After the bomb
In 10 years we may feel Ahmadinejad should have been detained in NY
A little before that, say in five to seven years, when all of Tel Aviv disappears in one giant flame and the survivors are able to find refuge in the Negev desert, perhaps we will come to have a different view regarding Ahmadinejad's freedom of speech.
Until that time, we are in favor of granting the Iranian guy rights. He is a national leader, and even if we disagree with his view that Israel has no right to exist, we are willing to die for his right to say it. This is the basis of freedom of speech.
We are certainly unwilling to prevent him from speaking. Let him speak. As long as he is merely preparing and building his nuclear bomb, we won't be the ones to stand in his way by silencing him.
We can fight by using diplomatic and economic means, and even introduce sanctions before he reaches the final stretch of development. In some cases, even military activity is allowed (although this is subject to international conventions and rights of the attacked party).
Yet to arrest a national leader who was invited by law to deliver a speech before the United Nations? After all, the Jews are blamed as it is for controlling the world, so if we insist that a national leader elected in democratic elections be detained, how will this make us look?
However, as noted, it is possible that in a few more years' time we will think differently. Things will look differently then. We can assume that when whole classes are wiped out in high schools in Ramat Gan and Petach Tikva, we will adapt our views to the changing reality.
Perhaps we should have believed him
A few hours after Ben Gurion International Airport no longer exists, the commercial center in Kibbutz Shfaim vanishes, and the Azrieli Towers in Tel Aviv become like Chernobyl, perhaps, in retrospect, we will feel that we should have arrested him when it was still possible.
However, as noted, this is what we will be thinking later on, if and when, heaven forbid, let us not jump ahead. Why do we need to terrify ourselves and put the cart before the horse?
Indeed, it is possible that the few dying Jews that remain in Afula and Ashdod (the towns in the north and south of the country at the edge of the bombing zone) will ask themselves whether it wasn't a mistake to behave like bleeding hearts in 2007.
Perhaps, some will say, we should have violated diplomatic norms after all and put the criminal in a police cruiser when he arrived in New York to deliver his speech. Perhaps we should have believed him when he promised that Israel would be wiped off the map instead of thinking he was merely an arrogant fool. After all, it was the same with Hitler, etc. etc.
On the other hand, then too there will be people who say that it is easy to talk like this now, in the year 2014, after "what happened" (they would not utter the explicit words: "the extermination of 800,000 Jews in central Israel," but instead opt for "what happened"). They will say it's not fair to judge what happened then through current-day lenses and that in 2007 it was more difficult to arrest Ahmadinejad during his New York visit.
And perhaps, looking ahead, they will be right then too. Just because a national leader threatens to exterminate us and prepares a bomb, are we allowed to violate diplomatic rules?
Therefore we can certainly say that at this time it's too early to say who's right. Perhaps, after all, it's better for us to wait until it's too late to know who's right.
