Unless I missed something, they reported that the cabinet met to discuss how the war should go. There seems to be debate on its aims. Now debate? Shouldn't there have been clear war aims before we attacked the Gazan missile launchers on Shabbat?
The TV journalists are interviewing a government official and keep asking about cease fire and what's the war aim. All he could say was that the government wants a "significant change." That doesn't say much. Ambiguous is the best word I can think of.
Avigdor Lieberman is now on the program. He's speaking clearly. He said that an attack like this should have happened from the very beginning seven years ago, when the terrorists first began launching kassams at Sderot and Gush Katif. He's right. He'll get support for telling the truth. He also calls it a lie that there's international pressure on us to stop. That's a myth. I agree with him on that, too.
Now someone else (a Prof. Stern) is on saying that without a clear war aim this war is a waste. And I agree with that too. This is starting to be like Olmert-Livni's first war, which I likened to A bissel ointment on the gangrene.
To quote King Solomon:
Nothing's new under the sun.
5 comments:
Glad to see that others are realizing what's really going on. I wrote about this on Motzaei Shabbat
JudeaNow!: Criminal Israeli Government Enters Gaza
That's what I've been saying, too, even call the war the Election Campaign.
We know anyone is a fool for even contemplating a cease-fire now.
I don't know the advantage of letting the public know the objectives of a major operation, especially the Israeli media and public.
We don't have to know that information. We only have to keep seeing our leaders keeping the attack on, giving the army freedom of action, and not talking (leaking to the media) crap about closing window of opportunity and cease-fire.
B'ezrat Hashem, they will not stop until Hamas begs for mercy. Anything before that is a loss for us.
I never realized how biased CNN was until I sat watching them on TV. Their quetions to Arabs were meant to open doors for anti-Israel statements while questions to Israelis were meant to challange, e.g. "Have you seen the pictures of Gazans having to dig for bodies w/ their hands?" One proogandist, I mean journalist, trid putting a spin on the Gaza campaign by calling it "the new Palestinian uprising."
They've devoted numerous articles & videos on thier website to worldwide anti-Israel demonstration but I having seen them show any that were pro-Israel. They claimed that Israelis was split on the Gaza campaign & even quoted an article in Haaretz that was so anti_israel it could have been written in Damascus. (I wonder if Barak will call him a traitor, or does he only call nationalist Jews that.)
Last night, CNN had their medical commentator describe the physical trauma caused by Israeli bombs.
Oh yes, CNN also has a website in Arabic.
Josh, whether the public knows the aims or not may not be of crucial importance, but it's frightening to think that the ruling troika hasn't yet decided on them.
Aaron K. Thanks for the input. I was in NY during most of Olmert-Livni's first war. My parents don't have a computer, and I found the lack of coverage even more unnerving. For me, with a son who was in active reserve duty, the 2-3 minutes per hour were not enough. And what they did show, just got me upset.
Post a Comment