Ynet says, Iran is not an existential threat:
Former Mossad Chief Ephraim Halevy warned against an Israeli strike on Iran, saying that the results of a confrontation could be devastating for the Mideast.
"The State of Israel cannot be destroyed," he told Ynet on Friday. "An attack on Iran could affect not only Israel, but the entire region for 100 years. "The former head of the Israeli secret service said Thursday during an army boarding school reunion that while Iran should be prevented from becoming a nuclear power, its capabilities are still "far from posing an existential threat to Israel." "The growing haredi radicalization poses a bigger risk than Ahmadinejad," Halevy said, adding that "the ultra-Orthodox extremism has darkened our lives."
Netanyahu thinks that the heads of Mossad and Shin Bet may have leaked plans for the attack so as to undermine them. Netanyahu is good for Israel like Nixon was good for the Republican Party.
Brits said to be thinking of Iran attack-- Sullivan can't imagine a crazier strategy, with devastating consequences... (thanks to Voskamp)
Israel will rot from within, no doubt of it. But how much of the world will still be standing by the time it collapses into a puddle of black goo?
Halevy cites “ultra-Orthodix extremism” without (as quoted here) explaining what he means. He might mean the settler movement, the settler-price-tag movement, the settler-pogrom movement, or merely shutting down certain public bus-lines on Saturdays.
I’d like to know what he meant and what average Israelis understood him to mean. Can anyone help with this question?
From the Ynet article:
“Political-Security Cabinet member and Housing and Construction Minister Ariel Atias slammed Halevy for claiming that the “ultra-Orthodox radicalization” poses a bigger threat for Israel than a nuclear Iran.”
“Halevy’s statements are shocking and inciting and they divide the people of Israel at a time when it needs unity more than ever,” Atias said, urging the former Israeli intelligence head to apologize.
The Shas minister claimed he had a hard time understanding “how a Jewish man, who was the head of the Mossad, expresses himself in such a shameful, untruthful and provocative manner against the Jewish public, whose only sin is keeping the Jewish people’s heritage alive without enforcing it upon anyone.”
***
Ariel Atias has two heavy-duty cabinet portfolios; Halevy is retired.
Hops, are you listening? Who do you think has more clout these days?
Don’t know what average Israelis understand him to mean, but given the context I think he is addressing those nutters who believe “Persia” must be destroyed to fulfill a Midrashic end-times prophecy.
Stuxnet’s source code had numerical references to scripture passages mentioning Persia. JPost and Ynet always have some lunatics in the comments section reference an apocalypse then quote the scripture it is interpreted from.
What I want to know is if this is a recent interpretation or an old one? Prophecy is for suckers. If you prophesize that you’ll stand up and sit down, then stand up and sit down, congratulations! You fulfilled a prophecy! The problem is these people are interpreting an interpretation and I have no clue how they get current events from what they are interpreting. It is wishful thinking on their part wanting their messiah (Melech HaMoshiach) to return no different that the rapturous dispensationalist fundies.
Charon — Thanks. Yes, he could mean (by ultra-orthodox threat) the entire movement in Israel toward war with Iran. I didn’t read it that way, however, because he could so much more understandably have said that the push-toward-war-with-Iran was more dangerous than Iran is. Is Bibi ultra-orthodox?
No. The Haredim in Israel are largely antizionist. The Haredi threat is demographic, the growth of a parasitic population to the point where it will soon kill the host.
“The Haredim in Israel are largely antizionist.”
What about their rabbis, Potsherd? What on earth do they think they’re up to? Surely they’re not apolitical. It just doesn’t add up to me.
Haredi politics is all about control. It’s all internal. They want subsidies for their lifestyle, given that most of the men don’t work. Housing allowances, child allowances, subsidies for their schools, etc. They support the occupation because they get to steal land in the W Bank for cheap housing in segregated haredi-only towns. They don’t give a damn about Iran.
Are these the same ultra orthodox people around in 70AD? It didn’t end well then either.
Halevy is irresponsible and wants to have his cake and eat it too. If Iran is attacked and there are dire consequences, which there no doubt will be, he can say I told you so.
Like most Israeli and their supporters the double standard that allows israel to have nuclear weapons without signing the non proliferation treaty or allowing any inspectors while condeming Iran which does not yet have these weapons but has signed the NPT seems perfectly normal.
Force will be needed to stop iran from acquiring the bomb so if you against iran having nuclear weapons you are a hypocrite if you are against the use of force to stop iran from acquiring any.
He doesn’t explain what or anything should be done about the “ultra-Orthodox” because he doesn’t want to be responsible for anything done to them.
In any case the war has already started with cyber attacks, assasinations, and who knows what else. The US is waging an undeclared war on Iran because the Iranians have the audacity to want a tiny fraction of the same arms that US and Israel have.
I hope iran gets nuclear weapons quickly because it maybe the only way to deter us agression. Pakistan, China, India, North Korea, Russia have enough nuclear weapons between them to destroy the world. Did anybody lose any sleep last night worrying about these weapons? The world will be safer with a nuclear iran.
