Retaliate

The question — at least it’s being called a question — is whether Israel should retaliate. As soon as the attack began, I started listening for the tip-off vocabulary of anti-Semitic Left (that being most of it): de-escalation, restraint (restraint on Israel, that is), “diplomatic solution,” anything about Gaza, particularly if jammed in the same sentence as “humanitarian crisis,” and the old stand-by, Palestinian oppression.

Advertisement

I missed the term that’s jumped to the head of the line, “wider war.” We have to avoid a “wider war.” This pretends that, if you’re a Jew in that part of the world and behave with suitable (to wit infinite) submissiveness, you can avoid the “wider war”that’s been going on against you since forever. ...

I briefly heard Alan Dershowitz sum up the “question” about retaliation with a pithiness we could use to keep in mind. Why should Iran stop its behavior when it’s never been given a reason to stop?

Ed Morrissey

That's a good question, but this assumes that Israel would even potentially choose not to retaliate. The reason they went after the IRGC commander at the diplomatic compound in Syria was to retaliate for Iran's role in the October 7 massacres. They're not going to let Iran slide on a massive aerial bombardment.

The question is how Israel chooses to retaliate, and when. It seems wiser to wait until the Hamas war is wrapped up, and maybe even after Hezbollah gets put back in its place. But Israel may choose differently. No one expects them to do nothing, though.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on HotAir Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement