Friday, May 06, 2005

Strange definition of "cease-fire"

Palestinians on Friday morning fired an anti-tank rocket on Friday morning at school bus carrying children outside the southern Gaza Strip settlement of Kfar Darom, shaking the fragile lull in violence. The rocket failed to hit the bus.

A mortar shell also hit a Gush Katif settlement. No damage or casualties were reported in either case.

Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip fired four Qassam rockets at the southern Israeli town of Sderot predawn Friday. The Magen David Adom ambulance service said that several people had been treated for shock.
Ha'aretz editorializes:

As long as the Qassam rockets and mortar shells fired intermittently from the Gaza Strip to Jewish settlements do not take a toll in lives, it is unlikely that Israel will respond with force. However, if there are casualties, Israel will not be able to stay its hand.

This is also the case if the Palestinians open fire during the disengagement itself. In the history of the Israel Defense Forces, it has never restrained itself, as it has recently, in the face of violence. In any case, the Palestinian firing of Qassams and mortars indicates just how fragile the cease-fire is.

Um, how about "how non-existent the cease-fire is"?

At any rate, what sense does it make to wait until Jews are killed before responding? If the enemy intends to kill Jews, why wait until tthey succeed before trying to stop them? The only reason the Kassams haven't killed anyone isn't because Hamas has decided to purposefully aim at open fields. The intent is clear, and the idea of a "cease-fire" is fiction.

It is distressing, at the time of Yom HaShoah, to see Jews with a strong army waiting for casualties before defending themselves. Who would have thought that Jews in Israel would end up with a Galut mentality?