supporting Qatar to achieve an alternate cease-fire, undercutting Egyptian efforts and giving Hamas reason to walk away from the table.
Just last week the US media lambasted Secretary of State John Kerry for supporting Hamas against Israel in cease-fire negotiations. The fact that the Obama administration continues to act in this manner suggests that it is completely committed to this course of action.
Israel can cope with all of these challenges and surmount them. But it won’t be easy.
In recent days a spate of government ministers and foreign supporters have recommended a bevy of options that involve getting someone else to deal with Hamas for Israel. Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman said Monday that Gaza should become a UN mandate.
Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and her colleagues on the Left, joined by former Bush administration deputy national security adviser Elliott Abrams say that Fatah can be brought into Gaza to fight Hamas for Israel.
These suggestions are all based on wishful thinking and an extraordinary capacity to ignore reality.
The UN is institutionally committed to delegitimizing and ultimately destroying Israel.
Fatah can only come into Gaza after Hamas has been destroyed completely and driven from leadership by Israel.
Under any other circumstance, Fatah will collaborate with Hamas against Israel, as it has always done. And if Hamas is routed and destroyed Fatah would only destabilize the situation.
The time has come for us to recognize that there are no easy answers for Israel. IDF operations in Gaza in recent weeks have dealt a harsh blow to Hamas. Perhaps the terror commanders have been deterred. Perhaps not.
Whatever the case may be, if Israel and Egypt are able to continue to block US attempts to open the borders for Hamas resupply until Kerry gets swept up in another major crisis, then Hamas can be defeated through attrition.
If not, then Israel will have no choice but to retake control of Gaza while maintaining enough forces in reserve to respond to a second front in the North, and finally end Iran’s dream of becoming a nuclear power.
There are no silver bullets. The price of freedom is hard work and vigilance.
Only if we act in full cognizance of the gravity of the moment and the absence of easy answers will we navigate the minefield we find ourselves in successfully and restore the safety of the south, the north, the east and the center of the country.
Max Said:
I told you I am an ” inercent Bee”. Thanks for the info, shall look it up.
Max Said:
I enjoyed that movie also. I prefer Jews as victor not victims. I watch some of “Man in a Glass Booth”, but Darlin that’s a movie about Nazis not Jews. The movie I couldn’t remember was ” Hester Street”.
Mivtsa Yonatan (English title: Operation Thunderbolt) (1977): Israeli Yehoram Gaon played Col. Netanyahu, Austrian Sybil Danning and German Klaus Kinski played the hijackers. Director: Menahem Golan.
I found this on youtube. I haven’t seen it either.
hxxps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFeDt0eVcTE
Hmmm – the link would not display – changed the “tt” to ” xx”
Mivtsa Yonatan (English title: Operation Thunderbolt) english subs
Getting it right now with youtube downloader and getting the captions with Google2srt 0.6.1 program.
honeybee Said:
So that’s what it is! – I didn’t think about it – you paid more attention than I did . I guess everyone gets the same ads . Well, now you got an education!
—-
I just re-watched Raid on Entebbe, I had it on my hard drive – hadn’t seen it for ages. I got the copy from youtube but it seems to have been taken off youtube now.
Bibi’s brother, Yonatan, died in the raid. Both were members of the Sayeret Matkal. Obviously the wrong brother died.
http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/3663789/Raid_on_Entebbe_1977_Charles_Bronson__Peter_Finch
“Raid on Entebbe – – 1977” The file is a small size and looks well seeded.
—>
I haven’t seen this version: “Victory at Entebbe”. I think I’ll try it. Only five seeders but it might be enough. Look at the five Star cast! – You see the world liked the Jews a lot better when they were uncompromising.
http://thepiratebay.se/torrent/6969781/Victory_at_Entebbe
Max Said:
Iam interested in seeing neked Vikings however, send some.
Max Said:
Hubby couldn’t work a computer if you put a gun to his head. Ol’windmill is as high teck as he goes. Look up the temps in San Antonio, Kingsville and Rio Grande City. It gets so hot down here nobody wears cloths, nobody looks at neked bodies by Aug. I thought the ” pop-ups” were amusing especially the Asian woman in the Catholic Schoolgirl uniform. Men’s taste never ceases to amaze me.
