I looked back into US history and found that two US Secretaries of War were fired in the middle of wars. James Madison fired William Eustis in the middle of the War of 1812 for incompetence. The incompetence actually threatened the independence of the country. Abraham Lincoln fired Simon Cameron in the middle of the American Civil War for a combination of incompetence and corruption. Again, the incompetence threatened the country. Both were basically political hacks who were in the job to satisfy important political blocs. A third political appointee, Henry Hines Woodring, was fired by Franklin Roosevelt in 1940 because Woodring was an isolationist who opposed preparations for the war that most saw as likely. Woodring wasn't exactly a political hack but he was also appointed to satisfy an important political bloc. Roosevelt replaced Woodring with Henry Stimson, who had held the same job under William Howard Taft. Stimson was a rare Republican non-isolationist. (So was Frank Knox, whom Roosevelt names as Secretary of the Navy the next day. And ironically so was Wendell Willkie, the ex-Democrat who had just become the Republican nominee for that Presidential election that year.)
The office of Secretary of Defense was created in 1947. The US had four Defense Secretaries during the Korean War and five during the Vietnam War. Policy differences, power struggles within the top levels of the executive branch, and changes of Presidents contributed to this revolving door, which I am old enough to remember.
Israel is a robust democracy. Every sector, yes EVERY sector, votes its interests. Why not look inward and place the blame on the only people you can influence: the Dati-Leumi. They are complicit in everything that Bibi and the haredim do. They can collapse the government tomorrow if they believe draft evasion or Gallant’s firing is a problem.
Perhaps it is the Dati-Leumi camp that is held hostage by it political leaders. Maybe they need to protest.
Stop lecturing everyone else and try to influence those closest to you.
You're not wrong, and I for one spent a very late night earlier this week sending emails to a bunch of DL and Likud ministers and MKs who should be protecting my interests and aren't. Obviously, they don't read the emails, but I assume their aides keep a tally
What exactly do you want the day ileum I community to do differently than they are doing?They are getting it right .The Chareidim are not .
Israel is not just any Democracy, but the only Jewish one. If you fail to understand this crucial distinction, Hashem will once again rem8nd you, and ALL of America Yisrael. The nation of Israel is In both Israel and The diaspora. Neither party is getting the concept right .
It’s all the Tanach and yet we ignore at our own peril
In the Tanach the wicked kingdoms that abandoned the Torah were wiped out and exiled. We probably don't want to start using Tanach comparisons to the "Jewish" state, except as a dire warning.
Look Mr Happy..You guys can fight over sources, and I think it's very unlikely that anyone will convince anyone else. But, we have a problem.
We have soldiers in sadir (compulsory service) who are beyond exhausted, soldiers in miluim who have been away from their families more than they are home, marriage issues, kids who are having a hard time, businesses collapsing, hospitals full of wounded.
Where do you Hareidim see yourselves in all of this? Not your problem?
The chareidim see that it is impractical for their community to join the army. Just like you would understand that it impractical to ask American Jews to drop everything and make aliyah so that they can fight. Chareidim *much* more so. There may be things you can do to get more chareidim to join than currently, but the fundamental issues will remain for the foreseeable future. The faster you realize that, the less frustrated you will get.
Great, so that's where they say, "no". Now where do they say, "yes"? The current situation is both unjust and unsustainable. After real negotiations, there needs to be a way to solve it.
I agree that chareidim need to make efforts in other areas that would not be impractical for them. Things like כתות כוננות. Or serving in Hatzalah. Or men who are not in yeshiva serving in chareidi-oonly army units. See this:
"✅ שילה פריד: בכירי צה"ל צברו בשנה האחרונה שעות רבות אצל המנהיג החרדי הרב הירש. הרב מקשיב להם היטב, יורד לעומק העניין, קורא דו"חות ומסמכים, מבין את הצורך הצבאי בכוח אדם, אבל תמיד בסוף השיחה שואל "האם אתם רשאים להגיע לסיכום עם הישיבות, או שהמילה האחרונה בכלל של הדרג המשפטי?" שם זה נתקע ."
Agreed, but this needs to be part of the negotiation. The buffet problem is that the rabbisc want to keep a grip, to keep the men in there yeshiva (because otherwise they're in there army), or else to keep control over those who don't strictly because they're responsible to sign the lie that says they are studying. It's a tough one to crack. But it needs to be cracked.
If you have such a cynical view of your opponent, obviously you are not willing to engage in good faith. And then I see you wondering above about "real negotiations". Making the reasonable assumption that your approach is representative of Israeli society in general-well, that's part of why we are here.
I stopped at his non-refutation of #1. The sources on the Rambam are there, even if RNS didn't cite them and only summarized their opinions. They include the רדב"ז, RCK, RAK and the חת"ס. Not every ת"ח is included in the elite club that the Rambam is talking about. And there's no real חידוש in what those commentators have written- it's there plainly in the words of the Rambam.
When that blogger writes, "There is no evidence of this." he's at best exaggerating. He could have written, "there is only a little evidence", or "I disagree with the evidence" or "I don't need no stinkin' evidence."
Maybe you shouldn't have stopped. Those sources don't say what you claim. They simply point out that the Rambam doesn't mean by ויזכה לו בעולם הזה דבר המספיק לו to take tzedakah, since the Rambam holds it's אסור for talmidei chachamim to take tzedakah. There are many things the Rambam holds are אסור, which we don't pasken like. That doesn't mean we can't pasken like his halacha of לא שבט לוי בלבד.
Did you read the כת"ס (quoting his father)? Do you know what citation of Rav Ahron Kotler that I referred to? Do you check RCK in his קרית מלך?
Did you check those sources? Because nothing you write seems to indicate you know what I'm referring to. You haven't addressed their understanding of this Rambam; you're addressing a different, but related issue.
The "halacha" states that "not only שבט לוי", but also a certain select group of people that he defines. I'm not talking about his ruling concerning charity and ת"ח. I'm talking about the definition about these select group of people.
He writes:
ופרק מעל צוארו עול החשבונות הרבים אשר בקשו בני האדם
Not every ת"ח falls under this description. Even if the רבמ"ם would permit and encourage ת"ח to take money, they still would not be among those who "cast off worldly concerns". They are not whom the רמב"ם is talking about. And that's exactly what Rav Ahron Kotler and the חתם סופר say- those ת"ח who take money are not akin to לוי but יששכר.
Ephraim. I saw the Radvaz. I saw the piece from Rav Kotler. I saw the Derech Emiunah. I saw the Kiryas Melech. They are not saying what you claim. You are distorting their words. There is no evidence that somebody who takes money is not among those who "cast off worldly concerns". To the contrary, the Leviim, to whom the comparison is being made, took money. However, the Rambam holds it is forbidden for talmidei chachamim to take money for their learning, and if they did so, they would be עבריינים in the opinion of the Rambam and presumably couldn't be included in לא שבט לוי בלבד because of this עבירה. But we don't pasken like that.
He says that there are יששכר type scholars who depend on their brothers for their sustenance. Nothing new there, kollel support has always been promoted as a יששכר-זבולן deal. One Charedi educator declared working wives as the זבולן of our times. You're going to tell me the whole יששכר-זבולן comparison was a lie?
"To the contrary, the Leviim, to whom the comparison is being made, took money. "
See what you've done here? You ignore the words of Rav Kotler and start making your own diyukim. You're attempting to create a new category: a scholar who is both יששכר and זבולן. Go ahead and do so on the basis of your own reasoning. But that's not what Rav Kotler said.
Simarly, the כת"ס citing his father writes:
ארון הקדש שבו הלוחות מונחים ועמד בקדשי קדשים מרמז על ת״ח כרחב״ד שהוא קודש קדשים ואינו נהנה מעוה״ז די לו בקב חרובים
So tell me, does the average kollel student suffice with a kav of carob? Or does he enjoy an existence, though frugal, is well above the standards of רחב״ד?
"I saw the Kiryas Melech."
He writes: " כל העוסק בתורה נכסיו מצליחין לו"
Does that mean taking money from others? Or does it mean, that one's own means will be blessed by Heaven?
"There is no evidence that somebody who takes money is not among those who "cast off worldly concerns"."
Money is a worldly concern. 2300 shekel a month for day care subsidies is a worldly concern. And the rest of the discounts, subsidies, stipends, dowries and outright charity are worldly concerns. You don't want "evidence", you want a definition.
So your point in quoting Rav Aharon is that it is impossible to be part of Yissachar and Levi at the same time? I can agree with that. According to Rav Aharon, it would be inconsistent to identify with both Yissachar and Levi, and somebody who identifies as Yissachar should not seek a petur from the army on the grounds of being part of Levi. That has nothing to do with your baseless reading of Rav Kotler and the Rambam. Neither said it is impossible to take money and still identify as Levi. That's your own invention, and is inconsistent with Shevet Levi itself.
As for the Ksav Sofer which I have not seen yet, where is he talking about the Rambam and being like shevet Levi? Please cite the source or bring a full quotation, since I suspect you are misreading that also just like you did with the other sources.
The Kiryas Melech is another example of a misreading since he never says one needs to have נכסים in order to qualify as לא שבט לוי בלבד, he is just explaining that when the Rambam says ויזכה לו בעולם הזה דבר המספיק לו, this is what he is referring to. This would be because the Rambam לשיטתיה holds it is אסור for a talmid chacham to take צדקה. But we don't pasken like that.
פרק עליו עול חשבונות הרבים doesn't mean one can't have worldly concerns at all. This is again your own invention. The Leviim, to whom these people are being compared, had some worldly concerns, but less than the general population.
The accusatory tone is totally uncalled for, and demonstrates a lack of conviction in your own arguments.
I had the impression that the firing of Yoav Gallant had more to do with leaks of sensitive information regarding the hostages and military maneuvers.
Bibi threatened having Gallant removed from being defense minister months ago, but then something happened (I don't remember what) that convinced Bibi to retain him as Defense Minister.
No, it's to do with Hareidi, but also with Gallant, along with the senior generals, wanting to end the war and do everything to return the hostages. Given Netanyahu's coalition and his primary goal - starting in power and avoiding his trials - Gallant had to go.
"Victory as far as I'm concerned is to meet the goals of the war. It does not mean defeating the enemy, in no war did this happen, neither in the Six Day War nor in the Yom Kippur War."
Do you mean when Kissinger intervened to stop us conquering Cairo and Damascus? If so, in which universe would it have been better for us had we done so and achieved "victory"?...yaani as the allies achieved against Germany and Japan at the end of WW2... But even then, Germany and Japan still exist, so those who vanquished them still had to deal with them on the next day and every day since. So how do you see it going if Israel is fully "victorious"?
Are you serious? In what universe could it be worse than now?
Because Egypt sold the Yom Kippur war as a victory, their army is perched on our border, armed with modern American weapons, having breached the Camp David Accords many times - and we have no way to enforce the breach without creating major dipomatic issues. Worse, they have achieved acceptance as a nation by the western world (as opposed to Lebanon and Syria, for example). If Israel had received their unconditional surrender, occupied them, replaced their governments, and forced them to demilitarize (like America did to Japan), then there would be no existential threat to Israel from Egypt now.
It's a fair question I don't have a good or simple answer. I guess my problem is that we don't seem to be an independent country, making our own decisions and our own mistakes. We are frequently looked upon as the 51st state of the USA. I'm reminded of the official motto of New Hampshire, "Live Free or Die". Let us make our own mistakes; we'll live them them or die with them.
I get that feeling, which is why despite the fact that I want the war to end and the hostages home, I inspect to Trump's statement that he will end the war. It shouldn't be his decision.
But, we need to be clever, not righteous, yaani. Two millennia so we revolted against the Roman Empire, three times, each with more devastating results than the last (and that's not counting the Rebellion of the Exiles, about which little is known).
More recently, in 2016 the UK voted to leave the European Union, partly/largely for reasons of sovereignty. That feeling of sovereign is more being depleted with every trade deal the UK, eventually, signs. But the economic damage has been done, continues, and is palpable.
We need America, and we need the wider world too. We need to be smart, not righteous
Do you think America will invade us, like the Romans did?
If not, what is your worst case scenario, and how is it worse than the present situation - in which we are fighting a war that never ends, because we aren't fighting to win?
Maybe Bibi doesn’t like his ministers stabbing him in the back. Maybe he’s got a very difficult if not impossible job and he’d like to trust the people working for him. The PM or the POTUS can hire and fire whoever they damn well please. I think there’s more than one competent general in Israel.
I would be curious to hear the other side too. What about charedim who already serve? Why unproportional majority of the fallen had a kipah on their head? Likud is doing really well in the polls today.
As for clans. In 1948, to take one example, the village of Abu Ghosh west of Jerusalem didn't take part in the fighting. Its head was famously friendly with Ben Gurion. Abu Ghosh is now a largish town. These kind of local loyalties, overriding national ones, were the car in Europe for centuries. They're still there, represented in army regiments and football or rugby clubs. It was touch and go whether England would unite or remain a heptarchy , ie. with six separate kingdoms. It's nothing new. Hence, and given the failure of any other idea, my belief in there prescription: one solution - federation.
It is certainly terrible to see the Chareidim appeased this way. But what are Bibi's options? Dump the Chareidim and add so-called "centrists" to his coalition? The same people who demonstrate and strike during a war, who oppose a judicial reform that at most would restrict the powers of the Supreme Court in Israel to something similar to what it is in all other free countries, and threaten to quit if they don't get their way? What's the answer?
Lyndon Johnson was the best US President for Israel and nobody else is even close. Jason Maoz has written several articles about Johnson and Israel. Here are two:
Honestly, I'm not sure how one would compare Trump against Johnson but I do remember the parts about Johnson in Yehuda Avner's book, The Prime Ministers when Prime Minister Eshkol visited President Johnson on his ranch. It was very amusing. Worthwhile reading.
Johnson sent what were then unprecedented amounts of aid to Israel. Trump opposed Biden's recent aid package and Vance voted against it.
Johnson's advisor Clark Clifford, who would shortly be named Secretary of Defense, was absolutely outraged by the attack on the USS Liberty. Clifford had been a humongous supporter of Israel and was one of the reasons Truman recognized the new State of Israel over the objections of his Secretaries of State and Defense. Johnson ignored Clifford's advice and neither said nor did anything about the attack.
Decades earlier, Johnson had saved some Jews from the Nazis.
Prediction: when they finally boot Hertzi Halevi, whose main contribution to the war so far aside from porking up its initial phase, has been to run around doing photo ops and ripping Moshiach patches off guys, Slifkin is gonna post another outraged cringiad.
Meanwhile, the miluim guys keeping this war going are pretty united in their opinion of the senior echelons of the IDF. Napoleon's opinion of Talleyrand, basically.
I looked back into US history and found that two US Secretaries of War were fired in the middle of wars. James Madison fired William Eustis in the middle of the War of 1812 for incompetence. The incompetence actually threatened the independence of the country. Abraham Lincoln fired Simon Cameron in the middle of the American Civil War for a combination of incompetence and corruption. Again, the incompetence threatened the country. Both were basically political hacks who were in the job to satisfy important political blocs. A third political appointee, Henry Hines Woodring, was fired by Franklin Roosevelt in 1940 because Woodring was an isolationist who opposed preparations for the war that most saw as likely. Woodring wasn't exactly a political hack but he was also appointed to satisfy an important political bloc. Roosevelt replaced Woodring with Henry Stimson, who had held the same job under William Howard Taft. Stimson was a rare Republican non-isolationist. (So was Frank Knox, whom Roosevelt names as Secretary of the Navy the next day. And ironically so was Wendell Willkie, the ex-Democrat who had just become the Republican nominee for that Presidential election that year.)
