Thursday, Sept. 26, 2002 | 9:11 a.m.
ARAFAT'S PALESTINIAN FOLLOWERS stood on their rooftops and cheered as Saddam's Soviet-made Scud missiles passed overhead on their way to the heavily populated Tel Aviv area. That was back in January and February 1991 when Israel had agreed with the United States' request it not respond to attacks from Iraq.
Some nights, when sitting in a sealed room with Israeli children who had lost their homes to Scuds that had landed earlier, I questioned the wisdom of the agreement. The missiles only came in after dark, so during the daylight hours I had the opportunity to visit with large numbers of military people and civilians. They often remarked that their military had the ability to seek out many of the Scuds before they were fired. The U.S. answer to their concern was the deployment of some Patriot antiaircraft missile batteries.
The Patriot crews stationed in and around Tel Aviv were well received by the Israelis. Invitations into Israeli homes and even friendly athletic competition with the Israeli Defense Forces brought them all together. At the invitation of Bella and Amnon Shochat, I brought two of our soldiers to their home for a Shabbat dinner. The Shochats opened their home and hearts for my friends. If the Patriot missiles had been half as effective as their crews, there would have been few, if any, Scuds to reach Israeli homes. We soon learned that the Patriot antiaircraft missiles left much to be desired as a defense against incoming missiles.
I was amazed that Israel didn't return the attacks from Iraq. They weren't happy about the situation but, as good friends, they sat quiet. My opinion is that if Saddam had fired a chemical or nuclear load into Israel he would have received immediate return fire. There were some nights when the little children, awakened from a deep sleep, would look up at me when putting on the gas masks and I wanted to return fire.
The evening President George Bush announced the beginning of the ground war, the evacuee families and I watched the announcement on television. It also was the night that the last Scuds came into Israel. They came in at 3:30 and 5:30 in the next morning. I noted a column from Israel, "The first sirens started at 3:31 and the all-clear sounded at 3:46. The children who earlier had experienced the loss of their homes arrived at the third-story sealed room wide-eyed.
"The 5:30 awakening resulted in the youngsters dozing off and going back to sleep even before the tape and wet towels had been applied to seal the room from a possible gas attack. They had to be awakened when the all-clear sounded at 5:42."
Just how much of a beating can that little country take when neighboring enemies interpreted their silence in 1991 as a sign of weakness? A recent New York Times story might have given the answer. Writer Michael R. Gordon tells readers that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has told senior U.S. officials his country will strike back if Iraq attempts a repeat performance. This reflects the feelings of 70 percent of his citizens according to a recent poll.
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld told Congress that Israel again would be vulnerable to an Iraqi attack, but it "would be in Israel's best interest not to get involved." I have to believe that if he had looked into the eyes of the children in our sealed room in 1991, he would better understand the feelings of Ariel Sharon and his people. I recall the small brown-eyed schoolgirl on her way home in a neighborhood hit by a missile. When asked in Hebrew, "You weren't scared when the missile hit were you?" She looked up and answered, "Yes I was scared."
Some of those youngsters are now of age to serve in the military and are probably in uniform. I am sure they don't want their younger brothers and sisters hiding in shelters from incoming missiles and their country not responding.
Gordon, after quoting Rumsfeld, wrote in his article that a senior Israeli official argued, " 'The Americans prefer that we not retaliate, but they don't understand that if we are hit, we have to retaliate. This is the dilemma. The questions are: When? How much? If? We will have to see first where this big American military machine is going.'"
archive
