The Day After

[OriZ 3,157]

The fight against Daesh reminds the world of the principle Israel has been trying to articulate for years: The only way to defeat terror is to create a stable alternative on the ground.

The lesson was sharpened after Iraq's trauma - a war to which America went with all the right maps, except for the one which showed the way out. That's where the West learnt that it isn't enough to defeat the enemy; you also need to decide what will come in its place the day after.

That lesson is clearer still in Iraq and Syria today. So long as the Islamic State isn't replaced by a moderate Sunni state (Sunni-Stan), which is both stable and pro-western, the forces of Daesh will continue to behave like a hydra on steroids - every time they cut off one head, they grow two more.

In Israel the dilemma intensifies as the Palestinian Authority plays a double game: On the one hand it is the governmental actor standing in the way of the rise of an Islamist terror state (in this case of Hamas), but on the other it names schools and roads after murderers, cooperates with their public relations campaign and openly supports the knife terrorism of the past months.

Israel will fight this wave of terrorism with determination and force - and we will defeat it - but we also need to build a completion strategy for the day after. I recently presented the people of Israel with a plan. The aim is separation from the Palestinians through a regional summit which will serve as opening salvo for a comprehensive regional agreement. The advantage of this initiative is that it doesn't look to reach an agreement only with the Palestinians, but full and normal relations - diplomatic and economic - with the whole Arab world.

The details may be complex but the question behind them is simple: Does Israel want to continue to live with 3.5 million Palestinians, or is it time to separate and guarantee our status as a Jewish and democratic state.

The answer is separation. As quickly and decisively as possible. The perceived wisdom today is that peace between Israel and the Palestinians is not possible. Some believe the point of no return has passed, others are waiting for a change in circumstance or a change in leadership. The underlying assumption might make sense, but this passive approach to our destiny is misguided and dangerous.

The goal of all of our efforts must remain the same - two states for two peoples - but the targets have shifted. We must move away from talk of peace and coexistence to talk of separation and security. No-one will win a Nobel prize for this language of pragmatism but genuine security for both sides, even if unaesthetic and unpleasing to the liberal eye, is preferable to ongoing conflict.

The search for peace is at the center of Jewish identity, and peace may come one day for our children, based upon a generation of true security. Separation will allow the wounds to heal, and trust to grow, and only then can we allow ourselves to believe in a better world.

Until then, we need to make a distinction between civilian level and the military one: on the civilian level separation must be sharp and clear. On the military level we cannot simply get up and leave because there is a strong possibility that Hamas will rise to power and build its own private Islamic terror state on our eastern border.

Official Palestinian spokespeople deny this possibility (halfheartedly), but there is no person in the region who doesn't know that it is a realistic scenario, predominantly because it happened once before: In the summer of 2005 Israel disengaged from the Gaza Strip. Immediately after Israel withdrew from the territory a series of clashes broke out between the Palestinian Authority and Hamas which ended, in June 2007, when Hamas threw the Palestinian Authority out of Gaza, murdered dozens of officials and transformed Gaza into a base of terror and death from which they've fired over 20,000 rockets at Israel.

That cannot happen again, not a mile away from Jerusalem. The solution is that the security coordination which exists today - which allows the IDF to act across the West Bank - must continue even after separation. The Palestinian Authority will shout and claim that this is a breach of their sovereignty, but they know it is in their own interest. Hamas has widespread support in the West Bank and without freedom of action for the IDF (not as a permanent presence on the territory but as an operational framework) the Palestinian Authority will quickly fall and its leadership will be murdered or exiled. It seems unlikely that they would be in favor of such a scenario.

We need to separate from the Palestinians. Not for them, for us. But that separation needs to be based on strict security measures and take into account the worst case scenarios.

In the Middle East you can never be too careful.
Not if you want to live to see the day after.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/yair-lapid/the-day-after_b_8724872.html

Edited December 6, 2015 by OriZ

[OriZ 3,157]

This week marked the end of a large scale joint infantry training exercise between the IDF and US military: The Israeli participants included hundreds of warriors from the Egoz guerilla warfare unit in the Golani Brigade, while the Americans sent 173 paratroops from the US European Command

The forces trained together for more than a week, shoulder to shoulder, in various scenarios which drilled the troops' basic skills. The troops also took part in joint training invasions against an urban warfare training center near the Tze'elim base in the south, which is meant to simulate a village with dozens of armed enemy militants.

