"Out of the north the evil shall break forth upon all the inhabitants of the land" (Jeremiah 1:14). Is that so? Perhaps the evil will break forth out of the south? Will it be Hamas rockets from Gaza into Israel or the transfer of rockets from Syria to Lebanon? It is important. It is interesting. It has to be investigated. But the Israeli response must be the same no matter what the threat, and only in very extreme circumstances should this response be altered in any way: Whatever breaks forth must be shut down immediately. No free passes. No unilateral shooting. This approach requires an explanation: Obviously there is the possibility of Israel being attacked and not retaliating immediately, or not at all. But these incidents are so rare and so unlikely that they are more theoretical than a potential reality. We have to keep this possibility in mind in order to remind ourselves that nothing is automatic, or automated, but we must not allow it to actually happen. When Israeli towns sustain light rocket fire from Gaza, like the rocket fire into the Negev on Independence Day, Israel reacts with low-intensity fire. When a shipment of missiles makes its way from Iran to Syria and then to Lebanon, like the shipment that, according to foreign reports, the Israel Air Force destroyed this weekend near Damascus, it is always the right policy to respond, especially now. In both these incidents, and other incidents like them, the source of the violence is the Iranian ayatollahs. Just as the American administration is so close to striking a nuclear deal with Iran, ignoring the fears of most of the world, it is important to demonstrate to all that this development has not diminished Israel's resolve. Israel has pledged to combat the transfer of weapons to Hezbollah and to retaliate to any rocket fire from Hamas-controlled territory (both Hezbollah and Hamas are supported by Iran), and it must not appear as though Israel is backing down. Israel is not backing down at all. Israel will continue with what it has done until now, and perhaps even step it up a notch. In Gaza, things are very clear. If Hamas says it didn't fire rockets into Israel, then it must intervene and prevent other organizations in the Gaza Strip from doing so. Hamas certainly has the power to do that. An Israeli retaliation even helps Hamas explain to their people why they have to take action against rogue terrorist groups that don't comply with their directives. Hezbollah on the other hand cannot claim that the weapons shipment was meant for some other terrorist group. There are no terrorist groups on that front that are directly supported by Iran. Therefore, it can mean nothing else but that Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah is arming his group, and foiling the shipment was more than legitimate. Certainly when it rests on a dangerous relationship with Tehran. The military action attributed to Israel wasn't taken as a means of solving the problem. It can't. The only thing that these attacks, as reported in the foreign media, were designed to do was to maintain the status quo in the rocket arsenals of the large terrorist group Hezbollah.
