He is definitely guilty of everything the Rabbi said, since he sets the policy, but do you think it isn’t hypocrisy to hear criticism of Netanyahu’s conduct regarding Hamas דווקא from Channel 12, where everyone there (for the most part) supported this policy? (They seriously think everyone is stupid.)
It seems that what interests them is getting rid of Bibi, and they make cynical use of everything to get rid of him, just like the Bibists did to Bennett. Does the Rabbi also feel/think that?

There is definitely hypocrisy here, and I also wrote that here regarding the Shalit deal.

Dov

This sounds like general, unserious criticism. Someone who did in fact support greasing Hamas and today criticizes Bibi is a hypocrite. But every day there are different people on the panels; not all of them supported greasing Hamas, and not all of them are criticizing him specifically on this point.
The thing is that you’re focusing on what matters less.
Netanyahu didn’t just fund Hamas; he also told us that Hamas was deterred even after it carried out terror attacks, he refused to meet with the heads of the security establishment before the disaster, and he continues to engage in politics.
Only recently we found out that he and Sara are collecting past statements by top army officials in order to throw responsibility onto them.
The man is a major scoundrel, but what matters to you is that Channel 12 shouldn’t criticize him.
So I’m telling you: it’s true that someone who criticizes him for greasing Hamas when a month ago he wrote otherwise is behaving hypocritically, but that’s not what bothers me right now. What matters right now is that this liar vacate his seat, and the sooner the better.

Well said.

Dov,

Resigning during a war is not taking responsibility but dumping it, along the lines of: sorry, I made a mess, now clean up after me. A leader who does that is really adding sin to crime.

Netanyahu’s job is to win the war. After that happens, God willing, everyone who has been prime minister, defense minister, or chief of staff in recent years needs to disappear from the public map. That includes Netanyahu of course, Gantz, Bennett, etc. Not because that is “taking responsibility,” but because people who led a certain conception are very rarely capable of really changing paradigm, and not just trying to patch things up at the margins. We shouldn’t take the risk that they belong to those rare people.

Sorry, my last comment wasn’t to Dov but to the person who responded to him.

Avi,

I didn’t argue that taking responsibility means resigning. I did argue that in my opinion it would be better for us if Bibi stepped down, for the reasons I listed above, among them: Bibi is busy with politics and is briefing against the army.
You’re also contradicting yourself: on the one hand Bibi needs to fix things because he broke them, and on the other hand you can’t rely on someone who led a certain conception to really fix it.
Now, in my opinion, both you and Dov are aiming at the same thing.
My impression is that it’s hard for you that Bibi should bear such great responsibility, so you’re trying to blame additional factors for the disaster—Bennett, the media, the protest movement, and assorted other vegetables, in the sense of “the beam in the eye.”
The point is that there are lots of good reasons why the responsibility rests squarely on Bibi’s shoulders, reasons that are not connected only to funding Hamas, so even if there are additional factors, they’re negligible by comparison (Bibi brushed off as straw every claim raised against the idea that “Hamas is deterred”).

Exactly the opposite. Automatically blaming Bibi, or any other persona, is choosing the easy solution. It’s a phenomenon that happens in politics, in business, and also in soccer (we’ll fire the coach and everything will be fine). People vent their anger on the designated culprit, and then don’t understand how everything stays the same.

What happened here was a total failure of the entire security leadership, both its professional and political parts. Defense ministers and chiefs of staff are not negligible but an important part of every success and every failure. If a chief of staff knows that security in the south has been abandoned, and the government stops him from solving it, he has to resign. Plain and simple.

Here there is also an answer to your second point, about the contradiction. The entire senior leadership failed here. If they all go home today, there will be no one to run a war. There is no way to carry out such sweeping personnel changes under fire. In the army they postponed commander replacements for exactly that reason—it’s simply not the time to do handovers. Right now, they are the only people capable of winning this war, and I think they can do it despite the failure.

After all this, every last one of them, from chief of staff upward, belongs outside the leadership.

Avi,

You’re again responding to things I didn’t write.
I didn’t write that Bibi’s responsibility is absolute, not that I think otherwise.
In fact, I gave examples of why Bibi’s responsibility is grounded in guilt.

As for “negligible by comparison”: you’re right. I was mistaken. Apparently there is indeed major responsibility on the part of the other security bodies as well, and it is not negligible compared to Bibi’s responsibility. In fact I thought so before too; when I wrote “negligible,” it was mainly against the claim that Bennett, the protest movement, and the media are guilty alongside Bibi.

And in your third remark too, again you’re not being precise. I didn’t write that the entire senior leadership should resign; I wrote that only Bibi should resign, for obvious reasons. I stand by that—it would only do us good as a people.

If you notice, toward the end of your remarks you’re again contradicting yourself, but I’ve exhausted this already.

Fed-Up Haredi, even if you decided to announce that you’re Haredi as though that were relevant or interesting, sticking that message into your name even when you’re dealing with completely different topics is childish, and that’s why it’s annoying.

Someone…

Glad it bothers you, that was the intention 🙂