The troops also practiced taking over enemy controlled territory in one of the villages in the north, which was meant to simulate the transition from fighting in mountainous terrain to an urban setting. The troops also performed joint shooting drills and physical fitness training.

160 camouflage-clad American paratroopers landed at Ben-Gurion Airport ahead of the exercise, and immediately boarded buses which took them to the southern training grounds to meet their counterparts from Egoz. The orders on the radio channels during the exercises were in English only, and the safety guidelines for the drill were those used by the Israeli hosts - which tend to be more strict. Due to the differences in safety protocols between the militaries, the soldiers fired only blanks when training outside of the shooting range.

The American military is considered lenient in its safety protocols in comparison to the IDF. American troops, for example, are allowed to: Count their hits at the shooting range while their friends continue to fire, check their own rifles after a range without the range commander's verification, and often walk around with a round in the chamber.

In order to still maintain the live fire effect during the drills, the IDF used several pyrotechnic effects. "It was an interesting exercise," an officer from the Egoz unit told Ynet, "We learned alot from the drills."

The American force came to Israel with its guns, including assault rifles, 7.62 mm machine guns, sniper rifles, and personal combat gear.

At the height of the exercise, on the road to one of the simulated objectives, the forces split into two groups: The attack force, which included dozens of Golani fights and American soldiers, attacked the second force which simulated enemy militants in the target village. The forces switched places the next day in order to complete the exercise.

The soldiers from both militaries also conducted training ambushes of different types, and trained in different elements of camouflage, and fighting in thicket.

"We never identified the enemy we were training against as Hamas or Hezbollah. For us and them terror is terror," an IDF officer said. "In contrast to us, the American infantry is based more on larger troop numbers and more fire power. We are more creative and flexible with our smaller forces. This difference results in them getting 'stuck' in the entrance to a target position. Another difference that we noticed was the approach: We teach our solders to be independent and creative on the battlefield, while they work according to set orders and protocol, No one moves until everyone is in place."

An additional and not surprising difference came about in the technologies used: Egoz fighters noticed that the Americans relied on computer and GPS during every navigation, while the IDF's infantry commanders are required to learn their paths ahead of time from a map, memorizing the topography in the classic manner - using a compass. Only using a GPS as a backup.

"Like us, the American infantry forces are also divided into regiments, mortars, snipers, UAV operators etc," the officer said. "They said they left the exercise saying a big 'wow.' They didn't expect to encounter such a high level of training. They learned alot of elements and techniques like camouflage from us. They were also excited by our varied use of Oketz dogs."

The officer added that the forces avoided holding shooting or fitness competitions between the sides. The American solders "did Shabbat" at Nevatim Airbase, visited Masada and Jerusalem, and held a running competition in a Druze village in the north. After the exercise, the troops returned to their home base in Italy.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4734611,00.html

Some very interesting differences between the two there.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Sorry, but this just is not true:

The American military is considered lenient in its safety protocols in comparison to the IDF. American troops, for example, are allowed to: Count their hits at the shooting range while their friends continue to fire, check their own rifles after a range without the range commander's verification, and often walk around with a round in the chamber.

[OriZ 3,157]

You know, that's what my wife said too lol.

I don't know all the details, I just find all the other differences fascinating as well.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

True. It's always neat to compare ourselves to other cultures. Lots to be learned on all sides.

[OriZ 3,157]

Hmmm. Interesting.

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/ISIS-Threat/The-only-country-ISIS-fears-in-the-Middle-East-is-Israel-438576

[OriZ 3,157]

In Israeli City of Haifa, a Liberal Arab Culture Blossoms

HAIFA, Israel — At Elika, a bar in the Hadar neighborhood of this hilly port city, a 30-something psychodramatist rolled a cigarette and sipped coffee with her father, a well-known actor in Israel. The bartender poured tall beers for two women who wandered in for an afternoon pint. Nearby, a 22-year-old woman with a partly shaved head and colorful tattoos sat alone, working on her laptop.

