‘The Day After’

Indefinitely. If you're wondering how long Israel plans to administer martial law in Gaza once the fighting's over, that's your answer. Maybe that's an inaccurate characterization of Benjamin Netanyahu's remarks to ABC, but it's hard to understand how Israel can have "the overall security responsibility" for the enclave, as he put it, without a military occupation. "We’ve seen what happens when we don't have that security responsibility," he went on. "What we have is the eruption of Hamas t

Join institutional investors, analysts and strategists from the world's largest banks: Subscribe today

View subscription options

Already have an account? log in

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

7 thoughts on “‘The Day After’

  1. “The Day After” … that’s one hell of a grim metaphor. One could say, “I pray to God that doesn’t prove to be apt,” but the irony would be so great it’d choke a horse. I wonder what the population of West Berlin was in 1983?

    I vaguely remember the hype when The Day After originally broadcast in 1983 (I had to look up the date), but I can’t claim to have watched it. Also, I hadn’t realized the impact that movie had on society, but Wikipedia provides:

    US President Ronald Reagan watched the film more than a month before its screening on Columbus Day, October 10, 1983. He wrote in his diary that the film was “very effective and left me greatly depressed” and that it changed his mind on the prevailing policy on a “nuclear war”. The film was also screened for the Joint Chiefs of Staff. A government advisor who attended the screening, a friend of Meyer, told him: “If you wanted to draw blood, you did it. Those guys sat there like they were turned to stone.” In 1987, Reagan and Soviet Premier Mikhail Gorbachev signed the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, which resulted in the banning and reducing of their nuclear arsenal. In Reagan’s memoirs, he drew a direct line from the film to the signing.

  2. Netanyahu may not be making these decisions, as his position grows more tenuous.

    Israel will occupy Gaza for some period. That’s usually what happens after a war. After 1967 Israel occupied Gaza for nearly forty years. Extended occupation is not the ideal choice and maybe not even a good one. This is a situation where all the choices are bad.

    The international community – e.g. the Arab states – could help provide better choices. We’ll see if they do so. My view has been that it is in the Arab states’ interest for Palestinians to be perpetually poor, stateless, and in low-level conflict with Israel. Hamas may have taken the conflict to a higher level than they want.

  3. “…penchant for deifying geography”. Well said !! Also the penchant for religious fundamentalists to insist that God is on their side, and all non-believers deserve to be exterminated. That tribal vestige of our dark evolutionary past needs to be eliminated from religious texts to help cleanse the human psyche if we ever hope to evolve beyond these inevitable and recurring paroxysms of violence.

    1. I should add that I mean religious fundamentalists of all flavors and varieties, so I’m not picking on any one particular religion. All religions are contaminated with fundamentalists. And one could broaden the scope even further by adding secular fundamentalists fervently committed to a particular doctrinal political, or economic view, that can include views on climate change, history including colonialism, culture, race, etc. Part of the appeal of fundamentalism is its promise to oversimplify a complex world, because navigating in a complex world requires intelligent informed effort.

    2. “And all non-believers deserve to be exterminated.”

      Sadly, this is what alot of “educated” westerners think the main world religions (eg Islam) teach.

      Since this is not the right place for this discussion, all I will say is you’d be better off researching any topic more thoroughly before jumping to conclusions.

NEWSROOM crewneck & prints