Q&A: Things Seen from Here Aren’t Seen from There
Things Seen from Here Aren’t Seen from There
Question
How does the Rabbi relate to Netanyahu’s statement: “Part of the criticism against the government stems from the fact that it is impossible to present to you what the heads of the security establishment—and I as well—are seeing,” Netanyahu explained. “You are seeing only a partial picture of a broad campaign that is still in full swing, and I am committed to bringing complete security to the residents of the south. I won’t say here when we will act and how we will act, but I have a clear plan, I know what to do and when to do it, and we will do it.”
I assume this does not change your mind now regarding the criticism, and on the other hand it is an irritating claim that seemingly really shuts people up.
And in general, what do you think about “things seen from here…”? Seemingly it has been empirically proven to be true, with all the right-wing people who declared that they would not give up territory, that they would eliminate Haniyeh, etc., and we know how they ended up.
Answer
I don’t believe him. It may be that in his helplessness and lack of vision, and that of the military people, he really thinks he is doing his best and the right thing, but that is exactly what I’m crying over. I don’t believe he has any consistent policy whatsoever. It is blatantly obvious that he does not, and Hamas is what determines everything that happens here, both on their side and on ours.
And again, I’m not talking about the fact that he isn’t forceful enough (things seen from here); I’m talking about the fact that he is inconsistent and has no policy. As far as I’m concerned, he can have a conciliatory policy, as long as we see consistency and pursuit of some goal.
Discussion on Answer
In what sense?
Hamas didn’t set the agenda except at the beginning,
and it seemed there was a policy.
Nothing of the sort. Hamas determined everything. The moment it began, and to a large extent also the ending. A policy is something long-term, not for a week or two. Now they are finally talking about formulating some kind of policy (I think under pressure from Kochavi, since Bibi has dragged his feet the whole way through, and he has only one policy—to survive and corrupt everything around him), and even this doesn’t look like something long-term. Simply to strengthen the stick. But in my assessment, later on what happened in the past will happen again. I expect there will be no real change.
Come on, this whole saga around Bibi and his opportunism comes from the left.
The right, at least part of it, knows that Bibi is an opportunist (almost like every politician, by the way), but I assume that on certain planes (the ones that really matter), ideology wins out.
Where is the left in its criticism of Lieberman? How is the left able to march with Lieberman? Because he doesn’t pose a threat to them; he is a minority.
After all, Lieberman is pure opportunism. What is his ideology based on? Isn’t there a contradiction here between being anti-Judaism and right-wing values?
Bibi knows the twists and turns of the human soul, so criticism from the left doesn’t faze him. He understands where it really comes from.
Therefore, he apparently tagged the head of the Mossad, ‘Yossi Cohen,’ as his successor.
He found in him, like himself, someone who doesn’t look only at the force of the arguments, but also at the way they are loaded.
True, there is a lot of criticism of his conduct, and there are places where years in power can really lead to corruption (unconsciously).
I agree that there is a fine line between opportunism and ideology.
But as long as it does not involve giving up the ideology expected of every Zionist in this country (and not necessarily a right-winger), I don’t see a problem with him. I don’t see what others have to offer.
Why don’t you condemn Lieberman’s behavior?
I also don’t condemn my neighbor’s behavior. Maybe you forgot, but Bibi is the prime minister. Well, it hasn’t been all that long, so maybe you don’t remember.
One level below that, I could answer that Lieberman may become a minister, if I take your arguments as based on a realistic alternative.
What is your sense of proportion based on?
Rabbi, it seems to me that a review of the latest operation in Gaza expresses a contradiction to your claim.
Could that be?