I had a nice conversation with an older Israeli about the Gaza 'disengagement' yesterday that went something like this:
Is: Of course we should be leaving, we can't deal with the population in the area and once we leave the IDF will have free reign.
Me: So instead of Sederot (southern Israeli city just north of Gaza) being shelled (hit with Kassam rockets), Ashkelon (major southern Israeli port city) will get hit?
Is: Don't tell me about being shelled, I grew up 1 mile from the Syrian border, we knew how to huddle down in the bunkers.
Is: We can't afford to be expending so much effort to protect so few.
Me: The residents that are there have chosen to be there. Hashem Yazo (G-d should help), they're taking the hits, the terrorist attacks, the brunt of the terrorism. That's their choice and sacrifice. You'd rather the hits come to Sederot, Ashkelon and Tel Aviv? You think it's going to stay contained in Gaza???
Is: Once we're out, with international support the IDF will have the freedom to deal with the situation if we are being hit.
Me: (Incredulity) Why in the world would you think that? When has the world ever sided with Israel on being able to protect itself????
I just don't understand the argument. The area produces significant exports (that's taxes and economic activity) that easily cover security costs (and note the government won't let the residents defend themselves). The IDF itself is predicting war after the pullout. So what's the benefit???
Thursday, April 21, 2005
// 4/21/2005 //