As these lines are being written, soldiers are standing on the border of the Gaza Strip, begging for the order to go in. None of them are eager for battle. They also know that this will be a difficult war, and that perhaps not everyone will return home safe and sound.
Citizens in the southern region, whose lives are disrupted by alarms and the rush to safe spaces, are urging the captains to enter Gaza and complete the job. Business owners, who are suffering heavy losses, declare that they are willing to suffer as much as necessary, provided that the campaign ends with the eradication of Gazan terrorism from the roots.
Is it possible that the decision-makers do not understand what every ordinary citizen understands? No in-depth understanding is required, as reality speaks for itself.
Want more news, videos and stories? Join the Haredim 10 WhatsApp channel >>
Our eyes see that in the lull between confrontations, the enemy draws lessons and equips itself with weapons with longer ranges, and it is quite clear that the next confrontation is only a matter of time.
Why did we wait?
In fact, we were in exactly the same place when the wave of terror broke out after Camp David, about fourteen years ago. It became clear before our eyes that the areas from which we had left following the Oslo Accords had become nests of terrorists, from which murderers emerge to blow up buses and crowded centers in Israeli cities. It was clear that there was no escape from re-entering all these places and uprooting terrorism from the root.
But only after two and a half years of horror and horror, in which more than a thousand Jews were murdered in hundreds of horrific bomb attacks, was it decided to launch Operation Defensive Shield, which put an end to the bloodshed. Suddenly it became clear that it was possible to defeat terrorism and crush its nests, if only the appropriate order was given.
So why did they wait two and a half years? The answer is sad and painful: because returning to the cities of Judea and Samaria meant a resounding admission of the failure of the Oslo concept. The entire political and military leadership was complicit in this disastrous move, and these people were unable to admit their mistake until terrible bloodshed left them no choice.
The solution is clear.
This is exactly the story of the Gaza Strip. When we were there, we faced simple, short-range mortar and rocket fire, which was mainly borne by the residents of the Gaza Strip. We controlled the crossings, entered the area when necessary, and did not allow more dangerous missiles to be smuggled in or manufactured.
Then the 'genius' idea of disengagement was born, and in a short time we had a terrorist base that threatened the entire country.
The one and only way to fix the situation is to cut off this terrorist infrastructure at its root. This requires returning to the Strip, eliminating all the terrorist leaders, blowing up all the bunkers, and destroying their missiles and production facilities.
But that is not enough.
It is not possible to enter and exit, but a 'lawn mowing' routine must be maintained to ensure that any terrorist organization is identified while still in hostilities.
Such a move would mean a resounding admission of the failure of the disengagement concept, and the political and military leadership is not ready for this. Therefore, they are content with isolated operations, which do not solve the problem, but bring upon us more and more rounds of violence, each one more severe than the last. And may the good Lord have mercy.
• The article is published in the current issue of 'The Conversation of the Week''