“I hope iran gets nuclear weapons quickly because it maybe the only way to deter us agression. Pakistan, China, India, North Korea, Russia have enough nuclear weapons between them to destroy the world. Did anybody lose any sleep last night worrying about these weapons? The world will be safer with a nuclear iran.”
I agree with you on this, USD, if you add the US and Israel to your list. The nuclear weapons genie is out of the bottle.
We need some more Rosenbergs.
>> The world will be safer with a nuclear [I]ran.
The world may not be safer, but Iran sure as hell will be! Given the existential threats which continue to be made against it by people in positions of power to actually implement those threats, I hope Iran is able to get some nukes up and running ASAP!
I hate nuclear weapons and nuclear proliferation but the US botched that when they let Israel keep their nukes on the sly.
In this case, having nukes as a deterrent will save millions of Iranian lives. Iran has demonstrated far, far more restraint than Israel ever has.
sullivan shares some of Bruce Riedel’s analysis
They don’t need to rely on Mexican drug cartels to hit inside America.
i find it almost inconceivable we could attack iran and not expect (and deserve) retaliation inside our country. no wonder ows doesn’t want us to focus on foreign policy. it just keeps getting worse and worse.
I think/feel that a nuclear Iran is preferable to an Israeli attack on Iran and preferable to an American attack on Iran.
When the question hits the headlines I have to wonder who is behind this. I suppose that those who favor an attack might be preparing the public for the necessary shock, but I guess those who oppose an attack are trying to alert the public so that the public (or the US) will rein in those who would launch an attack.
Ultimately, the disagreement between the generals in the cabinet room and the former chiefs of Mossad is one over strategy.
Ehud Barak is a longtime military guy. Former Mossad directors prefer to see Israel use covert action against Iran.
One must bear in mind the Iranian scientists killed in recent years, and the computer virus attack on Iran’s facilities.
Military generals, however, believe that brute force is always the answer.
And while the Mossad and the Shaback warn that the ultra orthodox pose a greater threat to Israel, it bears mentioning that both branches have historically been led by secular Zionists, that is until early 2011, when the colonists managed to install one of their “darlings” (As Uri Avnery put it) as director of the Shabak.
From wiki:
“Shabak…. officially known in English as Israel Security Agency (ISA), and commonly known in English as the Shin Bet (a two-letter Hebrew abbreviation of the name),[2] is Israel’s internal security service. Its motto is “Magen VeLo Yera’e” (Hebrew: מגן ולא יראה, lit. “Defender that shall not be seen” or “The unseen shield”). It is one of three principal organizations of the Israeli Intelligence Community, alongside Aman (the military intelligence of the IDF) and Mossad.”
Thanks for your info, Avi G. ‘Know thy enemy’, as the saying goes.
RE: “Netanyahu is good for Israel like Nixon was good for the Republican Party.” ~ Cap’n Weiss
JOSEPH LIEBERMAN: “Bibi Netanyahu is a great man…”
SOURCE – link to mondoweiss.net
I’ve been arguing for quite some time that religious Zionism (both Jewish and Christian) represents a much greater threat to Israel than any other factor. It’s heartening to see a former Mossad head concurring with me. :)
But I go a step farther than Halevy: my best guess is that Jews themselves will eventually judge Zionism as a whole to have been the most self-destructive false messianic movement in their history. That is where I am placing my bet in the casino of world history. We’ve seen this pattern numerous times before among messianic ethnic nationalist movements, which have strong innate tendency to implode in spectacular ways.
agreed re self destructive. i think its a death wish ideology. from the holocaust actually
“i think its a death wish ideology. from the holocaust actually”
Phil, are you reading Piterberg’s “The Returns of Zionism” by chance? His chapter on Herzl had echoes of this sort of ideology, imo.
no i got to get that book, thanks patm
Phil,
On the bright side, Jewish civilization is chock full of valuable and positive assets and resources that will easily survive the collapse of Zionism, if it does indeed collapse.
Jewish creativity can easily thrive without Zionism, and it often thrives best without Zionism, in rich and complex interactions with other cultures. My impression overall is that walled ethnic ghettos for any group tend to stifle creative energy.
But one should notice that Israelis have made remarkable creative contributions to science and technology, and have particularly excelled in high-tech ventures. I am guessing, however, that most of those Israelis feel as much at home in the United States and Western Europe as in Israel.
It is very careless to describe “ultra-orthodox” as any form of enemy.
There are all kinds among the ultra-orthodox, almost all apolitical.
“Careless,” Richard?
Spitting on Gentiles seems to me a political act. So does gender discrimination. See Kate’s Nov. 5th list for articles on both topics.
The spitting is a religious act. It’s aimed not so much at ‘gentiles’ but at Christian priests, identifiably clothed as such. It’s a ghetto custom, something like averting the evil eye.
Spittng shows disdain, contempt, total lack of respect.
Everybody knows that. Nobody, at his right mind, does it to innocent people.
Can you imagine walking down the road and spitting on people passing by?? I wonder how they would react?