They were among the many coifed, pierced and tattooed women and men who populate a slice of Haifa’s social scene that resembles that of the well-heeled hipsters of Tel Aviv. But here the cool kids are Palestinians, and they have unfurled a self-consciously Arab milieu that is secular, feminist and gay-friendly.

“Haifa is a center for Arabs, like Tel Aviv is a center for Jews,” said Asil Abu Wardeh, the Elika patron who practices a performance-based form of psychotherapy. “There is a cultural movement. There is a youth movement. There’s a kind of freedom here.”

“We have our own parties. Our own places. Our own discos. We dance. We drink. We do it all in Arabic,” she added. “This all began in Haifa.”

Arabs make up a fifth of Israel’s population of eight million, and in recent years, they have grown more assertive in expressing their Palestinian identity, allied with their brethren in East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip.

But their public life in Haifa is a striking secular counterpoint to the conservatism of many of Israel’s Arab communities, where sex before marriage is taboo, and single men and women rarely date and tend to marry at relatively young ages, in matches often arranged by their mothers.

Haifa’s relative liberalism is a product of its unique, cosmopolitan tradition. It is easy for young, single people to get out in this city, which is built on a steep coastal hill, with Jews tending to live on its heights and Arabs by the sea. The once working-class city of 280,000 has several universities and has embraced its diversity. The 30,000 Arab residents, around 10 percent of the population, include equal numbers of Muslims and Christians, and they are generally wealthier and better educated than Arabs elsewhere in Israel.

This makes Haifa a comfortable place for liberal Palestinians who want not only to escape the constraints of conservative Arab communities but also to be among their own people.

Haifa provides a comfortable refuge for liberal Palestinians who want not only to escape the constraints of conservative Arab communities but also to be among their own people.

URIEL SINAI FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

“If you are in an Arab neighborhood, you have a community. If you live in a Jewish neighborhood, you are a stranger, and that gives you freedom as an Arab woman,” said Fidaa Hammoud, 32. “There are many de facto couples, and older women living alone without having to hear gossip.”

Ms. Hammoud moved to Haifa in 2011 after studying speech therapy for four years in Barcelona, Spain. She and her partner live together in a Jewish neighborhood where they run a Palestinian cafe called Rai. “I couldn’t do this anywhere else,” she said.

Ayed Fadel runs Kabareet, a bar off a four-lane industrial road, through an alley and down some stairs. He envisions his out-of-the-way speakeasy with its red painted walls and old Arab movie posters as a place where people can truly be themselves.

“We want a gay couple to go to the dance floor and kiss each other, and nobody to even look at them,” he said. “This is the new Palestinian society we are aiming for.”

Outside the Elika cafe and bar in Haifa. "The people in Haifa, especially in these cafes, they are making revolutions," one patron said.

URIEL SINAI FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

That society was on display late last year, when some bars and cafes held screenings for Kooz #######, the first Palestinian gay film festival. And Dar al-Raya, a cafe that doubles as a publishing house, recently published “The Book of Desire,” believed to be among the first volumes of modern erotica by Palestinian authors.

For some, the blossoming Palestinian scene in Haifa is reminiscent of the city during British rule, when a lively Arab cultural life flourished. Much of that ended in 1948 with the war in which Israel was established, when Arabs fled, or were forced to leave, their homes in many cities, including in Haifa, said Mustafa Kabha, a lecturer in Palestinian history at the Open University of Israel.

Haifa in the 1930s and ’40s, he said, “had clubs, cafes, hotels, theaters and newspapers” for Arabs, including the Sham Cafe, where Syrian and Lebanese workers met, and the Port Cafe, for workers from the city’s busy port.

“You feel that the place is returning to a very natural harmony; in an old Arabic house you hear Arabic,” said Bashar Murkus, who recently opened the Khashabi Theater in an old warehouse owned by an Arab merchant in an industrial seaside neighborhood.

The liberal Arab renaissance in Haifa began with the opening of Fattoush, a Palestinian restaurant, in 1998. The restaurant, which hosted cultural discussions and art exhibitions, was once a scandal to polite Arab society because men and women openly drank alcohol and flirted. Now, it is a tourist-friendly fixture on Ben Gurion Boulevard, Haifa’s main drag.

