Connect with us

Uncategorized

Thomas Friedman explains how devastating Israel’s attacks on Iran have been

By BERNIE BELLAN I’m not sure how many readers follow Thomas Friedman’s writing in the New York Times; after all, he’s been highly critical of Netanyahu for years, which probably makes him persona non grata for a lot of you.

Thomas Friedman


But, on Tuesday, November 26, Friedman wrote a piece that was so particularly incisive – and came across as so laudatory of what Israel has been able to achieve in the past 13 months, that even diehard Friedman critics should be able to take some very meaningful lessons away from that column.
Toward the beginning of what he wrote, Friedman makes what, for most readers of his columns, would probably be perceived as a fairly shocking statement when he writes: “In just the last two months, the Israeli military has inflicted a defeat on Iran that approaches its 1967 Six-Day War defeat of Egypt, Syria and Jordan. Full stop.”
He goes on to describe what Israel has been able to do to Hezbollah in the past few months as so destructive of that terrorist organization’s abilities that “Hezbollah and, by extension, Iran have decided to delink themselves from Hamas in Gaza and stop the firing from Lebanon for the first time since Oct. 8, 2023, the day after Hamas invaded Israel.”
Friedman then provides some very interesting information about how effective two attacks Israel launched against Iran – one in April and then one in October, were, both in inflicting tremendous damage to Iran’s capability to defend itself against a full scale Israeli attack – should one be launched, and in undermining Iran’s confidence that it can continue to arm Hezbollah without severe repercussions.
Here is what Friedman wrote:
“There is a reason for this (Hezbollah’s agreeing to a cease fire). Hezbollah’s mother ship has suffered a real blow. According to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s April strike on Iran eliminated one of four Russian-supplied S-300 surface-to-air missile defense batteries around Tehran, and Israel destroyed the remaining three batteries on Oct. 26. Israel also damaged Iran’s ballistic missile production capabilities and its ability to produce the solid fuel used in long-range ballistic missiles. In addition, according to Axios, Israel’s Oct. 26 strike on Iran, which was a response to an earlier Iranian attack on Israel, also destroyed equipment used to create the explosives that surround uranium in a nuclear device, setting back Iran’s efforts in nuclear weapons research.
“A senior Israeli defense official told me that the Oct. 26 attack on Iran ‘was lethal, precise and a surprise.’ And up to now, the Iranians ‘don’t know technologically how we hit them. So they are at the most vulnerable point they have been in this generation: Hamas is not there for them, Hezbollah is not there for them, their air defenses are not there anymore, their ability to retaliate is sharply diminished, and they are worried about Trump.’ “
Friedman’s column goes on to offer advice to President-elect Trump how to deal with other changing realities in the world, including the rapid pace of artificial intelligence development in which, Friedman points out, Israelis are playing a leading role. But one has to wonder whether anyone in Trump’s circle bothers to read anything written by Friedman. After all, he was very close to President Biden – which would certainly put him into Trump’s enemies’ camp, on top of which he writes for that most hated of all media: The New York Times.
Still, if someone who is as critical of Israel’s government as Friedman has been is capable of pointing out the vastly changed dynamic now permeating the entire Middle East as a result of the huge blows Israel has inflicted both on Iran’s number one proxy in the region – Hezbollah, and on Iran itself, once can more readily understand how Israel’s strategy of taking on different enemies all at the same time has paid off.
I, for one, will admit that I was quite surprised to read Friedman’s analysis – and it leads me to question my own thoughts as to what would happen when Israel opened up a new front in Lebanon at the same time as it was still engaged in Gaza. I had thought that it might lead to a repeat of the 2006 debacle, in which a ground invasion by Israel into Lebanon led to heavy Israeli losses and what was, in effect, a victory for Hezbollah – not by being able to defeat Israel, but simply by surviving that invasion.
This time around though – and we’ll have to wait for military analysts to tell us just how effective the heavy Israeli bombardment of Lebanese areas has been in terms of degrading Hezbollah’s military capabilities, Israel has managed to keep its own casualties relatively low by relying upon bombing of Hezbollah infrastructure. As has been the case in Gaza, however, it’s so difficult to tell what those devastating bombings have actually accomplished in specific terms beyond realizing that they have thoroughly degraded both Hamas’s and Hezbollah’s military capacities. It seems though that the aphorism that “the sum is greater than its parts” is particularly apt in describing what the Israel Air Force has been able to achieve.
While we have been witnessing the wholesale destruction of civilian areas – in both Gaza and Lebanon, it now seems evident that Israeli intelligence has been able to locate terrorist locations with tremendous accuracy. The fact that both Hamas and Hezbollah have been so thoroughly embedded within civilian population areas made it inevitable that, once the IAF embarked upon a relentless campaign to destroy terrorist infrastructure and locations where terrorists were embedded within the civilian population, there would be huge civilian casualties – but ultimately Israel would be able to degrade both Hamas and Hezbollah’s fighting abilities to the point where they have both been neutralized in large part.
The question, of course, is what will now happen as a result of Friedman himself describing Israel’s having forced Hezbollah and Iran to “delink” themselves from Hamas. Hamas is, in effect, nothing more than a mafia type organization, now terrorizing the Palestinian population in Gaza, with its own survival now being its purpose. The Israel Defence Forces seem content to let Hamas carry on its campaign of looting aid trucks and terrorizing the population for its own benefit.
But Hamas fighters, however many may remain, don’t have the same option as Hezbollah’s fighters – which is to retreat behind a defined line north of the Litani River in Lebanon. How many are in the tunnels? How many are embedded within the rest of the Gaza population? If the IDF has an idea what the answers to those questions are, I haven’t seen them.
So, the war in Gaza will likely carry on for some time. It appears that the bombing campaign has thoroughly reduced Hamas’s ability to carry on any effective strikes on Israeli targets, but it is not clear at what point the Israeli government might be willing to accept any sort of a ceasefire. The government’s position has been that a ceasefire can only be entered into when at least the majority of the hostages are released, but frankly, Israel is now operating from such a position of strength vis-a-vis Hamas, that the idea of accepting a ceasefire that would allow Hamas fighters to remain in place seems unconscionable to the vast majority of Israelis. It may seem perverse to think that the government has been willing to sacrifice hostages’ lives for the sake of dealing a final, crushing blow to Hamas, but that’s the sad reality.
Still, who would have thought that Israel would be able to wage successful wars on so many fronts? As Thomas Friedman has noted, Israel has upended the situation in the Middle East, albeit at a very heavy price. And even though I’ve been questioning from the outset the Israeli government’s strategy of seeking total victory over Hamas, given how thoroughly Israel has been able to undermine Hezbollah’s and Iran’s positions, perhaps I was wrong to question Netanyahu’s goal of thoroughly crushing Hamas. Credit has to be given though to the IDF and how much they learned from previous wars with Hamas and Hezbollah.
Amidst all this though, one has to feel great sympathy for the people of Gaza. They are being held to ransom by a gang of thugs and there does not appear to be any way out for them. For their sake, let’s hope that Israel can “finish the job” quickly, although how that can be done remains difficult to know. Perhaps Thomas Friedman, who is always so thoughtful and insightful, can shed some answers to that question as well.

Uncategorized

Yiddish has a long list of words for ‘cemetery‘

נישט אַלע ווייסן אַז אויף ייִדיש איז דאָ אַ גאַנצער וואָקאַבולאַר וועגן דעם, וווּ מע לייגט ייִדן נאָכן טויט.

וואָס טוט מען טאַקע מיט אַ מת? מע באַגראָבט אים אָדער מע באַהאַלט אים, אָדער מע איז אים מקבר, אָדער מע ברענגט אים צו קבֿר־ישׂראל. „באַגראָבן“ האָט דאָך אויך אַ פֿאַרשפּרייטן מעטאַפֿאָרישן טײַטש, „רויִנירן“. אָט איז דאָ אַ ווערטערשפּיל: „שטאַרבן איז נאָך ווי ס’איז, אָבער דאָס אַרײַנלייגן אין דר’ערד, דאָס באַגראָבט אַ מענטשן!“

וועגן דעם אָרט, וווּ ס’ליגן ייִדן נאָכן טויט, איז דאָ אַ לאַנגע רשימה ווערטער, כּמעט אַלע אייפֿעמיזמען. נאָך די הונדערט יאָר ליגן ייִדן און ייִדישע טעכטער, קודם־כּל, אויף אַ בית־עולם. אויף לשון־קודש איז „עולם“, פֿאַרשטייט זיך, טײַטש „וועלט“ און אויף ייִדיש — „אַ גרופּע מענטשן“; אָבער אויף לשון־קודש האָט „עולם“ נאָך אַ טײַטש, „אייביקייט“. איז אַ בית־עולם דאָס אָרט, וווּ מע בלײַבט אויף אייביק. דאָס אייגענע איז שייך צום אַרמיש־שטאַמיקע „בית־עלמין“.

אַ פֿאַל פֿון לשון סגי־נהור, דאָס הייסט וווּ מע זאָגט איין זאַך אָבער מע מיינט דאָס פֿאַרקערטע, איז „בית־חיים“, טײַטש „דאָס הויז פֿון לעבן“. אַן אַנדער וואָרט, נישט קיין אייפֿעמיזם, איז „בית־הקבֿרות“, דאָס הייסט, דאָרטן, וווּ ס’געפֿינען זיך קבֿרים.

אָבער נישט אַלע ווערטער נעמען זיך פֿון לשון־קודש. מע זאָגט דאָך אויך „דאָס פֿעלד“, „דאָס גוטע־אָרט“, „דאָס הייליקע אָרט“, „דאָס ריינע אָרט“. אַ טשיקאַווער משל דערפֿון: איך בין אַ מאָל געפֿאָרן אין דער שטאָט גער, נישט ווײַט פֿון וואַרשע, וואָס ביזן חורבן איז זי געווען דער זיץ פֿונעם באַקאַנטן גערער רבין. אין 2007 זענען אין דער שטאָט געבליבן גאַנצע דרײַ ייִדן, האָב איך געהאַט די זכיה זיך צו באַקענען, און צו כאַפּן אַ ייִדישן שמועס, מיט צוויי. (וויפֿל מאָל אין לעבן איז מיר אויסגעקומען צו שמועסן אויף ייִדיש מיט אַ ייִד, וואָס האָט איבערגעלעבט דעם חורבן און וווינט נאָך אין זײַן מיזרח־אייראָפּעיִשער היימשטאָט?)

איינער פֿון זיי, וועלוול קאַרפּמאַן, האָט מיט אַ פּאָר יאָר שפּעטער געגעבן אַן אינטערוויו דער ייִדישער ראַדיאָ־אוידיציע פֿונעם פּוילישן ראַדיאָ (צום באַדויערן, האָט מען די ראַדיאָ־אוידיציע דערנאָכדעם אָפּגעשאַפֿט). ווען די זשורנאַליסטקע האָט אים אַ פֿרעג געטאָן וועגן דעם גורל פֿונעם גערער בית־עולם, האָט ער זי איבערגעפֿרעגט: „איר מיינט ס’גוטע־אָרט?“ יעדעס מאָל, וואָס זי האָט ווײַטער געזאָגט „בית־עולם“, האָט ער געענטפֿערט „ס’גוטע־אָרט“.

אויך בײַ די אומות־העולם זענען די ווערטער דערפֿאַר אייפֿעמיזמען. דאָס פֿאַרשפּרייטסטע וואָרט אין אייראָפּע איז ס’ענגלישע cemetery, ס’פֿראַנצייזישע cimetière אד”גל, פֿון אַן אַלטגריכישן ווערב פֿאַר „ליגן/לייגן שלאָפֿן“. גאָר אַ מאָל, פֿאַר דער הײַנטיקער צײַט־רעכענונג, איז ס’גריכישע וואָרט געווען טײַטש „שלאָפֿשטוב“; בײַ די קריסטן בשעתּו האָט עס באַקומען דעם מאָדערנעם טײַטש. אַ ווײַטער קרובֿ פֿון דעם וואָרט איז ס’ייִדישע „היים“, אַ פּנים, ווײַל אין דער היים שלאָפֿט מען, אָבער נישט פּונקט אַזוי ווי אויפֿן בית־עולם…

דאָס דײַטשישע Friedhof איז דער „שלום־הויף“; און Kirchhof „קלויסטערהויף“ איז מגולגל געוואָרן אינעם פּוילישן Kirkut „ייִדישער בית־עולם“!

און אַזוי ווי מאַמע־לשון האָט פּאַראַלעלע וואָקאַבולאַרן פֿאַר ייִדן און פֿאַר קריסטן איז גאָר קיין חידוש נישט, וואָס אויפֿן אָרט, וווּ ס’ליגן קריסטן זאָגט מען „צווינטער“ אָדער „צמענטער“, מסתּמא, פֿון פּוילישן cmentarz פֿונעם זעלביקן גריכישן שורש וואָס cemetery.

The post Yiddish has a long list of words for ‘cemetery‘ appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

IHOP denies inviting Florida GOP candidate who said ‘Americans shouldn’t die for Israel’

(JTA) — James Fishback, the fringe GOP candidate courting the online far right in his long-shot bid for governor of Florida, had a bit of food-service drama this week — and it wasn’t about the “goyslop” he previously claimed was being served in the state’s school cafeterias.

Waffle House, he alleged, had banned him from every restaurant in the state after he announced his intent to campaign at the chain’s Florida locations. The reason, he claimed, was because he said that “Americans shouldn’t die for Israel.”

But not to worry, Fishback quickly announced: Another breakfast chain, International House of Pancakes, had extended an invitation to him personally.

“Hey, wanna come over?” reads a direct message Fishback posted to social media, a photo of which appears to come from IHOP’s official corporate account. An elated Fishback soon posted photos from a campaign stop at an IHOP, which he deemed “International House of Patriots.”

Not so, an IHOP spokesperson told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.

“Since our founding, IHOP and its franchisees have been committed to providing warm and welcoming dining experiences for all guests. We are not working with James Fishback or his campaign in any capacity,” the spokesperson told JTA in an email. “Additionally, we have confirmed that the image circulating on social media is not authentic.”

Fishback did not return a request for comment by JTA about IHOP’s claim. The former investment banker has used terms on the campaign trail considered dogwhistles to the online far right and boasts a large online profile that has included interviews with Tucker Carlson and antisemitic podcaster Myron Gaines. He has also praised the followers of antisemitic streamer Nick Fuentes.

Asked by JTA why he had made his earlier “goyslop” comments, Fishback replied, “Because it’s funny. Get a life.”

He then posted the exchange to his X account under the caption, “Journalists are insufferable.”

Earlier in the same conversation, asked about recently revealed racist and antisemitic messages from a Florida Young Republicans regional group chat, Fishback replied, “I condemn all forms of hatred.”

The post IHOP denies inviting Florida GOP candidate who said ‘Americans shouldn’t die for Israel’ appeared first on The Forward.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Iran Names Khamenei’s Hardline Son Mojtaba as New Supreme Leader

FILE PHOTO: Mojtaba Khamenei, the second son of Iran’s late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, visits Hezbollah’s office in Tehran, Iran, October 1, 2024. Office of the Iranian Supreme Leader/WANA (West Asia News Agency)/Handout via REUTERS/File Photo

Iran on Monday named Mojtaba Khamenei to succeed his father Ali Khamenei as Supreme Leader, signaling that hardliners remain firmly in charge in Tehran a week into its conflict with the United States and Israel.

Mojtaba, a mid-ranking cleric with influence inside Iran’s security forces and vast business networks under his father, had been seen as a frontrunner in the lead up to the vote by the assembly, a body of 88 clerics charged with choosing the new leader after Ali Khamenei.

“By a decisive vote, the Assembly of Experts, appointed Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Hosseini Khamenei as the third Leader of the sacred system of the Islamic Republic of Iran,” the assembly said in a statement issued just after midnight Tehran time.

The position gives Mojtaba the final say in all matters of state in the Islamic Republic.

Mojtaba’s appointment will likely draw the ire of US President Donald Trump, who said on Sunday that Washington should have a say in the selection. “If he doesn’t get approval from us, he’s not going to last long,” he told ABC News. Israel, ahead of the announcement, threatened to target whoever was chosen.

Mojtaba’s father, Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, was killed in one of the first strikes launched against Iran more than a week ago.

The US military on Sunday reported a seventh American has died from wounds sustained during Iran’s initial counter-attack a week ago, a day after Trump presided over the return to the United States of the remains of the six others who died.

The US-Israeli attacks have killed at least 1,332 Iranian civilians and wounded thousands, according to Iran’s U.N. ambassador.

As Trump pressed for an “unconditional surrender,” Mohammad Bagher Qalibaf, Iran’s parliament speaker, said Tehran was not seeking a ceasefire to the war and would punish aggressors.

Israel continued to target senior Iranian figures, including Abolqasem Babaian, the recently appointed head of the military office of the supreme leader, saying he was killed in a Saturday strike.

BLACK SMOKE HANGS OVER TEHRAN

As fighting escalated on day nine of the US-Israeli campaign against Iran, thick black smoke hung over Tehran on Sunday, residents said, after strikes on oil storage facilities had lit up the night sky with plumes of orange flame.

Iran’s foreign ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei said the large-scale attack marked a “dangerous new phase” of the conflict and amounted to a war crime.

“By targeting fuel depots, the aggressors are releasing hazardous materials and toxic substances into the air,” he wrote on X.

Israeli military spokesman Lieutenant Colonel Nadav Shoshani told reporters the depots were used to fuel Iran’s war effort, including producing or storing propellant for ballistic missiles. “They are a legal military target,” he said.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his government would press on with the assault and strike Iran’s rulers “without mercy.”

“We have an organized plan with many surprises to destabilize the regime and enable change,” he said in a video statement.

US special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner will visit Israel on Tuesday, according to Axios, citing a senior US official.

Trump told reporters on Air Force One that he was not seeking negotiations to end the conflict, which has driven up global energy prices, disrupted business and snarled air travel.

“At some point, I don’t think there will be anybody left maybe to say, ‘We surrender,’” he said.

Continue Reading

Copyright © 2017 - 2023 Jewish Post & News