The office of Secretary of Defense was created in 1947. The US had four Defense Secretaries during the Korean War and five during the Vietnam War. Policy differences, power struggles within the top levels of the executive branch, and changes of Presidents contributed to this revolving door, which I am old enough to remember.
I despise Bibi and hate the road he's taken Israel on. But I do get that a PM has the right to have a minister who isn't constantly battling him.
He has the right to fire him and we have the right to protest that decision.
It’s Bibi’s fault. It’s the Haredim’s fault. It’s everyone else’s fault. Except yours.
Israel is a robust democracy. Every sector, yes EVERY sector, votes its interests. Why not look inward and place the blame on the only people you can influence: the Dati-Leumi. They are complicit in everything that Bibi and the haredim do. They can collapse the government tomorrow if they believe draft evasion or Gallant’s firing is a problem.
Perhaps it is the Dati-Leumi camp that is held hostage by it political leaders. Maybe they need to protest.
Stop lecturing everyone else and try to influence those closest to you.
"Stop lecturing everyone else and try to influence those closest to you." Why not both?
You're not wrong, and I for one spent a very late night earlier this week sending emails to a bunch of DL and Likud ministers and MKs who should be protecting my interests and aren't. Obviously, they don't read the emails, but I assume their aides keep a tally
What exactly do you want the day ileum I community to do differently than they are doing?They are getting it right .The Chareidim are not .
Israel is not just any Democracy, but the only Jewish one. If you fail to understand this crucial distinction, Hashem will once again rem8nd you, and ALL of America Yisrael. The nation of Israel is In both Israel and The diaspora. Neither party is getting the concept right .
It’s all the Tanach and yet we ignore at our own peril
In the Tanach the wicked kingdoms that abandoned the Torah were wiped out and exiled. We probably don't want to start using Tanach comparisons to the "Jewish" state, except as a dire warning.
Hey dear compatriots! Did I hear people talking about chareidim and the draft? Fear not, because IM has released a post on this topic recently! https://irrationalistmodoxism.substack.com/p/10-myths-about-charedim-and-army
Look Mr Happy..You guys can fight over sources, and I think it's very unlikely that anyone will convince anyone else. But, we have a problem.
We have soldiers in sadir (compulsory service) who are beyond exhausted, soldiers in miluim who have been away from their families more than they are home, marriage issues, kids who are having a hard time, businesses collapsing, hospitals full of wounded.
Where do you Hareidim see yourselves in all of this? Not your problem?
The chareidim see that it is impractical for their community to join the army. Just like you would understand that it impractical to ask American Jews to drop everything and make aliyah so that they can fight. Chareidim *much* more so. There may be things you can do to get more chareidim to join than currently, but the fundamental issues will remain for the foreseeable future. The faster you realize that, the less frustrated you will get.
Great, so that's where they say, "no". Now where do they say, "yes"? The current situation is both unjust and unsustainable. After real negotiations, there needs to be a way to solve it.
I agree that chareidim need to make efforts in other areas that would not be impractical for them. Things like כתות כוננות. Or serving in Hatzalah. Or men who are not in yeshiva serving in chareidi-oonly army units. See this:
"✅ שילה פריד: בכירי צה"ל צברו בשנה האחרונה שעות רבות אצל המנהיג החרדי הרב הירש. הרב מקשיב להם היטב, יורד לעומק העניין, קורא דו"חות ומסמכים, מבין את הצורך הצבאי בכוח אדם, אבל תמיד בסוף השיחה שואל "האם אתם רשאים להגיע לסיכום עם הישיבות, או שהמילה האחרונה בכלל של הדרג המשפטי?" שם זה נתקע ."
https://bshch.blogspot.com/2024/11/blog-post_123.html
Agreed, but this needs to be part of the negotiation. The buffet problem is that the rabbisc want to keep a grip, to keep the men in there yeshiva (because otherwise they're in there army), or else to keep control over those who don't strictly because they're responsible to sign the lie that says they are studying. It's a tough one to crack. But it needs to be cracked.
