8 thoughts on “BREAKING: Israeli Soldier Died on Secret Spy Mission Inside Syria – Tikun Olam תיקון עולם إصلاح العالم
Comments are published at the sole discretion of the owner.

  1. Yitzchak Rabin was not Chief of Staff in 1984.
    Refael Eitan was till 1983 (planning) then Moshe Levi at the time of the operation.
    Prime minister was Yitzhak Shamir. (Planning – Menachem Begin).
    Defence minister was Moshe Arens till September 1984 then Yitzchak Rabin, so Rabin probably had little to do with the operation as at most he was involved at the last moment.
    Arik Sharon was a previous Defence minister probably involved in the planning.
    Omer Bar Lev only became the commander of Sayeret Matkal during 1984, so Shai Avital the previous commander, probably was a major planner.

    1. @ Shai: I made that error due to a quick [mis]reading of the Haaretz Hebrew article. It actually says Rabin was defense minister, and one of the key players in the operation. And Sharabi was killed in Dec 1984. So Rabin was involved from Sept-Dec in it.

      That being said, if the planning lasted 3 yrs that would’ve given all of them a hand in planning and preparation.

  2. You wrote:” The IDF units also plant such devices in Lebanon to monitor Hezbollah communications. This particular operation there also ended in failure.“. However, Han Yunes is in Gaza and not in Lebanon. You may want to replenish your “Israeli sources“.

    1. @ Old Nag: If you only learn one thing here (and it’s unlikely you will), when I say a thing, it is true. So thanks to you I’ll now add two different incidents in which IDF spy operations failed. So thanks for alerting me and permitting me to add that information.

      And yes, there was one in Lebanon as I said in my post.


      I find the Gotcha nature of your comments exceedingly tiresome.

      1. When I say a thing it is true

        Everyone makes mistakes. And you have done many on this blog in the past.
        Not to mention, you are making many assumptions in your writing which could be wrong.

        1. @ Dan: No Dan. I haven’t made “many mistakes” in this blog. A few. But when I make a mistake I admit and correct it. I didn’t make a mistake in this case.

          you are making many assumptions in your writing which could be wrong.

          “Could be?” Anything “could be.” But I’m interested in what is, not what could be. And I know that I’m not making assumptions and that I cannot be wrong about this. If in the future you wish to prove with facts and credible sources that I am wrong, be my guest. But “could be wrong” won’t get you far here.

  3. But what’s the actual confidential portion that was published exclusively here? The aspect relating to the planting of listening devices? You yourself are claiming that it’s unlikely the reason. Care to venture a more plausible explanation?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *