There are many things that can be said in favor of former chief of staff Gadi Izenkot, one of which is his open remarks. You can understand his views and considerations. According to this, the reason he probably intends to enter the political arena is his criticism of the political echelon during his time as chief.
The obvious conclusion is to elevate oneself to the decisive political echelon.
"When I take office, I write an IDF strategy file," he said in an interview with Ben Caspit about a year ago. Military Secretary Eliezer Toledano, "and the document was presented to the General Staff.
"In four eyes I tell him it's a good paper, but it's really not a perception of security."
One thing can be predicted with confidence, that in any party he goes to he will not find leaders who will criticize his views.
If he goes to Yair Lapid, which is the most politically sensible thing for Izenkot, he will reign alone in the security field.
Despite his criticism of Netanyahu, it must be said that when you look at Izenkot's portfolio, he is the most successful of the chiefs of staff of the last 15 years. Since the entry of the Russians into Syria in 2015, the handling of the knife intifada, the events of the fence in Gaza in 2018, the destruction of the tunnels in the "Northern Shield" and more.
Although he was exposed for years to a verified patient, Major General Yair Golan, he did not contract the anti-bibial rabies.
What is even more worrying is his statement about the war on Hamas, which seems to reflect the perception of the IDF's top echelons over the years. This creates a situation where little Hamas declares that it is able to stand up to the big IDF.
This is a deterrent.
This is damaging the image of Israel as a winning state. "
Izenkot is coming to terms with a situation in which Hamas is not defeated and no decision is reached against it.
This is because of the "complex reality".
In fact, he reconciles with the ability of the so-called weak to harm Israel, the home front, without restrictions, because there is no point in entering into a confrontation with a weak enemy.
One has to fight against a strong enemy, like Iran and its attempts to establish itself throughout the Middle East and nuclear development.
Izenkot reflects the lack of understanding of the last generation at the top of the IDF regarding the form of the Palestinians' war against Israel. In this respect, one can perhaps learn something about the three candidates for chief of staff.
According to various reports, Major General Herzli Halevi is in fact Defense Minister Ganz's candidate for chief of staff. Some call him "the leading candidate." Prof. Benzion Netanyahu received the letter of the attrition war of the late Yoni, after the IDF issued the letter more than 30 years late.
Maybe it says something about the Jerusalem heritage of old families, and maybe not.
The current urge to decide on the appointment immediately stems from fears of left-wing elements and the establishment that Benjamin Netanyahu may return to power at any moment.
It is assumed that Eyal Zamir is a champion preferred by Netanyahu.
Everything in relation to Netanyahu.
No one asks what Prime Minister Bennett thinks, for example.
Major General Halevi seems too much like someone who was marked years ago for promotion to chief of staff. This is a certain problem.
These are exactly the events that shook the public, while the IDF chose to contain them. The method was to charge a heavy price, especially in infrastructure.
The definition of left or not left does not fit here, and it may be good for a right-wing prime minister to have a chief of staff to balance him. But that is no substitute for finding a systemic warfare against Sinwar warfare. Answer.
General Halevi has held all senior positions, knows the political echelon and also some of the leaders of the region.
He was the head of the Armed Forces, was the commander of a division on the Lebanese border, the commander-in-chief and the deputy chief of staff.
General Eyal Zamir at least tried to give a strong answer to the beginning of the events of the fence, under the heading of the "Return March."
The left, and especially the Haaretz newspaper, did not like the fact that the IDF did not allow the fence to be crossed and killed dozens of rioters, including gunmen waiting for an opportunity to act.
The left immediately absorbed Hamas' slogans and took action.
Instead of riots over the fence, there was talk of "return marches," when part of the plan was to infiltrate localities.
Even then they would accuse: Why did you shoot?
Statements about "war crimes" were marketed.
If the chief of staff should be someone who gets backing from a particular press, it is a completely foreign and negative consideration.
General Zamir was Prime Minister Netanyahu's military secretary.
At that time he enjoyed close access to the prime minister and was part of his kitchenette along with Yossi Cohen, Ron Drummer, and perhaps a few other personalities.
In those years, the functioning of the security cabinet declined following the entry of two disruptive factors.
One, Naftali Bennett.
The second, Yair Lapid.
Maj. Gen. Zamir, as an armored man, is supposed to represent the core values of the IDF, which have clearly been neglected: logistics and discipline and rethinking the scope of ground forces, in light of Ukraine's lessons.
The conclusion there: the next war must be decided quickly, forcefully and in a way that will leave no room for doubt as to who won it.
The IDF suddenly concluded that the presumption of the time of the land wars had been disproved, and that a decisive goal should be decided. But this is not a mental breakthrough, but a return to traditional IDF perceptions since time immemorial.
Maybe you should try them again in front of a "weak" enemy.
Non-literary activity
They were a duo in the political and literary field, until the third joined, David Grossman.
But I do not remember Amos Oz and.
B.
Joshua used to appear together at events.
For example, Amos Oz has often participated as a speaker in peace demonstrations now, when it was still at its peak.
He was kind of a nail in the coffin tonight.
It is strange that a writer, and so central, is able to speak in front of 100,000 people.
With all the rage and rhetorical energy.
also not.
B.
Joshua had the charisma of performing in public, but she acted in front of audiences of a few dozen up to 300 people maximum.
Oz and Yehoshua once appeared at a couple's press conference, which she remembers from all the shows and events.
This was in early 1991. The United States and its coalition were about to attack Iraq in the first Gulf War, or the offensive had already begun.
General Halevi.
Looks too much like someone who was marked years ago as chief of staff, Photo: Yossi Zeliger
In Israel, there was a consensus of the entire political spectrum in favor of the campaign against Saddam Hussein.
Joshua and Oz attended a well-publicized press conference, in which they expressed full support for the war.
The reason was probably also to give a counter to the European intellectuals, and also to maintain the status of the left in public as it becomes hawkish.
It was an uncharacteristic alignment with the public in the country.
Yossi Sarid also announced at the time, following Arafat and the Palestinians' support for Saddam and the jubilant missiles on Tel Aviv, that the Palestinians could look for him.
But they did not have to, he and others found the Palestinians.
Fifteen years later, during the Second Lebanon War, Joshua and Oz, along with Grossman, held another press conference calling on the government to stop fighting.
But Oz and Joshua have over the years become an unfamiliar phenomenon from elsewhere.
Joshua's death closes a period.
This is a period that began in 1967.
Moshe Shamir, Naomi Frenkel and Naomi Shemer turned right.
The great intellectuals signed the proclamation for the Greater Land of Israel.
Whereas the two young writers actually went against them, and at one time they seemed to have overcome the writers of the unity of work, Agnon, Hazaz, Shamir and Shemer.
Joshua was more accessible than a stronghold.
He was not restrained and calculated in his statements.
Were among the writers of the new generation who rebelled against him.
A.
B.
Joshua, who died this week, belonged to the tradition of the political writer, as another dimension of extra-literary activity.
The time of the recruited and recruiting writer has passed.
Exercise in awakening
That was in 1981.
One of the last terrorist acts of the revolutionary undergrounds in America.
Cathy Bodin and David Gilbert left their 14-month-old baby with a babysitter at the time and robbed a Brinks truck in a New York suburb.
It was an alliance with a militant organization of blacks, and they also did the black work.
Cathy Bodin was waiting some distance away in the getaway car to which the money was to be brought.
Following the robbery, during the escape, gang members shot at her persecutors and killed three, two policemen and a Brinks security guard.
Kathy Bodin ran 22 years in prison following the violent robbery.
She has become a mythological figure taken as if from a distant time in the past.
Her partner, David Gilbert, is still in jail.
Hello baby.
His name is Chesa Bodin.
In 2019 he was elected to the position of Attorney General in San Francisco and immediately began implementing a “progressive” law enforcement policy, namely: a massive release of offenders from detention to the city streets.
That's the bottom line.
Instead of strict law enforcement, change the method.
The Corona period and the George Floyd riots made the situation in San Francisco unbearably worse.
At first it seems that the reports of the anarchy of crime on the city streets, which was once beautiful, are trending and come from conservative sources.
But now that the American left, that is, the Democrats, are beginning to take stock of what happened that Chessa Bodin was kicked out of the prosecutor's office in a re-election, it turns out that liberal reporters from left-wing liberal magazines are telling the same story.
When you hear the word anarchy it almost looks beautiful.
But it is first and foremost a city full of homeless people, criminals and overdose injectors, who have turned the streets into one big toilet with corpses.
One of the reporters who spoke with prosecutor Bodin about a year ago, said that all he heard from him was "explanations, explanations, explanations."
Maybe also explanations and explanations.
Mass burglaries to shops and malls have become a mass hobby.
In the end, it turns out that this situation is tired of even the "progressive" citizens.
They demand the rule of law.
Bodin symbolizes something in his rise to greatness more than in his removal.
It turns out he grew up with Bill Ayers, who was in the close circles of President Barack Obama.
Ayers was one of the founders of the "Weather" underground, of which Chesa Bodin's mother was one.
When Cathy Bodin was released from prison in 2003, she was immediately accepted as a professor at Columbia University, meaning the academic establishment embraced the graduates of the terrorist underground and their descendants.
Son Chesa is a Yale University law graduate, and later was a so-called Rhodes Scholarship student at Oxford, like Robert Mali and Bill Clinton.
He had a time when he served as a sort of adviser to Hugo Chavez in Venezuela, and in short: all the resume needed for anyone who wants to be elected on behalf of the Democrats in California.
The result of this Marxist doctrine is robbery and breakage and "explanations, explanations, explanations."
Were we wrong?
Fixed!
If you found an error in the article, we'll be happy for you to share it with us