Middle East Defence & Security

[Big_Zucchini]

Iran's assassination attempt on Salman Rushdie, and blaming him for the incident, still gets no condemnation by Amnesty which saw it fit to equate Ukraine to the Islamic Jihad group.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559081702261145601

This should be a wakeup call for the west that Iran has sympathizers primarily via religious affiliation all over the world that are willing and able to act against civilians and even potentially critical assets.


Israeli airstrikes in Syria near Tartus. As usual, target unknown, only different speculations. Some say Hezbollah outposts, some say Iranian and Syrian personnel and an air defense system.

Israeli airstrikes in Syria said to hit Iranian targets near Russian naval base

Syrian officer says Iranian base and nearby air defense system hit in Tartus; Hezbollah posts near Damascus also reportedly struck

www.timesofisrael.com

Iran likely behind attack on US Al Tanf base, presumably in retaliation for Israeli strike described above.
Worth mentioning that recently Iran began retaliating against the US for Israeli strikes on Iranian assets. Hard to guess exactly what might be the interest there.
Article is from live blog, so link will be broken soon. Will try to update when possible.

US: Drone attack hit American base in Syria, no casualties

* * *

www.timesofisrael.com

Israel continues operations against terrorist organizations and does not relax even after the operation has ended, which is a refreshing change. Operation Breaking Dawn is already considered the most successful operation in many years, and the current government continues that path.

IDF says it foiled Hamas attack tunnel with two branches along northern Gaza border

Official says tunnel first struck during last year's war, but since repaired and extended by Hamas; it crossed into Israeli territory, but posed no danger due to underground wall

www.timesofisrael.com

Despite that, Israel's political crisis remains, and unlikely to end soon. Lapid, the quiet, friendly, and polite politician that didn't see combat in his life, brought Israel a huge military success which his elite fighters/commanders predecessors could only dream of, yet his popularity only rose slightly.
As is rightfully said, the political affiliations are baked into people, and they cannot see changes.

Despite the crisis, Israel manages to handle well against global crises and its volatile region's issues.

Paltry bump for Lapid after Gaza op shows Israelis’ ‘electoral identity’ is baked in

Over two-thirds of voters think the PM handled the fight against Palestinian Islamic Jihad well, but so far that's barely boosted his party or changed the balance between the blocs

www.timesofisrael.com

 

[Big_Zucchini]

A short opinion piece on Iran-Russia-Israel-Syria dynamics. Not exceptionally detailed or insightful, just good for a little update on the topic.

In short:
1. Israeli strike right next to Russian Tartus base (Syria) on Iranian targets could be a message to Russia not to overstep in their Iran relations, and to Iran that Russia can't and won't defend it.

2. Leverage on Russia has been largely exhausted so Russia would naturally deepen cooperation with Iran.

3. Iran is still pleading with Russia to defend it in Syria, and will only keep pressuring more.

4. Cooperation could include Su-30 and other forms of advanced military equipment and technologies, that would be very bad for Israel.

Did Israel send a message to Russia about Iranian ties with latest strike in Syria? - Breaking Defense

An Aug. 14 Israeli strike came within three kilometers of a Russian base, closer than normal strikes would come to Russian assets in Syria.

breakingdefense.com

 

[Vivendi]

Looking at how the Su-30 is faring in Ukraine, I don't think a few Iranian Su-30 should be an issue for Israel. The Israeli SAMs will have absolutely no problems dealing with them of course and even more importantly the Israeli F-16, F-15, and (of course) F-35 will be completely superior. I don't think it matters much to Israel whether Iran flies F-14 or Su-30.

S-300/350/400 may be slightly more of an issue of course. However even the latest Russian SAMs will most likely be handled quite well by the growing number of Israeli F-35.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Looking at how the Su-30 is faring in Ukraine, I don't think a few Iranian Su-30 should be an issue for Israel. The Israeli SAMs will have absolutely no problems dealing with them of course and even more importantly the Israeli F-16, F-15, and (of course) F-35 will be completely superior. I don't think it matters much to Israel whether Iran flies F-14 or Su-30.

S-300/350/400 may be slightly more of an issue of course. However even the latest Russian SAMs will most likely be handled quite well by the growing number of Israeli F-35.

I think you got the situation a bit reversed.
Israel doesn't fear Iran having ground strike aircraft that can reach Israel.
It fears Iran having air superiority fighters that can attack Israeli planes en route to Iran during a strike on nuclear facilities.

Already a central issue is range of Israeli aircraft, and adding dogfight maneuvers to the equation is surely to add significant complication to the mix.

 

[STURM]

Looking at how the Su-30 is faring in Ukraine

I don't think the Su-30's performance in the Ukraine is anything to go buy. IMO if the IAF [an air arm with various key enablers including data links, AEW platforms, etc] fared badly in a war; to me this would be a much more accurate indicator.

The overall performance of the Russian air force in the Ukraine is not so much due to imitations with its aircraft but a host of other factors.

 

[STURM]

Iran's assassination attempt on Salman Rushdie, and blaming him for the incident, still gets no condemnation by Amnesty which saw it fit to equate Ukraine to the Islamic Jihad group.

No doubt in due course we'll know more but for now; is there anything solid indicating Iran tried to assassinate him per see or was it the work of a deranged or misguided individual?

3. Leverage on Russia has been largely exhausted so Russia would naturally deepen cooperation with Iran.

3. Iran is still pleading with Russia to defend it in Syria, and will only keep pressuring more.

"Naturally deepen cooperation" in various areas no doubt but not; as I see it; with regards to cooperation over Israel.

Well I have no idea about the "pleading" but then again Iran has nothing to lose by "pleading" or asking. Given that both countries are in Syria for different reasons and that Russia has no desire or interest for tensions with Israel; Iranian "pleading" will go nowhere.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

No doubt in due course we'll know more but for now; is there anything solid indicating Iran tried to assassinate him per see or was it the work of a deranged or misguided individual?

Yes.
A fatwa by Iran's supreme leader himself, all the way back in 1990 and later reiterated in 2019 by the current supreme leader, to kill Salman Rushdie.

Even if Iran didn't send Iranian-born, IRGC-trained agents to the US to attempt the assassination, it's still equally responsible for ordering a hit for all the Ayatollah's followers.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1558896249935462400

 

[Big_Zucchini]

"Naturally deepen cooperation" in various areas no doubt but not; as I see it; with regards to cooperation over Israel

It doesn't have to consist of agreements explicitly naming Israel. Any agreement between Russia and Iran is harmful to Israel. And any defense deal involving Iran importing Russian weapons is harmful to Israel even if labeled as "self protection".

Well I have no idea about the "pleading" but then again Iran has nothing to lose by "pleading" or asking. Given that both countries are in Syria for different reasons and that Russia has no desire or interest for tensions with Israel; Iranian "pleading" will go nowhere.

It is true that Russia for a good reason essentially told Iran to piss off with these requests, but Israel's leverage on Russia was always relatively lacking, and with the war in Ukraine it's now borderline non-existent unless we look at the issue of future Israel-Russia trade which is a wild card considering the western political climate.

 

[STURM]

fatwa by Iran's supreme leader himself, all the way back in 1990 and later reiterated in 2019 by the current supreme leader, to kill Salman Rushdie.

I'm aware of the fatwa and have been from the time it was released but I specifically asked if this assassination attempt was Iranian planned and ordered. At the moment we simply don't know. It could have been the work of a lone individual who was acting on the fatwa but was not carrying it out at Iran's behest per see. Or maybe not.

Israel's leverage on Russia was always relatively lacking,

That may be so but Israel long understood why Russia was in Syria and that it was there for slightly different reasons compared to Iran; despite both sharing the common goal of eradicating IS. Russia and Israel also have a common understanding with regards to not butting heads in Syria.

If doesn't have to consist of agreements explicitly naming Israel. Any agreement between Russia and Iran is harmful to Israel

I'll put in in a way that can't be misconstrued; cooperation in areas that have nothing to do with Israel - not everything revolves around Israel and not all cooperation is necessarily a threat against Israel. You'll also need no reminders that Russia has along history of cooperation with Iran on issues of common interests related not only to the Middle East but also the Caucasus, Afghanistan and the Caspian Sea.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

That may be so but Israel long understood why Russia was in Syria and that it was there for slightly different reasons compared to Iran; despite both sharing the common goal of eradicating IS. Russia and Israel also have a common understanding with regards to not butting heads in Syria

From another perspective it might seem they are there for the same reason. That is, they both want Syria as another base and economical asset. And both fought passively for it. ISIS was never their concern.

But Russia's interests in Syria are diminishing since it takes a large army and vast influence to justify globally spread bases. For now, ambitions = curbed.
So they could in a sense fulfill Iran's requests in another way - an almost full withdrawal from Syria, allowing Iran to take control except for a few actual bases.

I'll put in in a way that can't be misconstrued; cooperation in areas that have nothing to do with Israel - not everything revolves around Israel and not all cooperation is necessarily a threat against Israel. You'll also need no reminders that Russia has along history of cooperation with Iran on issues of common interests related not only to the Middle East but also the Caucasus, Afghanistan and the Caspian Sea.

On which Israel never reacted except for a purely diplomatic protest.
Perhaps the reality in Europe shows us that Israel could step up the game and go after Russian-Iranian cooperation that could indirectly harm Israel, like arms transfers. Specifically when they're in Iran itself. Previously attacking such systems even in Iran would be considered too hostile.

 

[STURM]

From another perspective it might seem they are there for the same reason. That is, they both want Syria as another base and economical asset. And both fought passively for it. ISIS was never their concern.

.

The reality is that IS was and is a source of major concern for Iran and to a lesser extent Russia. Both aldo wanted or rather needed Assad to stay in power and both also had different strategic reasons for being in Syria.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

In a meeting with Scholz in Berlin, PA supreme leader and PhD in holocaust denial Mahmoud Abbas refused to apologize for his role in the Munich Olympics massacre in 1972, and claimed the Palestinian people have endured 50 holocausts.

In the last few years, the PA has lost significant support in the Arab world due to frustration of the Arab nations who wanted Palestinians to accept peace so they'd themselves have a way to sell normalization to the public, and because Arab countries donate significant funds to Palestinians with basically no returns and a political cold shoulder from the PA which has not refrained from causing diplomatic crises with said Arab states.

The PA draws some legitimacy from ties with European countries and the US, but it seems it is not averse to diplomatic crises with them as well. The most on the surface logical explanation to this phenomenon might be Abbas's ever decreasing popularity and a willingness to take a hit vs Europeans and angering Israel further (on whom he relies greatly) to curb said decreasing popularity.

Abbas is considered a useful collaborator by the Israeli government, which is why we see things like this:

Palestinian Authority said to nab 2 Islamic Jihad members with 17 kg of explosives

Suspects, residents of West Bank city of Nablus, questioned over purpose of reportedly 'substandard' material

www.timesofisrael.com

But do I expect Israel to get revenge on Abbas for these statements that will hurt the current Israeli government's popularity (cooperation with the PA is a point of contention in Israeli public opinion)? Not at all. This could however result in less dialogue in the short term.

EDIT:
One thing I forgot to mention is that part of the reason why Israel doesn't talk about a long term peace with the PA anymore is that the public is pretty much fed up with a process it thinks has been exhausted. These remarks by Abbas are only going to delegitimize Israeli ties to the PA, and it already has caused a ripple in Israeli politics.
Top politicians like defense minister Benny Gantz are already trying to explain to the public that dialogue is necessary despite the severity of Abbas's remarks.

Germany's Scholz 'disgusted' at Abbas’s '50 holocausts' comments

The German chancellor rejected the use of the word 'apartheid' in a meeting with the PA president • Liberman: Abbas is alive today only because of security coordination with Israel

www.jpost.com

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1559780922714734597

Israel and Turkey to reset ties after over a decade of on and off diplomacy.
In 2010 Turkish-Israeli relations were suddenly frozen after many years of warm friendship built on strategic defense trade. I can only assume Turkey believed it was worth the potential gain in influence in the Muslim world, but to say its policy vis a vis the Arabs was coherent is a bit difficult.
After similar switches from friendship to rivalry (and vice versa) with many nations, it seems Turkey is on a path to consolidate around a coherent stance.
Experts believe this warming of ties is not temporary as was since 2010, but will hold for the foreseeable future. Why exactly? I don't know.
But we can see that Israel's normalization/peace with an increasing number of Muslim states shows that Turkey no longer stands to gain anything from hostility toward Israel, but rather quite the opposite. Muslim states seeking to increase trade with Israel will greatly appreciate a geographically strategic Turkey that takes a part in that trade. Perhaps this is why experts believe this time it's there to last.

Additionally, Turkey's frenemy relations with pretty much all its neighbors allows it to be a good mediator.

With reset, Turkey and Israel look to build durable ties that can reshape the region

Long reconciliation process reaches successful conclusion as 'frenemies' agree to swap envoys, a major step that could have important implications for Middle East

www.timesofisrael.com

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Israeli military chief says Israel struck in a "3rd country" during Operation Breaking Dawn.
Two known instances of "Israeli justice" were a strike in Syria near the port of Tartus, and a mysterious explosion in Sanaa, Yemen, involving Houthi-operated Iranian munitions.
It is unknown if the strikes had any relevance to the operation, but if the military chief decided to comment on that, and use that wording, it's very likely it was connected. And since we know the PIJ has presence in Syria, and that attacks from Syria could have high value (desire to create an image of victory), plus that PIJ is an Iranian proxy (as opposed to Hamas which is supported by Iran but is largely independent from it), it is very likely chief of staff Kohavi was referring to Syria.

Military chief says IDF forces struck ‘third country’ during recent Gaza fighting

Kohavi doesn't name nation or target, but Arab media reported Iranians and Lebanese killed in large explosion at Houthi camp in Yemen earlier this month

www.timesofisrael.com

IDF also releases a bit of PR, talking about the extent of the use of armed drones in Gaza.
Armed drones are usually powered by smaller/weaker engines than fighter jets, with an emphasis on range and persistence over speed and agility. This design choice limits their payload in both quantity of munitions and their weight, forcing industries to develop lighter, smaller munitions for drones.
This has a positive effect in that the IAF (as well as any armed drones operator elsewhere) has the ability to drop light munitions while quickly closing firing loops in real time.
It thus contributes to a larger trend in the IDF of increased capability to 'dial' an effect - choose in short time periods the size, lethality, and functionality of a munition, and strike the target with a munition proportional to the mission.
Thus the parasitic lethality, i.e the potential to harm undesired targets such as infrastructure and innocent civilians, keeps going down, which in turn keeps reducing by every operation/confrontation the collateral damage and civilian deaths.

Israel has been more focused on assassinating high ranking PIJ figures in the last operation, and the reported dominance of drones over Gaza during the op might have made the strikes much more surgical.

Armed drones gave IDF ‘surgical’ precision during recent Gaza fighting, officers say

UAVs conducted over 2,000 flight hours during 3-day battle against PIJ earlier this month; airbase commander says Strip 'covered' in drones, collecting intel 24/7

www.timesofisrael.com

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Apparently centrist Israeli Prime Minister Lapid does not support the nuclear deal and urges halting diplomatic efforts.

World must ‘walk away’ from Iran nuclear talks, Lapid tells Western leaders

Senior Israeli official says continuing to negotiate shows weakness after Tehran gave noncommittal response to 'take it or leave it' offer

www.timesofisrael.com

Israel's defense establishment has previously laid out some facts - IDF has a variety of attack plans, some of which still need work, and some are ready to act upon on short notice.

Israel's public believes in the event of such an attack, Iran is likely to wage a limited war (albeit sufficiently limited to avoid risking all its assets at once) on the Israeli homefront, and that they'll be the main target of said war.
But it is also not averse to this fact. To the contrary, there is basically no political element that I'm aware of that expressed any objection to a strike on Iran knowing it might bring war.

So this might partially explain why it is easy for even dovish political figures to take the hawkish stance on Iran, without incurring any political penalty.

As for why Israeli politicians, military, and intelligence figures are so dominantly supportive of the 'no deal' option, one of the reasons for that might be the difference in priorities for the US and Europe, versus Israel and the Arab world.
US and Europe see this as a nuisance, while Israel and the Arabs see it as a strategic threat, even an existential one. That was the macro level.
But on the micro level, for Israel a diplomatic solution (whose ability to halt Iran's nuke efforts is arguable to say the least) is a time period in which not only is a strike not an option, but significant operations against the program are also off the table, as we've seen with the ramp up when the JCPOA failed and decrease when the latest talks began.
Even the period of talks is considered a no-go zone, as Israel, especially under Lapid which believes in more dialogue with the US and fewer unilateral actions, prefers to have the American green-light on this.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Israeli Kan news reports a dangerous rift created between Israel and Egypt after the ceasefire agreement (regarding Operation Breaking Dawn in early August).

