Israel Matzav

As rockets continue to fall, even Dichter doesn't get it

Rockets continue to fall in the western Negev today, with a 70-year old woman in Sderot suffering 'light' wounds from shrapnel. A grad rocket - a form of Katyusha - hit a house in Ashkelon today, the first time there has been real damage from a rocket hitting Ashkelon. And all indications are that the 'Palestinians' have longer-range weaponry that they have not yet unsheathed.

Meanwhile, 'Public Security' Minister Avi Dichter (pictured, top left), one of the few ministers I held out hope might 'get it,' proved today that he doesn't.

During his visit, Dichter said that the solution to the rocket problem lies in bolstering Israel's deterrence, not taking over the Gaza Strip.

"All the ideas about conquering Gaza are just not serious. Even if Gaza is taken over tomorrow, it will take years to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure. Therefore, bolstering our deterrence, in the first stage, is the most important goal, in order to give the necessary signals so that the other side understands that it [terror activity] simply doesn't pay off," said the public security minister.

What does 'bolstering Israel's deterrence' mean? More hitting empty buildings? More 'targeted killings' of mid-level operatives? Setting up the 'Iron Dome' protection system, which is completely ineffective anyway? When will the government decide that enough is enough?

Why should it take 'years' to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure? Most of it was built in the last two and a half years! Why should it take longer than that to dismantle? And if it takes that long to dismantle it, so be it. How long did it take the allies to undo the effects of fascism in Germany and Japan after World War II? If we don't dismantle the terrorist infrastructure, who will? No one else is going to fight our wars for us! And if we don't start dismantling the terror infrastructure now, how many more people will die and how many more lives will be unlivable until we awaken from our catatonic stupor and decide to start doing it?

Why is conquering Gaza 'not serious'? The only alternative other than conquering Gaza that might put a stop to the rocket fire is to flatten it. Is Dichter willing to do that?

The other side will never 'understand' that terror 'doesn't pay.' First of all, they have seen already that it does pay, because the buffoons with whom Dichter shares power have been falling all over themselves for most of the last fifteen years trying to give land to the 'Palestinians' which the 'Palestinians' believe that they have earned through terror. Ask them. Second, for the 'Palestinians' the terror is an end and not a means. The end is to bring about the coming of the 12th Imam and the 'Palestinians' believe they can bring that about by committing suicide and murdering Jews just as they could bring it about by actually defeating us. The terror has become an end in itself. Third, there are limits to how long our own people will put up with living the way they are living in Sderot, and when they leave the 'Palestinians' will once again see that terror does pay. I wouldn't raise my children in Sderot today. And neither would most other people who could afford not to. Most of the people who can afford to leave Sderot have left already because they feel that the government has abandoned them. I can't blame them. You only live once and you only raise your kids once: Why raise your kids in a bunker mentality if you don't have to? What makes Dichter think that thousands more won't leave Sderot as a result of the current round of fighting?

But it's not just the government. It's also those who would be the government. As many of you know, I thought that Boogie Yaalon would make a great Prime Minister. Then I read this from him over the weekend:

Although there are no clear answers to these dilemmas, there are certain principles that we must always follow, even when confronted with a terrorist threat. First, the use of force should be a last resort; second, targeted killing should be the last resort of the use of force; and third, when we are forced to kill, we should do so as surgically and decisively as possible. All three principles aim to impart the same message: That terrorism does not pay.

To this end, the IDF has a three-pronged test for evaluating prospective operations. First, we consider how the army itself--soldiers and commanders--will perceive its own actions. This is often referred to as the “mirror test”--will we be able to look ourselves in the mirror after the operation?--and is concerned primarily with morality. Second, we consider how the society we wish to defend will perceive our actions; this is where both moral and political considerations abound. And third, we consider how our actions will be perceived internationally; here, political considerations dominate.

...

Fourth, there is the constant need to combat the logic of “the ends justify the means.” Our war is legitimate, it is in self-defense, and it is about survival. Therefore, say many soldiers, any and all means should be used to win it. To counter this way of thinking, we try to instill in our soldiers the understanding that our objective is not only to win, but to win with the knowledge that we have upheld our society’s morality. We teach our soldiers that a justly fought war is the only kind of war worth winning, and that they will be evaluated for not only whether they achieved their goals, but how they achieved them.

I'm not arguing in favor of deliberately killing women and children. But in fighting an enemy that has no morals and that targets our civilians, I think we need to be more concerned with keeping our own soldiers and civilians alive and less concerned with how many of their civilians - many of whom actively support the terrorists - die in the process. Shoot first, ask questions later when there's a ticking time bomb in front of you. We're in a war, not a game of Stratego.

Let's face it: The reason the IDF isn't in Gaza today is because sending the IDF into Gaza would mean hundreds of 'Palestinian' civilian casualties. Instead, we have allowed life to become unbearable for Sderot and the other communities that are near Gaza, and soon for Ashkelon and maybe others as well. Why would anyone choose to raise their children that way? If the IDF had gone into Gaza the first time a Kassam came out after the expulsion, Roni Yihye (who was the victim yesterday) would be alive, Osher Twito would have two legs, and Yossi Haimov would have two usable arms. The government of Israel is supposed to protect Israelis - not 'Palestinians.' The most basic duty any government has is to protect its own people. The Olmert-Barak-Livni junta has not only failed in that duty, it has abandoned that duty. And unfortunately, there doesn't seem to be anything much better waiting on the horizon.

Noted conservative thinker William F. Buckley, Jr. passed away yesterday. At Little Green Footballs this morning, Charles Johnson has posted a quote from Buckley: "Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive." Reality is all-too-rapidly approaching us. It's time for the government to tone down the idealism and make preserving our own people the priority. Before it's too late.

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 3:49 PM