Western leaders unfairly ask Israel to 'take the win' after fending off 300 drones and missiles this weekend

You can save this article by registering for free here. Or sign-in if you have an account.

Hey, everybody. Free hits on Jews! What’s not to love?

If you recoil in horror, crying “Never again,” clearly you are not in power. Instead, after Iran’s government carried out a clear act of war On Sunday by firing 300 drones and missiles against the Jewish homeland, having long pledged to annihilate Israel for Allah, everyone said, “Aaaah, don’t retaliate, they get to do it.”

Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.

Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.

Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.

Don't have an account? Create Account

Had Iran launched its brazen aerial assault on, say, Saudi Arabia, the United States president, western foreign ministers and other “luminaries” would not demand inaction. Or if Lower Slobovia bombed Slimea. But the smart set (though not National Post writers) insist that Jews may be attacked with impunity.

Commenting on this weekend’s Iranian attack, The Economist’s digital editor hectored, “Perhaps Binyamin Netanyahu will feel the need, in turn, to respond to this. I hope not.” Then he blamed the Jews: “Israel’s own act, earlier this month, when it bombed an Iranian consulate in Damascus and killed a top Iranian general, was a grave blow but also a provocative one.”

It wasn’t even a consulate. It was the building next door, used to plot terror attacks against Israel. But you’re allowed to kill Jews, whereas targeting mere antisemitic murderers is “provocative.”

Some of Israel’s allies did help fend off the assault, militarily: the U.S., United Kingdom, France and Jordan. Not Qatar, sheltering Hamas’s billionaire leadership, or Canada, lacking means and will alike. Still, Israel is under pressure to stop there. Imagine assisting Britons through the Blitz then saying, “Take the win, don’t provoke Germany.” Or Alan Fryer’s sardonic: “Every police officer, every soldier who was shot but survived thanks to a ballistic vest should just ‘take the win’ and let the bad guy go.”

This newsletter tackles hot topics with boldness, verve and wit. (Subscriber-exclusive edition on Fridays)

By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc.

A welcome email is on its way. If you don't see it, please check your junk folder.

The next issue of Platformed will soon be in your inbox.

We encountered an issue signing you up. Please try again

You might assume people are simply lying when they blither, “It is important that Israel be able to protect itself,” while refusing to send even non-lethal military equipment, demanding that fire not be returned and working internationally to weaken condemnations of the attack and affirmations of Israel’s right to self-defence.

I refer to the words of our foreign minister, Mélanie Joly, and the G7 communiqué offered by our prime minister, which said, “We express our full solidarity and support to Israel and its people and reaffirm our commitment towards its security,” while doing the opposite. This was a watered-down version of the first draft, according to the Wall Street Journal, as “Japan, Canada and European officials (were) wary of giving Israel too wide a berth for its response to the attacks.” But a crucial rule of history is that ideas have consequences, so we must understand this worldview. Not to sympathize, or shrug that everyone has their own “truth.” To grapple with and dismantle it.

Partly the standard appeasement mentality everywhere and at all times, flinching reflexively before aggression and always envisioning adversaries’ appealing options for harming us and our feeble choices in response. Thus the Washington Post recently reported that when U.S. Vice-President Kamala Harris met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in February, she said “something he didn’t want to hear: Refrain from attacking Russian oil refineries, a tactic U.S. officials believed would raise global energy prices and invite more aggressive Russian retaliation inside Ukraine.”

Right. Russia launches a brutal war to conquer a western ally, and the U.S. whines not to hit back hard lest it provoke Putin. An “irritated” Zelenskyy “brushed off the recommendation.” But appeasers will surrender on the beaches, in the streets and in the hills, so “Washington reinforced the warning in multiple conversations with Kyiv, including by national security adviser Jake Sullivan.”