More Arab-owned businesses opened on that street in the years since, with signs welcoming all people in Arabic, English and sometimes Hebrew. Many of these bars, cafes and restaurants were crowded on a recent weeknight with couples strolling along teeming sidewalks decked with Christmas lights.

Back up the road at the Elika bar, Samer Asakleh was hanging out with a co-worker. A folksy Arab song about smoking marijuana played from the speakers, and posters tacked to the wall advertised a concert featuring an Arab ska band,Toot Ard.

“The people in Haifa, especially in these cafes, they are making revolutions,” said Mr. Asakleh, 23, his long hair tied in a messy bun. He moved here from his home village of Mughar, in Galilee, to study management and was initially surprised by the open, seemingly libertine attitudes and social mores of people he met. He said he had not encountered any openly gay people before moving here in 2011, and he used to excuse himself from parties when gay couples would show up because he did not approve of homosexuality.

Since then, he has mellowed, he said.

“I am for people’s freedoms, social, personal and individual, and you can’t divide that up,” Mr. Asakleh explained. “You can’t just not accept ####### people. I believe in freedom for the Palestinian people, so we also have to support personal freedoms.”

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2016/01/04/world/middleeast/in-israeli-city-of-haifa-a-liberal-palestinian-culture-blossoms.html?mwrsm=Facebook&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fm.facebook.com&_r=1

[OriZ 3,157]

BtS spokesperson's lies refuted by his former army-mates

Avner Gvaryahu is the public face of Breaking the Silence, writing articles in Western media about how immoral the Israeli army is, and relating it to his own army experiences.

Now his fellow soldiers wrote a letter saying that he is full of it.

From My Truth:

Hey Avner,

It’s us, your friends from the army, from the Orev unit. We have also decided to break our silence. Want to stop reading? Don’t.

We were there no less than he was, and now the time has come for you to hear our truth also.

He shouts in every possible forum that he needs to be heard, now the time has come that he listen to us, too. We were ready to take a bullet for him once, we were with him there on the missions that he speaks of (in which we saved many lives and prevented countless terror attacks in the heart of Israel). In fact, when he says that war crimes were committed, he’s referring to each and every one of us. In every court case both sides are heard, no?

Let’s start. This post is written together by many members of the unit. Avner served together with us in the "Orev" Paratroopers (Anti-tank) unit from November 2004 until March 2007. Some of us served in the same crew, others in a parallel crew or in the unit at the same time. We decided to describe part of his testimonies which accuse us of things which never happened, or which were utterly distorted and whose connection to reality is totally coincidental, and each testimony needs to be told truthfully. To prove that you don’t have a sister is not an easy task, so be patient, you too Avner, give the minimum of respect and read until the end.

Before we begin to try to restore our name, we have one personal question for you: If we did all that you describe, you were a part of it; you were the March 2006 sniper team sergeant (by the way, this team by definition didn’t do arrests, refer to your own testimony, No. 58601 from 2011, in which you described other things), commander! What was done was your responsibility; so why did you run from responsibility? You turned a blind eye! You led soldiers behind you; don’t say that you received orders – you gave them! If there was truth in your words, then today you should be the one facing trial.

Let’s start from the last ones, the ones from the patrol in Hebron:

You claimed that there was a position with a “machine gun” which kills with a radius of 50 meters(!) and the operator would play a kind of video game and shoot innocent people and cars, and more than this, you claimed that there would be screams of encouragement on the radio, and so he would shoot.

We were in Hebron as a team of recruits who hadn’t yet finished training, for a period of about two weeks. Which machine guns did we use? With a killing radius of precisely 50 meters? Even a grenade launcher doesn’t kill at that kind of radius. Did you even fire so much as a single live bullet anywhere other than in the direction of a cardboard target in the course of your training? We didn’t. Since when are there cries of “come on, come on, shoot!” on the radio? The normal command on the radio is that “fire is permitted”. Nobody screams at anyone, and nobody permits live fire in the direction of innocent civilians or random vehicles.

