Third time? Ice cream!

An opinion column on ynet criticizes the campaign for a third war against Iran, arguing that the two dominant approaches—those of Netanyahu and Chief of Staff Zamir—ignore past failures. The author demands explanations for the gaps between declarations and achievements, and warns against selling another war to the public without acknowledging the lies that were told.

Einav Schiff analyzes in an opinion column on ynet the public campaign for a third war against Iran, criticizing the two dominant approaches in the discourse. The first approach, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and heads of security mechanisms, pushes for immediate action, preferably with the US but also without it. The second approach, led by Chief of Staff Eyal Zamir and backed by the opposition, holds that the situation is troubling but not urgent enough to warrant action in a transitional government. Schiff argues that both approaches ignore the strategic failures of the two previous wars, and notes that Zamir himself described them as a success. He demands explanations for the gaps between declarations and achievements on the ground, especially in light of Netanyahu's declaration of toppling the regime as a goal. Schiff warns that selling a third war without admitting failures and lies is folly, and compares it to the saying "third time's a charm."

Third time? Ice cream!