If you have such a cynical view of your opponent, obviously you are not willing to engage in good faith. And then I see you wondering above about "real negotiations". Making the reasonable assumption that your approach is representative of Israeli society in general-well, that's part of why we are here.
I stopped at his non-refutation of #1. The sources on the Rambam are there, even if RNS didn't cite them and only summarized their opinions. They include the רדב"ז, RCK, RAK and the חת"ס. Not every ת"ח is included in the elite club that the Rambam is talking about. And there's no real חידוש in what those commentators have written- it's there plainly in the words of the Rambam.
When that blogger writes, "There is no evidence of this." he's at best exaggerating. He could have written, "there is only a little evidence", or "I disagree with the evidence" or "I don't need no stinkin' evidence."
Maybe you shouldn't have stopped. Those sources don't say what you claim. They simply point out that the Rambam doesn't mean by ויזכה לו בעולם הזה דבר המספיק לו to take tzedakah, since the Rambam holds it's אסור for talmidei chachamim to take tzedakah. There are many things the Rambam holds are אסור, which we don't pasken like. That doesn't mean we can't pasken like his halacha of לא שבט לוי בלבד.
"Those sources don't say what you claim."
Did you read the כת"ס (quoting his father)? Do you know what citation of Rav Ahron Kotler that I referred to? Do you check RCK in his קרית מלך?
Did you check those sources? Because nothing you write seems to indicate you know what I'm referring to. You haven't addressed their understanding of this Rambam; you're addressing a different, but related issue.
The "halacha" states that "not only שבט לוי", but also a certain select group of people that he defines. I'm not talking about his ruling concerning charity and ת"ח. I'm talking about the definition about these select group of people.
He writes:
ופרק מעל צוארו עול החשבונות הרבים אשר בקשו בני האדם
Not every ת"ח falls under this description. Even if the רבמ"ם would permit and encourage ת"ח to take money, they still would not be among those who "cast off worldly concerns". They are not whom the רמב"ם is talking about. And that's exactly what Rav Ahron Kotler and the חתם סופר say- those ת"ח who take money are not akin to לוי but יששכר.
Ephraim. I saw the Radvaz. I saw the piece from Rav Kotler. I saw the Derech Emiunah. I saw the Kiryas Melech. They are not saying what you claim. You are distorting their words. There is no evidence that somebody who takes money is not among those who "cast off worldly concerns". To the contrary, the Leviim, to whom the comparison is being made, took money. However, the Rambam holds it is forbidden for talmidei chachamim to take money for their learning, and if they did so, they would be עבריינים in the opinion of the Rambam and presumably couldn't be included in לא שבט לוי בלבד because of this עבירה. But we don't pasken like that.
" I saw the piece from Rav Kotler"
He says that there are יששכר type scholars who depend on their brothers for their sustenance. Nothing new there, kollel support has always been promoted as a יששכר-זבולן deal. One Charedi educator declared working wives as the זבולן of our times. You're going to tell me the whole יששכר-זבולן comparison was a lie?
"To the contrary, the Leviim, to whom the comparison is being made, took money. "
See what you've done here? You ignore the words of Rav Kotler and start making your own diyukim. You're attempting to create a new category: a scholar who is both יששכר and זבולן. Go ahead and do so on the basis of your own reasoning. But that's not what Rav Kotler said.
Simarly, the כת"ס citing his father writes:
ארון הקדש שבו הלוחות מונחים ועמד בקדשי קדשים מרמז על ת״ח כרחב״ד שהוא קודש קדשים ואינו נהנה מעוה״ז די לו בקב חרובים
So tell me, does the average kollel student suffice with a kav of carob? Or does he enjoy an existence, though frugal, is well above the standards of רחב״ד?
"I saw the Kiryas Melech."
He writes: " כל העוסק בתורה נכסיו מצליחין לו"
Does that mean taking money from others? Or does it mean, that one's own means will be blessed by Heaven?
"There is no evidence that somebody who takes money is not among those who "cast off worldly concerns"."
Money is a worldly concern. 2300 shekel a month for day care subsidies is a worldly concern. And the rest of the discounts, subsidies, stipends, dowries and outright charity are worldly concerns. You don't want "evidence", you want a definition.
So your point in quoting Rav Aharon is that it is impossible to be part of Yissachar and Levi at the same time? I can agree with that. According to Rav Aharon, it would be inconsistent to identify with both Yissachar and Levi, and somebody who identifies as Yissachar should not seek a petur from the army on the grounds of being part of Levi. That has nothing to do with your baseless reading of Rav Kotler and the Rambam. Neither said it is impossible to take money and still identify as Levi. That's your own invention, and is inconsistent with Shevet Levi itself.
As for the Ksav Sofer which I have not seen yet, where is he talking about the Rambam and being like shevet Levi? Please cite the source or bring a full quotation, since I suspect you are misreading that also just like you did with the other sources.
The Kiryas Melech is another example of a misreading since he never says one needs to have נכסים in order to qualify as לא שבט לוי בלבד, he is just explaining that when the Rambam says ויזכה לו בעולם הזה דבר המספיק לו, this is what he is referring to. This would be because the Rambam לשיטתיה holds it is אסור for a talmid chacham to take צדקה. But we don't pasken like that.
פרק עליו עול חשבונות הרבים doesn't mean one can't have worldly concerns at all. This is again your own invention. The Leviim, to whom these people are being compared, had some worldly concerns, but less than the general population.
The accusatory tone is totally uncalled for, and demonstrates a lack of conviction in your own arguments.
I had the impression that the firing of Yoav Gallant had more to do with leaks of sensitive information regarding the hostages and military maneuvers.
Bibi threatened having Gallant removed from being defense minister months ago, but then something happened (I don't remember what) that convinced Bibi to retain him as Defense Minister.
No, it's to do with Hareidi, but also with Gallant, along with the senior generals, wanting to end the war and do everything to return the hostages. Given Netanyahu's coalition and his primary goal - starting in power and avoiding his trials - Gallant had to go.
Direct quote from Yoav Gallant:
"Victory as far as I'm concerned is to meet the goals of the war. It does not mean defeating the enemy, in no war did this happen, neither in the Six Day War nor in the Yom Kippur War."
Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/397676
But wasn't that because of interference by the United States and (possibly, I can't recall for sure) other nations?
The US did nothing whatsoever in the Six Day War.
Do you mean when Kissinger intervened to stop us conquering Cairo and Damascus? If so, in which universe would it have been better for us had we done so and achieved "victory"?...yaani as the allies achieved against Germany and Japan at the end of WW2... But even then, Germany and Japan still exist, so those who vanquished them still had to deal with them on the next day and every day since. So how do you see it going if Israel is fully "victorious"?
Are you serious? In what universe could it be worse than now?
Because Egypt sold the Yom Kippur war as a victory, their army is perched on our border, armed with modern American weapons, having breached the Camp David Accords many times - and we have no way to enforce the breach without creating major dipomatic issues. Worse, they have achieved acceptance as a nation by the western world (as opposed to Lebanon and Syria, for example). If Israel had received their unconditional surrender, occupied them, replaced their governments, and forced them to demilitarize (like America did to Japan), then there would be no existential threat to Israel from Egypt now.
It's a fair question I don't have a good or simple answer. I guess my problem is that we don't seem to be an independent country, making our own decisions and our own mistakes. We are frequently looked upon as the 51st state of the USA. I'm reminded of the official motto of New Hampshire, "Live Free or Die". Let us make our own mistakes; we'll live them them or die with them.
I get that feeling, which is why despite the fact that I want the war to end and the hostages home, I inspect to Trump's statement that he will end the war. It shouldn't be his decision.
But, we need to be clever, not righteous, yaani. Two millennia so we revolted against the Roman Empire, three times, each with more devastating results than the last (and that's not counting the Rebellion of the Exiles, about which little is known).
More recently, in 2016 the UK voted to leave the European Union, partly/largely for reasons of sovereignty. That feeling of sovereign is more being depleted with every trade deal the UK, eventually, signs. But the economic damage has been done, continues, and is palpable.
We need America, and we need the wider world too. We need to be smart, not righteous
Do you think America will invade us, like the Romans did?
If not, what is your worst case scenario, and how is it worse than the present situation - in which we are fighting a war that never ends, because we aren't fighting to win?
Maybe Bibi doesn’t like his ministers stabbing him in the back. Maybe he’s got a very difficult if not impossible job and he’d like to trust the people working for him. The PM or the POTUS can hire and fire whoever they damn well please. I think there’s more than one competent general in Israel.
"When the left, headed by Yair Lapid, Yair Golan, Benny Gantz - oh, and don't forget Lieberman - take the side of Gallant - that says it all"
I would be curious to hear the other side too. What about charedim who already serve? Why unproportional majority of the fallen had a kipah on their head? Likud is doing really well in the polls today.
I'm not sure how the UN come into it.
As for clans. In 1948, to take one example, the village of Abu Ghosh west of Jerusalem didn't take part in the fighting. Its head was famously friendly with Ben Gurion. Abu Ghosh is now a largish town. These kind of local loyalties, overriding national ones, were the car in Europe for centuries. They're still there, represented in army regiments and football or rugby clubs. It was touch and go whether England would unite or remain a heptarchy , ie. with six separate kingdoms. It's nothing new. Hence, and given the failure of any other idea, my belief in there prescription: one solution - federation.
Strange...I was under the impression that Gallant was fired because he was kowtowing to the Biden administration and its generals.
It is certainly terrible to see the Chareidim appeased this way. But what are Bibi's options? Dump the Chareidim and add so-called "centrists" to his coalition? The same people who demonstrate and strike during a war, who oppose a judicial reform that at most would restrict the powers of the Supreme Court in Israel to something similar to what it is in all other free countries, and threaten to quit if they don't get their way? What's the answer?
Ridiculous! The greatest US president for Israel of all time just got reelected. Not the time for this now.
Besides, Bibi has the best working relationship with Trump, than anyone else in Israel - period!
Lyndon Johnson was the best US President for Israel and nobody else is even close. Jason Maoz has written several articles about Johnson and Israel. Here are two:
https://www.commentary.org/jason-maoz-2/lyndon-johnson-friend-of-the-jews/
https://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/front-page/who-was-the-first-genuinely-pro-israel-u-s-president/2017/08/30/
Honestly, I'm not sure how one would compare Trump against Johnson but I do remember the parts about Johnson in Yehuda Avner's book, The Prime Ministers when Prime Minister Eshkol visited President Johnson on his ranch. It was very amusing. Worthwhile reading.
Johnson sent what were then unprecedented amounts of aid to Israel. Trump opposed Biden's recent aid package and Vance voted against it.
Johnson's advisor Clark Clifford, who would shortly be named Secretary of Defense, was absolutely outraged by the attack on the USS Liberty. Clifford had been a humongous supporter of Israel and was one of the reasons Truman recognized the new State of Israel over the objections of his Secretaries of State and Defense. Johnson ignored Clifford's advice and neither said nor did anything about the attack.
Decades earlier, Johnson had saved some Jews from the Nazis.
Yes, a political disaster. No doubt the illegal kangaroo owners will be rounded up into concentration camps and deported.
The enforcement of a New York law prohibiting private ownership of wild animals became a campaign issue in the recent election.
Prediction: when they finally boot Hertzi Halevi, whose main contribution to the war so far aside from porking up its initial phase, has been to run around doing photo ops and ripping Moshiach patches off guys, Slifkin is gonna post another outraged cringiad.
Meanwhile, the miluim guys keeping this war going are pretty united in their opinion of the senior echelons of the IDF. Napoleon's opinion of Talleyrand, basically.
Thanks for the discussion