Thanks for the recommendation, I shall try to watch the “Glass Booth” asp. Then we can discuss it’s merits.
honeybee Said:
Those are links to movie torrents with Maximilian Schell and Liza Minnelli. Those ads on are on the sidebars – they probably thought your hubby was back on the computer as Google cross-references it ‘s ads with your email contents and browsing history.
You can use flash-block to block unwanted ads.
Yes, you are interested in naked ladies (something like Islamo-Fundamentalists are?) because you are more interested in discussing them than watching Maximilian Schell in one of his best films.
Max Said:
My fault!!!!!!!!!!! Darlin, I am not interested in naked Ladies. Oh Max, you have shown me a whole new interest aspect of your personality.
honeybee Said:
No I didn’t . Those would be ads on the sides which just might be based on your browsing history lol
Typical self-destructive behavior – look at the bad stuff instead of get the good stuff, you are supposed to click on the movie torrents not the womin ads.
@ Max:
Check you site Boy Chick, you sent me pornography !!!!!!!!!!!
http://thepiratebay.se/search/Man%20in%20the%20Glass%20Booth/0/99/0
http://thepiratebay.se/search/Cabaret%201972/0/99/0
Max Said:
Rarely go to the movies, TX is to big to sit in the seat and has hearing problems. I saw “Romance of a Horse Thief” on TV while recovering from pneumonia. I thought it was a Western, but in odd way it was. Tried to find on tape or DVD, but no luck.
honeybee Said:
Yes, I liked that one also.
…
Cabaret is one of my favorites
also “The Man in the Glass Booth”
Max Said:
The Jewish movie I ever saw was the ” Romance of a Horse thief” with David Opasue [?], Lainie Kazan and Yule Brunner [?]. Second best ” Enter Laughing”. Another that slips my mind.
Max Said:
If their parent are robots. If their you’re kids their well what can I say.
honeybee Said:
Depends who the parents are.
….
I give you 50 more films to get upset about and castigate.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_50_Greatest_Jewish_Movies
Hmmm I haven’t seen # 1 “The Chosen” (Maximilian Schell and Rod Steiger. How did that happen?.. fix that right now… found it on pirate bay…
(Film of Potok Novel) .
…
and #4 Shoah 1985… harder to find…
Max Said:
Why do you think I am expending so much time and attention on you ?????
Max Said:
The Good Guy doesn’t look Jewish and the Bad Guy looks too Jewish, go figure????? AS for the kids, really do kids act or look like that ?
Max Said:
Brits don’t have big noses ??????
Max Said:
As I said,” no big thing”.
honeybee Said:
So one guy is too Jewish – the other guy is not Jewish enough.
Ari is to marry an (ugh) goy and a pretty blonde Presbyterian at that (the horror) and this somehow is part of the film depicting the Jews badly?
And the Kibbutz children are too clean and too well behaved for you but if they were shown as rude and dirty that would be an insult to the Jews.
Also the Jews were depicted as bloodthirsty but also they were too nice to the British.
…
Are you practicing to be a Jewish Mother?
honeybee Said:
No not Andre with him — you.
honeybee Said:
That objectively said is an extremely prejudiced attitude.
In fact, Newman’s part was supposed to be a Jew who didn’t look like a a typical Jew – first so he could pretend to be a British Officer -second so they could have that bit where the prejudiced officer is talking to Newman -telling him how he could recognize Jew by the way they are and Newman asks him to find “a cinder in my eye” while the guy is railing on against Jews.
..
You really need to drop your prejudices and actually “see” the film.
Max Said:
No big thing !!!!!!!!!!! Uris is no Andre Swartz-Bart.
Well then you should have written your own book – and see if you can compete with Leon Uris.
What a trivial detail based on small minded prejudice to base like or dislike of a film! The film showed the Hagganah and Irgun working together but you don’t seem to be able to transcend to that level.
Max Said:
Yes Daddy.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
honeybee Said:
Calling something “garage is not critical thinking. You do not explain how you came to that conclusion. If you can’t explain how you came to that conclusion you just portray yourself as being in blind denial and having an inability to inspect the world around you. – There is a difference between critical inspection critical analysis and personal attack.
A personal world model in which all critical thinking is “personal attack ” is the very lowest level of reasoning. Actually it is a level of crippled reasoning.
If I say you personally are mean and selfish without any reference that is a personal attack.
If I say a film review seems founded on a mean and selfish attitude that is critical thinking. That is an objective analysis of the objective reality you have presented me with.
..
It is not about “you” . it is about the product you created.
To separate your identity and the identity of others from the objective world is the first step towards objective rational thought.
Max Said:
And yet respond to me like honey to a bee.
Max Said:
The Hagganah freed him, if it had been my movie I would have had the Irgun free him.
honeybee Said:
So now it’s “ranting” – another personal attack – you have no other level.
. This apparently is like a high school corridor to you ,where you like to cat-call people, make personal attacks – razz the”enemy” etc
quite immature and simply pointless.
But I guess it’s a life, of some kind.
– to each their own
Max Said:
Do sound insecure, Honey !!!!!!!!!!!!! You’re the one ranting.
honeybee Said:
The film did not portray Sal Mineo as being “led astray”. It showed him as willingly and happily taking Irgun vows and in the end Sal was a hero who a 15 year old girl idolized and he wanted to marry.
And it did not show the Irgun leader as “evil”. In fact his brother a leader of the Hagganah forgave him and vowed he woudl not hang form a “British Rope”. And Paul Newman and George Maharis led the teams to free them.
What reality are you in? You must have seen the film in an alternate dimension. You prove that prejudice warps a person’s perceptions.
honeybee Said:
You are American and you never saw his name in print 100,000 times??
Max Said:
You really believe this garbage, Sugar [ note term of affection directed toward you] you wrote, if so I have a oil well I want to sell you.
honeybee Said:
No.Refresh my memory. You must be exaggerating or mus-interpreting. They wouldn’t pay any attention to me here, I oppose fascist Republican Capitalism and “they” would probably like to exterminate me the same as they wish to exterminate Hamas.
No,personal attack is one of the building blocks here – most think it is OK to be immoral in order to win – but in fact they don’t need to be – personal attack suffocates a lot of truth and adoption of this policy is one of the pillars of some kind of fascism.
Anyway this is your home here, not mine I never realized you were insecure about it.
And finally even advocating banning people on some kind of moral principle is not personal attack. It is really the development of mission statement. A site takes a stand and within that mission statement is the prerogative of enabling some thought and disabling others. And I acknowledge that even knowing I am not on this site’s mission statement – but you are – so I think you are safe. 🙂
You really are confused as to what means “personal attack”. So long as you are on that level , you are not really involved in “discussion”.
Max Said:
Who me ????????? An inercent bee ???? If Paul NEUMANN’s part had been play by someone who looked Jewish. Sal Mineo the sad boy led astray by the evil Schieldkraut. The bigots are the producers of the movie.
Max Said:
Is it my fault he Anglicized his name so he wouldn’t sound Jewish ??
honeybee Said:
This is not ad hominem – I critically analyzed what you wrote in the what you yourself shared and revealed – not you as an identity – not did I try to deflect from the subject at hand by making a non sequitor but rather I directly addressed the subject at hand –
How is it that you cannot understand the difference? There is a level beyond personal identification and taking “sides” with selfish motivations rather than taking sides with truth.
honeybee Said:
Paul Newman!!! not Neuman.
How can you Misspell Paul Newman. Are you sure you are an American in Texas? – maybe you are really a Mexican immigrant or a Gazan Spy?
Your “review” reflects a simple minded nationalism and prejudice in which everyone “on your side” has to have halos because “one” represents all in your mind – This is prejudice.
In the world where people do not have a prejudiced agenda – and actor who plays a role is just an actor who plays a role not the personal symbol and representative of your G_d or ethnic symbol.
You want everyone to have halos and straight noses – well you had Newman there who is a militant Jew with a halo and straight nose – how did you not “see” him? instead you couldn’t see beyond your prejudices..
Absolutely untrue. You need to actually see the movie. Even Sal Mineo who was shown to have joined the Irgun and dynamited many places is shown is a very sympathetic light giving the backstory of his motivations of his experiences in the holocaust – very important backstory in 1963.
It’s justified criticism that Otto Preminger downplayed the hatred against the British. He did it deliberately to get the movie made – so what? It doesn’t destroy the film except to some rabidly prejudiced person who has some hate agenda . It doesn’t negate the positive aspects of the film.