בעקבות המבצע בעזה: נתק בין ישראל למצרים

בקהיר לא היו מרוצים מהמגעים להפסקת האש - ונקטו בצעדים אקטיביים מול ישראל כדי להבהיר את חומרת המצב ביחסים בין הצדדים

www.kan.org.il

The reported reason: Egypt wanted general calm, but Israel proceeded to arrest further PIJ figures in the West Bank shortly after.

While I understand Egypt's reasons, they are essentially protesting a country exercising its sovereignty in its most basic form. From my POV, I see a significant obstacle here in Egypt's ability to conduct foreign policy with regional allies and powers.
A likely reason for Egypt's protest is the alliance is not popular, and any actions vs Palestinian factions (regardless of their political affiliation, e.g Hamas being Muslim Brotherhood that are Egypt's opponents) are only going to raise criticism of said alliance.
Egypt needs to sort this educational issue, much like other countries in the region cannot afford to have Sunni-Shia differences affect their policies.

In Jordan, peace with Israel is extremely unpopular, mainly due to a significant portion of Jordan being Palestinians. It already affects said peace and it seems rather fragile right now.

 

[STURM]

In Jordan, peace with Israel is extremely unpopular, mainly due to a significant portion of Jordan being Palestinians. It already affects said peace and it seems rather fragile right now.

Is this an objective assessment or one seen from an Israeli lens? Based on my own - limited - observation and discussions with Jordanians [not of Palestinian descent] they see and understand need for peace with Israel but because of the unresolved Palestinian issue [unlike you they don't blame the Palestinians and only the Palestnians] they don't see Israel in a favourable light.

If you want to talk about Arab attitudes towards peace with Israel you will note support from the ground for the Palestinians remains fairly strong; whether in Algeria, Oman or the UAE. Even in countries which signed the Abraham Accords the decision of their rulers [with a lot of U.S. urging but with ordinary citizens having no say] to sign the accords was unpopular but [note the distinction] it wasn't because they want Israel to cease to exist of because of "hate" or because they don't see the advantageous [which you mentioned several times] but because of solidarity with the Palestinians.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Is this an objective assessment or one seen from an Israeli lens? Based on my own - limited - observation and discussions with Jordanians [not of Palestinian descent] they see and understand need for peace with Israel but because of the unresolved Palestinian issue [unlike you they don't blame the Palestinians and only the Palestnians] they don't see Israel in a favourable light.

If you want to talk about Arab attitudes towards peace with Israel you will note support from the ground for the Palestinians remains fairly strong; whether in Algeria, Oman or the UAE. Even in countries which signed the Abraham Accords the decision of their rulers [with a lot of U.S. urging but with ordinary citizens having no say] to sign the accords was unpopular but [note the distinction] it wasn't because they want Israel to cease to exist of because of "hate" or because they don't see the advantageous [which you mentioned several times] but because of solidarity with the Palestinians.

That's caused by many years of indoctrination. They are taught to support Palestinian factions (as a monolith) without understanding anything beyond that simple point.
There is no wonder the Arab nations are in such a sorry state, constantly.
No amount of good-will gestures, donations, aid, will convince them.
If they ever choose to forego peace, it will be to their detriment.
All I'm saying, to those who read here but are less informed, that this is a problem that exists, and is a factor in the general outlook on the region.

 

[STURM]

Were not on the same page. I know you have a lot to say [mostly from an Israeli perspective] but I merely countered your statement or claim that Jordanians are not keen on the deal because many are Palestinians - incorrect.

I also pointed out to you that for many ordinary non Palestinian Arabs in various Arab countries; the Abraham Accords is not popular for reasons I gave.

I'm sure you think you have it all figured out but the idea that Palestinians are unable to think because they are brainwashed and the reason the don't have a state is entirely their fault [Israel naturally shares no blame] is condescending and poppycock... Next will you claim that the Palestinians don't understand the concept of peace because they are incapable; being brainwashed and consumed by hate? Naturally Israel and only Israel off course makes "good-will gestures, donations, aid" but alas it's all wasted on the ungrateful, warmongering, hateful and nefarious Palestinans right?