Would they smile at you with an understanding in their eyes?: “Oh, this is his Ghetto custom, he has to do it”. ” I will just wipe the spit from my face and continue walking, like nothing happened”. “What a lovely people they are, sooo friendly and welcoming.”
“They spit really well, tons of pracitse”.
Again, it doesn’t add up for me, Potsherd. (And I’ve just read Israel Shahak’s “Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of 3000 Years.” I do understand that most Haredi stem from eastern Europe where ‘classical Judaism’ lingered on and on and on.)
But as the old saying goes: “Every act is a political act.” Even spitting!
Haredi rabbis by condoning such actions are making a political statement. And I cannot believe that these same rabbis are not zionists, i.e. that they don’t want to get their hands on all the land in Palestine.
Spitting — which is nasty, disgusting and loathsome — is an effective method for provoking retaliatory physical violence. It’s a very primal form of provocation guaranteed to incite rage. So why do they do it?
Those same rabbis would condone spitting on Christians even in the Islamic State of Palestine. Although they probably wouldn’t get away with it.
The political aspect of the problem is the fear that the government has of these people, that they won’t enforce the laws against their activity.
“The political aspect of the problem is the fear that the government has of these people, that they won’t enforce the laws against their activity.”
Why does the government fear the Haredi? What levers do they hold?
Do Haredi women vote as well as the men? Do the rabbis choose who they vote for? Is this another aspect of the “democratic” state of Israel?
The haredim are bloc voters, and they vote as their rabbis dictate. Women, as well. Their parties have a significant number of seats in the Knesset.
But more than that, they simply have no respect for the law in Israel. At a word from the rabbis, they come boiling out of their ghettoes to riot, throw stones, burn garbage, and disrupt any action they disapprove of. And they spit. If one of them is arrested, mobs beseige the police stations, and the police are afraid to touch them. They scream that the police are antisemites and Nazis – everyone is a Nazi to them.
There’s a sense among some Israelis that these fanatics are the only “real Jews”, that they possess some kind of holiness, and they deserve a pass, because of it. Of course, this is exactly what the haredi say.
It’s aimed not so much at ‘gentiles’ but at Christian priests, identifiably clothed as such. It’s a ghetto custom, something like averting the evil eye.
Elliot Horowitz (“The Jews and the Cross in the Middle Ages”) in fact suggests that the mediaeval Jewish practice of spitting in the presence of the cross may have contained elements of superstition (the belief that saliva neutralises the power of evil spirits) as well as contempt and defiance (in the case of martyrs).
In the case of our modern-day expectorators, I think that the phenomenon goes beyond the mere expression of contempt. It reflects a kind of fanatical arrogance that has thrived in the Jewish ethnocracy – even among those who reject the ideological basis of Zionism. There is more than one way of feeling or acting like “lords of the land”.
Thanks for answering my questions, Potsherd. I’ve two more that come out of what you’ve just written.
“out of their ghettoes” Do you mean their settlements on the hilltops? Or ‘gated communities’ in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, etc? I guess what I want to know is, can they be found all over Israel?
***
“There’s a sense among some Israelis that these fanatics are the only “real Jews”, that they possess some kind of holiness, and they deserve a pass, because of it.”
Who are these “some Israelis” who support the ultra-Orthodox? Wouldn’t they have to be fanatics as well?
patm – the hilltop settlements are where the zionist fanatics live, most of the religious zionists. The two groups aren’t the same at all, although they’ve been to merge a bit at the edges very recently.
The ghettos are places like Bnei Brak and Mea Shearim, crowded urban slums, most of them concentrated near Jerusalem for the holiness factor. (B B is an exception in being near Tel Aviv)
A large proportion of the secular Israeli public despises these people. But mostly they’re terrified that they will move into their neighborhood and take it over.
Shmuel – it’s not just a Jewish thing. Spitting was widely regarded as protective against the evil eye, against witches, etc. Priests would fall into that category to a Jew.
There’s a custom when making a deal, both parties spit into their hands, then shake. Spit has mana.
it’s not just a Jewish thing. Spitting was widely regarded as protective against the evil eye, against witches, etc.
I know. I’ve come across it in Russian folk tales – Baba Yaga and all that. Something to do with demons being afraid of water, I think.
In Yiddish, the onomatopoeic expression “tfoo tfoo tfoo” (later incorporated into Modern Hebrew) is used – with or without the words keyn eyne hore (without the evil eye) – when describing or wishing for something good.
Witty,
With which branches of the ultra-Orthodox do you sympathize?
Oh, so you aren’t bothered by the Spanish Inquisition, then?
>> It is very careless to describe “ultra-orthodox” as any form of enemy.
>> There are all kinds among the ultra-orthodox …
There are all kinds among “Hamas” and “dissent”, but that doesn’t prevent either of those groups from routinely being very carelessly described as any form of enemy.
Interestingly, too, I noticed that neither Phil’s comment at the head of this thread, nor the Ynet article he links to, uses the word “enemy” to describe “ultra-orthodox”.