You spoke about a big football game which occurs every four years (you meant the World Cup final?) and the soldiers are frustrated that they cannot see the game, so they enter a house with a satellite dish, tie up the people there, and sit down to watch the football game (at the time of training, remember?). The only World Cup final which took place while were in the army was in 2006 in June/July – just before the beginning of the Second Lebanon War. We performed a military mission in the Nablus area and from there we proceeded northwards. We weren’t in the Hebron area at all; we were 120km away from there, in fact. In Nablus nobody went into any houses to see a football game or selected a house because of its satellite dish.

On one thing you do speak the truth, and as usual, the rest is devoid of context and distorted. The team from the unit was indeed on a mission at the time of the World Cup final. As with every mission undertaken in the unit, the house was selected according to operational parameters alone, by officers who we were blessed to be under their command. You worked closely with them, Avner, so you certainly know this. And yes, in every house like this of ‘uninvolved people’, there is indeed a family (for the most part) whose routine is disturbed. But we can attest to the fact that when we were forced to do this, dozens, perhaps hundreds, of times all of us always extended as courteous as possible an attitude to the family, while keeping in mind the operational target for which we were sent out on the mission.

The protocol for houses of ‘uninvolved people’ was that the occupants of the house would be required to go into one room, and they would generally go to sleep there while one soldier stands guard outside the room. In the case above, since the mission was longer than usual, the family watched the game in their lounge. Needless to say, nobody was bound tightly. Nobody is ever completely tied up unless they are arrested. So it’s true, the soldier who watched over the family also glanced at the television which was already on. We won’t deny this. But it’s a far cry from the picture you tried to paint of a unit of sadistic soldiers whose first interest is to mistreat the civilian population.

You present us as a barbaric bunch who kill people who are only holding a cell phone.

To remind you: In every single company discussion the general protocols for opening fire, the protocol was mentioned in the unit, and it was that before opening fire, it’s vital to verify that it’s known which weapon the suspect is carrying in hand, whether it’s a Kalashnikov, a (burning) Molotov cocktail, or an M16, and if we are unable to say which weapon he’s holding, then apparently we’re not sure that it’s a weapon at all, and we don’t fire. Should we remind you about the hospital in Jenin? From where they shot at us almost every time we passed by, including from a PK sub-machine gun, and the commands were to not return fire, and so it was.

Can you give the name of your friend who shot indiscriminately?

You tarnish the name of the unit and make claims about a lack of values in a place where if a soldier so much as sat down on a bed in the parents’ room in a house in Jenin, he would be sentenced to court martial by the unit commander for disrespect of property, and his punishment would be a month on base. These were the values, from first day of training, of the soldiers who fought with you.

[Our] War isn’t an ideal but a necessity, exceptional cases such as they are do not represent the education or the values of your friends in the unit specifically or of Israeli soldiers in general.

This biased and one-sided show which you presented in front of the UN creates a false image which fuels hatred of Israel around the world and doesn’t contribute in any way to making the army “more moral”.

Furthermore, it doesn’t match the ten commandments which the organization you represent is based upon, and more’s the pity.

We demand you to immediately cease bearing false witness about your military service and to stop demonizing your friends in the unit and crew who gave their all, and continue to give their all, in order to safeguard the security of the people of Israel.

-Members of the Paratrooper Orev unit

http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2016/01/bts-spokespersons-lies-refuted-by-his.html#.Vpg4NPlVikr

https://www.facebook.com/Israel.MyTruth/posts/1587493011489953

[OriZ 3,157]

"Three Palestinians killed as daily violence grinds on." This was the headline on the website of US TV network CBS on Wednesday, following a terror attack in Jerusalem in which Border Police officer Hadar Cohen, 19, was murdered and her colleague moderately wounded.

CBS headline on Jerusalem terror attack, before being changed. (Photo: Screenshot)

The three Palestinians killed were the terrorists who carried out the combined shooting and stabbing attack, and were shot dead at the scene.

The Government Press Office (GPO) announced that it was weighing up "far-reaching" measures in response.

Zionist Union MK Tzipi Livni's response to the CBS headline.

"This time we will not let it pass quietly," GPO head Nitzan Chen said on Wednesday. "We are considering rescinding press passes from journalists and editors who are negligent in their work and present headlines that flip the reality."

