Israel is sparring with UN official Sir John Holmes over the “cycle of violence,” arguing that the term actually encourages terror. Haaretz explains:
During an official meeting with the former British diplomat, Abramowitz said such discourse draws parallels between terrorists and those who defend themselves against terror. He also stressed that these remarks could inadvertently lead terrorists to believe that the international community might apply pressure on Israel instead of addressing the roots of violence.
We addressed the MSM’s specious cycle of violence spin (also myopically referred to as tit-for-tat) time and again.
Here’s a more intuitive way to respond to Holmes: If Palestinian terror were to completely end, the IDF would certainly stop military action against Palestinians. The result: Total calm.
But on the other hand, if the IDF disappeared, there’s no doubt Hamas and other terror groups would continue pursue their official charter seeking to”obliterate Israel” and “raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.” This is no circular “cycle,” but rather a linear assault upon Israel, which acts in self-defense.
One final point to ponder: Tit-for-tat has already boomeranged on the Palestinians.