The film is the book that Leon Uris wrote which was extremely popular at the time. So the film is the book that everyone wanted to see made into film. Unfortunately for you it is not the fantasy you have in your head about hating Presbyterians, Kibbutz children, hook noses etc.
You miss an enjoyment of a great part of the world with such prejudices – the world has much more to offer and there are many more dimensions it beyond ethnic prejudice.
Max Said:
ALERT ALERT ALERT PERSONAL AD HOMENEN ATTACK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Max Said:
Exodus [the movie had no depth], one could almost say it was boring. Nice photos of Jerusalem.
Max Said:
Just bless your sweet Li’tle Ol heart, you don’t remember when you wanted me banned from the Pundit ????????
honeybee Said:
You almost manged to get through a post without making a personal attack.
almost.
Your review shows a very narrow minded perspective , extremely one dimensional. The world is not like this attitude – it has much more depth to it, Your review is an attitude of trying to put life and art in boxes to serve the mean and selfish purposes of individuals.
honeybee Said:
Max Said:
Really??? I mean really ??? Does Paul Neuman romance a nice Israeli Jewish woman. Noooooo , he falls for a tall willowy blond blued American Woman from the Hamptons [who wear fetching sweater sets], probably a liberal Presbyterian. { I have it from impeccable sources that Presbyterian women love Jew boys with blue eyes and curly honey blond hair].
The children of the Kibbutz , clean [they live on a kibbutz?] good. obedient little robots.
The freedom fights are portrayed as blood thirsty terrorist. Joseph Schilkraut with his classic Jewish sharp nosed Jewish face looking the typical evil Jew ???
The noble Brits, who are only interested in justice ?
I saw this first when I was young [read the book too] with the Synagogue, watched it again last year. No the film I remember. It was missing a meaning plot and dialogue. A weepy sentimental soap opera with a handsome leading man.
As I said I wonder about your discriminative abilities.
honeybee Said:
If you wish to contribute some information or a review about the film, it would be more constructive to do so, rather than make personal attacks which is simply empty posting..
BethesdaDog Said:
It still is. I saw it a long time ago. Upon seeing it again, i realize it’s still current , the film is timeless.
Just have a university film club or Israeli org have a screening and watch the radicalized Muslims-leftists, those bearers and defenders of “Islamic Peace” have some riots and you’ll know it’s still current.
honeybee Said:
It was a GREAT film, for the time. It was wonderful PR, and provided a whole generation of Americans with the positive view of Israel that many continue to have to this day.
Max Said:
Now it’s confirmed !!! Max has no TASTE !!!!!
I saw “Exodus” on the weekend on DVD. Not information rich but a good film for the times The cast just seems so strange though – Paul Newman as “Ari”!! ? , he is just too “cool” and George Maharis? – somewhat the same another “cool”.
… but it works out – those stars got it major attention.
Pity about Sal Mineo – both the career slump and his murder.Now I read the wiki entry , I know what happened.
..
The film has a nice atmosphere – positive upbeat amidst danger and adversity and the funny thing? – not too much or nothing seems to have changed. ie The Israelis have built an advanced civilization and the Arabs remaining backwards in every possible way are still trying to exterminate them.
It should be shown in the American Muslim-radicalized Universities. Should be good for a few riots.
Ms. Glick is correct in her analysis, but her ability to predict the future is just as bad as everyone else’.
Here’s my take for what it is worth: Iran will have to put up or shut up before Obama leaves office. The next president will probably resupply Israel with its military needs. Obama will not! Let us see whether he replenishes the stores that Israel just removed. I doubt he will do that and will excuse himself by saying that the US is unable to do so at this time due to budget considerations.
Syria and IS are a serious threat to Iran and may restrain her, but the Ayatollahs may over-reach because they are afraid of a preemptive attack by Israel. A weakened Iran would be easy pickins’ for IS, so Iranians too live in a complex world. Most likely they will simply continue their nuclear and missile development without taking themselves to the battlefield. If they build enough rockets, some time in the future they will be able to overcome Israeli defenses, but that will take them into the next US administration. Too bad life is so complicated for them as well as Israel.
Frankly, the smart thing for Iran to do is to mend fences with Israel, drop their WMD program, and face IS with the help of Israel. Real Persians and Israel are natural allies. But that scenario is as likely as Obama developing a conscience.
Israel has no good choices – only bad ones and can’t win – only manage the conflict with the Arabs.