Al Jazeera's breaking news tweet about the terror attack in Jerusalem.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Jerusalem also reacted angrily to the distortions. MFA Spokesperson Emmanuel Nahshon said: "The audacity of CBS' headline is unparalleled. The headline is biased and false."

Following the rapid intervention of the MFA and the GPO, the CBS headline was changed to: "Palestinians kill Israeli officer, wound another before being killed."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4761809,00.html

This is beyond disgusting, and goes way beyond freedom of the press. Rescinding the press passes from those journalists would be more than warranted, and any other journalist needs to know that theirs will be as well, if they do not report the truth. If they lie, and incite via distorting the facts, they need to know they will be gone. End of story.

[TBoneTX 46,379]

The headline-writers tend to be different from the writers of the articles; regardless, the editors are ultimately responsible.

[OriZ 3,157]

It doesn't matter...if your news agency does such a poor job, whether it's the editor or the reporter(and alot of times it has been the reporters - on tv) they should all be held accountable.

[TBoneTX 46,379]

Noted. Too many journalism students today view that career as their chance to "change the world" rather than to report news fairly and accurately.

[Expat1 971]

It doesn't matter...if your news agency does such a poor job, whether it's the editor or the reporter(and alot of times it has been the reporters - on tv) they should all be held accountable.

I'm not getting into this any more than to quietly say that where it happens matters now, and when it does not happen inside the borders of Israel it is not the Palestinians who are viewed as the aggressors.

That has not always been the case but it is becoming a new reality that it seems is not sinking in over there.

[OriZ 3,157]

I'm not getting into this any more than to quietly say that where it happens matters now, and when it does not happen inside the borders of Israel it is not the Palestinians who are viewed as the aggressors.

That has not always been the case but it is becoming a new reality that it seems is not sinking in over there.

Show me any other country in the world that's treated that way?

Look, you know where I stand on the disputed territories(the first post in this thread should be a reminder), but unlike some I can also differentiate between that and being fair to people who get killed. The fact that this happened in the old city(which was annexed decades ago so technically it is a part of Israel but we've already had that discussion) doesn't mean you can completely ignore a victim and pretend they never got killed and that the only people who got killed were the ones who killed her. I find that to be quite repulsive.

When my wife was in Israel we visited the old city many times. I don't believe we should have boycotted it just because it is in dispute. Just like many tourists don't, just like the Palestinians who work there don't, we too, wanted to visit and see things. Does that mean we were fair targets? I don't believe so. Not to mention the fact that this happens alot in the media and even if it happens in cities that everyone considers and acknowledges as part of Israel. This one latter example just happens to be from Jerusalem but really it is no different.

[Expat1 971]

Show me any other country in the world that's treated that way?

Look, you know where I stand on the disputed territories(the first post in this thread should be a reminder), but unlike some I can also differentiate between that and being fair to people who get killed. The fact that this happened in the old city(which was annexed decades ago so technically it is a part of Israel but we've already had that discussion) doesn't mean you can completely ignore a victim and pretend they never got killed and that the only people who got killed were the ones who killed her. I find that to be quite repulsive.

When my wife was in Israel we visited the old city many times. I don't believe we should have boycotted it just because it is in dispute. Just like many tourists don't, just like the Palestinians who work there don't, we too, wanted to visit and see things. Does that mean we were fair targets? I don't believe so. Not to mention the fact that this happens alot in the media and even if it happens in cities that everyone considers and acknowledges as part of Israel. This one latter example just happens to be from Jerusalem but really it is no different.

(sigh) Oriz it has nothing to do with caring or not caring. The whole mess over there is an exhausting and impossible quagmire. There is a principle that we pick up from birth, and that principle is that there or in our own country, and it applies to our own selves - we cannot step over our property line, be agressive to our neighbors, and expect any legal standing no matter their response. The castle doctrine is hundreds of years old and predates us all. You must understand that it applies to everyone, regardless of orgin.

It is a mistake to believe that I have a deep love for arabs LOL as much as it is a mistake to think i have a dislike for Jews. The best and worst of humanity is equally distributed among all in my experience. This annexation was not a legal action and this is the official position of our government and our country. Based on this, on their side Israel is the agressor and on your side they are the agressor. In this case, Israel is viewed to be the agressor.