Reading your narrative one would get the - false - impression that the Palestinians only have to think; do what's expected of them and what's right [from an Israeli perspective] and they would get their state; simple as that. Well I'm not a Middle East expert and I've never claimed to be one but I can differentiate fiction from non finction.

 

[Big_Zucchini]

Were not on the same page. I know you have a lot to say [mostly from an Israeli perspective] but I merely countered your statement or claim that Jordanians are not keen on the deal because many are Palestinians - incorrect.

Oh, then in that case yes my opinion is that it has a lot to do with the composition of the population, they feel the topic is closer to them than other Arab nationalities. But that is only if we apply relativism here as well.
If you say, as usual, that in absolute terms the average Jordanian view of Israel is the same as the view in other Arab states, then I disagree.
All dislike Israel, but some more than others. That is relativity.

I'm sure you think you have it all figured out but the idea that Palestinians are unable to think because they are brainwashed and the reason the don't have a state is entirely their fault [Israel naturally shares no blame] is condescending and poppycock... Next will you claim that the Palestinians don't understand the concept of peace because they are incapable; being brainwashed and consumed by hate? Naturally Israel and only Israel off course makes "good-will gestures, donations, aid" but alas it's all wasted on the ungrateful, warmongering, hateful and nefarious Palestinans right?

That is a vast oversimplification of things, but it is more true than not.
But we will disagree here because you view things more absolutely, and I more relatively.

In binary logic, both "1" and "2" produce a 'True' statement.
But with relativism applied, it becomes 2 > 1.

Maybe on this we can agree:
Had the entire region been composed of European-style liberal democracies, none would hear about Israel any more than, or in a context different from, say, Norway.

Reading your narrative one would get the - false - impression that the Palestinians only have to think; do what's expected of them and what's right [from an Israeli perspective] and they would get their state; simple as that. Well I'm not a Middle East expert and I've never claimed to be one but I can differentiate fiction from non finction.

I don't really understand what your point is behind all this, beside blaming Israel for the nth time for something that is really not the subject at hand.

Of course as an Israeli I would post mainly about things I am exposed to in the media, but I am trying to make this as region-centric (rather than country-centric) as possible.

 

[STURM]

Oh, then in that case yes my opinion is that it has a lot to do with the composition of the population, they feel the topic is closer to them than other Arab nationalities. .

It indeed has to do with the composition but as I clearly explained it's inaccurate to say that Jordanians are against the peace deal because a significant chunk of Jordanians are of Pakrstinian descent or descendent of Palestinians who fled Palestine for Jordon decades ago. Many Jordanians who are not of Palestinian descent are also not very happy with the peace deal because of the unresolved Palestinian issue and are disgusted - unlike you these people don't assign blame solely or only on the Palestinians.

All dislike Israel, but some more than others.

"All"? Didn't you mention something about "absolutes" and "oversimplification?" What if I peddled nonsense such as "all" Israelis are incapable of seeing Palestinians as human beings but as terrorists; even an 8 month baby in diapers and a 80 year old man with his dentures and walking stick are terrorists.

But we will disagree here because you view things more absolutely, and I more relatively

That's how you see it no doubt but I see it as you looking at things with a large degree of biaseness; with a very narrow lense. Look at your narrative; Palestinians being "brainwashed"; unable to think; not wanting peace and being unable to be convinced by "good-will gestures, donations, aid,"' This is self serving and condescending view; akin to me saying nonsense such as the Arabs are blameless; everything which has gone wrong for them was a result of external [read Western/Zionist] conspiracies.

In binary logic, both "1" and "2" produce a 'True' statement.

But with relativism applied, it becomes 2 > 1

Ta for the lesson.

don't really understand what your point is behind all this, beside blaming Israel for the nth time for something that is really not the subject at hand

Well I'm obliging by helping you "understand"'. First of all I'm not blaming Israel per see; neither am I completely exonerating the Palestinians. Secondly if it's " really not the subject at hand" then why mention the stuff in your post?

Of course as an Israeli I would post mainly about things I am exposed to in the media

Profound difference writing stuff based on what you're "exposed to in the media" and the message you're sending; Israel can do no wrong; there would be peace if only its enemies were reasonable; not "brainwashed" and accepted Israel's "good-will gestures, donations, aid" and Palestinian children are only killed because terrorists placed them in areas where they know the Israeli Air Force will hit or because terrorist rockets malfunctioned.