In the extreme enemy, the arrogant and brute force owners admit their failure to prevent the occurrence of October 7, and the commander of the extermination army announces his resignation, and forms a committee to investigate the causes of the serious shortcomings and failure.

In the lower enemy, the banners of victory are fluttering, and the victors compete over who will have sovereignty over the rubble, a victory that mitigates the crime of genocide, for which a court was convened that issued arrest warrants for the criminal killers, just as it suffocates the breath of anyone who dares to criticize gambling.

Arabs have a habit of turning facts upside down, describing the blind as “Abu Basir,” the one-eyed as “Karim al-Ain,” and the sick as “al-Mu’afi.” We called the June defeat a “setback,” which are deceptive descriptions that contradict painful facts.

Arabs decorate ugliness and praise delay by saying: “Every delay has a good thing in it,” which is an attempt to save those who are late, and legislate the disgrace of delay, and transform it into praise. There is no blame on the latecomer even if his delay causes the destruction of the country, just as Egyptian writers excelled in criticizing mistakes; as a small employee says in an attempt to flatter his boss if he makes a big mistake: “Your mistakes are moving the country forward, sir!”

Criticism does not detract from the uniqueness and boldness of the October spectacle, which the resigned Chief of Staff Herzi Halevi said would “accompany him throughout his life.” But the uniqueness of the spectacle does not grant it immunity or sanctity, nor the right to practice dictatorship in the manner of “I only show you what I see.”

The lesson is in the endings and outcomes. Life has been wiped out from Gaza, the dreams of the Gazans have been shattered, their sorrows have deepened with the enormity of the loss of their loved ones, and their lives have returned to the era of the tribe and the tent, while the speech of victory is raised in their faces on the tips of spears, to suspend the virtue of criticism, review and evaluation in order to avoid adventures and the repetition of going to the nihilism of options.

What applies to the owners of the “flood” applies to the owners of the “peace of the brave”, as each one is infatuated with his achievement and exalts its status. The thirsty man thought it was water before he saw it as a savage settlement in the West Bank and a barren, desolate land in Gaza, while the owners of the “flood” did not offer an alternative to peace, otherwise what is the need to turn against it, if something better than it is not offered.

Victory is not called victory unless the great sacrifices are turned into political gains that make what comes after the flood better than what came before it. Otherwise, we ask God Almighty that the flood be the last of our sorrows and the conclusion of our victories!