Too Much Deference

You may also like...

10 Responses

  1. Joseph says:

    In summation, zionism is bankrupt, always has been, and has never not will ever provide any tangible solutions but rather continue to cause mayhem.

  2. Ori says:

    Moderators, I made a grammar error. Please use this comment instead. Sorry for the hassle.

    I think you identified one problem out of three. The second problem, which may or may not be related to the first, is a lack of willingness to fight and suffer the necessary casualties to make Israel safer in the long run. People unwilling to fight, or leaders unwilling to order others to do so, will be tempted to find peaceful solutions even where none exist. The ghost of Neville Chamberlain could explain why this is a bad idea.

    The third problem is either laziness or cowardice. People who don’t believe Israel has a right to exist have no business living there. People who aren’t willing to suffer what it takes to keep Israel on the map(1) have no business living there either.

    (1) I am a member of this group. I resented being conscripted, so I moved to a country that does not force its people into military service.

  3. Ori says:

    Joseph, I think your summary is inaccurate. You interjected your own opinions, which Jonathan Rosenblum may or may not share.

    1. Jonathan Rosenblum mentioned Ben Gurion favorably. This would argue that he doesn’t believe that Zionism has always been bankrupt. Maybe that is always had a negative balance.

    2. Zionism always came in two flavors: secular and religious. The leaders in this article all came from the secular camp. Religious Zionists still use the Tanakh as their justification. That’s one of the reasons they place so much importance on the west Bank – most of the Tanakh does not take place in the coastal regions Israel conquered in 1948.

    3. Zionism will never provide perfect solutions, but nothing short of Mashiach would. However, are you sure that having six million Jews all over Eretz Israel, rather than the few who lived in a few places a two centuries ago, is not tangible?

  4. Garnel Ironheart says:

    I recall Shimon Peres explaining his rational for the Oslo Discords back in 1993. He looked around at the Israelis and saw that they were less and less willing to stand up for themselves as time went on. After all, they were getting richer and more content. Rich and content people do not like to fight wars. Too much to lose, not much to gain.

    And that was his naive hope for Oslo. If the Arabs could also develop a middle and upper class, also have homes, neighbourhood parks and pools, cable television and decent jobs, then they too would become content and not be interested in fighting any more wars.

    So Israel developed a leadership that fulfilled its part of the agreement. On the right, the Chareidim won’t serve in the army. On the left, the extreme seculars won’t serve either. In the middle, the Mizrachi are committed to serving but the kibbutzniks won’t let them advnace past a certain rank. And everyone up to and including the Chief of Staff is more interested in protect his butt (remember the stock selling the day before Lebanon II) than working for the good of the country.

    Unfortunately, on the other side, the leadership has not done the same thing. They have continued to foster an impoverished and rabidly hate-filled population dedicated only to increasing their own misery in the hope of eventually putting an end to the hated Zionist Entity.

    As a result, you now have one side constantly ready for war and another desperate to do anything to avoid one. Is there any wonder no one is backing Israel?

  5. Bob Miller says:

    Since you now live in the US, shouldn’t the logic in your comment of April 4, 2008 @ 10:39 am (“People who aren’t willing to suffer what it takes to keep…on the map have no business living there either”) lead you to volunteer for service in the US armed forces?

  6. Ori says:

    Bob Miller, that’s a good question. However, there is one important difference between Israel and the US.

    The US does not need everybody to serve in its armed forces. The US does not want everybody to serve in its armed forces. In fact, over half the high school graduates each year are ineligible for enlistment because the minimum requirements are set so high. The US is in an environment where a small, professional military is sufficient for national defense. Israel is not.

    It would be different if we were plunged into a WWII type situation. Then I’d be morally bound to go to the recruitment office and have them decide if they want me or not, or leave the country. However, we are not in that situation and short of a war with China we’re unlikely to be in that situation any time soon.

    The war on terror is nowhere near that level. Despite fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan, there hasn’t been a sizable increase in the size of the military. Conscription might be a hot potato politically, but there hasn’t even been an appeal for more recruits. The US doesn’t need me in its armed forces, and is probably better served by having me as a productive tax payer.

  7. cvmay says:

    “Since the first Oslo Accords, successive Israeli governments have adopted the position that Israel’s security is better served through diplomacy than by ensuring that Israel maintains defensible borders”

    Interestingly enough, the Israeli Gedolim shared this same view that diplomacy and peace concessions will safeguard the country and the correct halachic decision for ‘pikuach nefesh’. Rav Schach, Belzer Rebbe and Chachem Yosef were the pioneer advocates of ‘peace talks’ together with Shimon Peres. Passivity has been the prefered modus operanda, brought to Israel from the shores of Europe.
    WHAT CAN & SHOULD BE DONE????????? We are awaiting a response and the silence is unbearable. Nu!

  8. Bob Miller says:

    Cvmay referred to “Passivity…brought to Israel from the shores of Europe.”

    This is of a piece with the proposition that the Golus (exilic) attitude is obsolete now that we have a State, having been replaced by a new, bold, youthful self-reliance. The new, bold, youthful self-reliant State has somehow become a colony taking direct orders from the likes of Condi Rice. Many of its manual laborers are Arabs or other foreigners. Every available form of Western decadence has now been imported, by progressives!

    Cvmay, how has this happened? Is this condition not a warning that we are still in Golus because we have not taken the necessary steps as a nation (including a true rapprochement with HaShem) to achieve Geula and true independence?

  9. cvmay says:

    Have you noticed that the Gedolim have stopping sharing (they shared-past tense)the policy of diplomacy?
    Passivity – a trait with pluses and minus.
    I was refering to the “active stance” of the Nachshon ben Aminadavs, Bnos Tzelafchak, Rabbi Akivas, Rav Eliezer Silvers, Reb Moshes, Bostoner Rebbe and many more.
    (BTW you have the right to deduce your personal opinions from my words, as you desire)

  10. Bob Miller says:

    Regarding the comment by cvmay — April 7, 2008 @ 11:36 am:

    My apologies! But please re-read your original comment which was ambiguous about your real point.

Pin It on Pinterest