This war has raged for decades. But now, the officials of President Joe Biden worry that the “Israeli response to Iran’s attack may trigger wider war.” The New York Times newsletter circulated a newsletter about the attack, in which it fretted about it leading to “a more dangerous new stage” instead of constituting one. Even the Wall Street Journal said “the strikes set up a direct military confrontation between the two countries,” instead of constituting one.

Then there’s “Lord Cameron begs Israel to ‘take the win’ to defuse tensions” from the Daily Mail. How does it defuse tensions to offer a regime with genocidal nuclear ambitions free hits on Israel? Well, Euronews blares “‘Major escalation’: EU leaders rally against Iran’s attack on Israel” followed immediately by “European capitals are calling for restraint and trying to de-escalate the conflict.” They’re actually “rallying” against an Israeli response because … must … grovel.

GZERO emails, “Will Israel listen to calls for restraint?” Not Iran. They don’t fear us. We fear them. When “Iran Officials Threaten U.S. Not to Retaliate to Its Attack on Israel” NBC quakes, “Analysts have warned that if Israel decides to hit back hard, it could plunge the wider Middle East into war.” Whereas if Iran merely wars on Israel, there’s no war, just some dead Jews. Hey everyone. Free hits.

This grotesque meeting of appeasement with antisemitism is visible domestically too, with authorities tolerating hateful, law-breaking anti-Israel protests. The Rebel’s nettlesome David Menzies was even arrested for committing journalism in a public place by interviewing Hamas backers. As for the terrorist supporters, we’re lucky the cops didn’t bring them coffee … this time.

If our governments declared free hits on anyone else, we’d be appalled. When it’s Jews, especially given the Holocaust, we must respond.

National Post

Postmedia is committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion. Please keep comments relevant and respectful. Comments may take up to an hour to appear on the site. You will receive an email if there is a reply to your comment, an update to a thread you follow or if a user you follow comments. Visit our Community Guidelines for more information.

Plus a few of their favourite things

The Vancouver company has revealed its collection of gear for the Canadian athletes headed to the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games in Paris this summer

Protein bars, vitamin chocolate, salty treats and more

Casper, Best Buy and Sephora, to name a few

Nicki Minaj, Ice Cube and Avril Lavigne are on sale now

QOSHE - John Robson: The response to Iran's attack on Israel should not be appeasement - John Robson
menu_open
Columnists Actual . Favourites . Archive
We use cookies to provide some features and experiences in QOSHE

More information  .  Close
Aa Aa Aa
- A +

John Robson: The response to Iran's attack on Israel should not be appeasement

9 0
17.04.2024

Western leaders unfairly ask Israel to 'take the win' after fending off 300 drones and missiles this weekend

You can save this article by registering for free here. Or sign-in if you have an account.

Hey, everybody. Free hits on Jews! What’s not to love?

If you recoil in horror, crying “Never again,” clearly you are not in power. Instead, after Iran’s government carried out a clear act of war On Sunday by firing 300 drones and missiles against the Jewish homeland, having long pledged to annihilate Israel for Allah, everyone said, “Aaaah, don’t retaliate, they get to do it.”

Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.

Enjoy the latest local, national and international news.

Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience.

Don't have an account? Create Account

Had Iran launched its brazen aerial assault on, say, Saudi Arabia, the United States president, western foreign ministers and other “luminaries” would not demand inaction. Or if Lower Slobovia bombed Slimea. But the smart set (though not National Post writers) insist that Jews may be attacked with impunity.

Commenting on this weekend’s Iranian attack, The Economist’s digital editor hectored, “Perhaps Binyamin Netanyahu will feel the need, in turn, to respond to this. I hope not.” Then he blamed the Jews: “Israel’s own act, earlier this month, when it bombed an Iranian consulate in Damascus and killed a top Iranian general, was a grave blow but also a provocative one.”

It wasn’t even a consulate. It was the building next door, used to plot terror attacks against Israel. But you’re allowed to kill Jews, whereas targeting mere antisemitic murderers is “provocative.”

Some of Israel’s allies did help fend off the assault, militarily: the........

© National Post


Get it on Google Play