People view life here as a logical reality, not only according to their ideology, but also according to their intellect. It is difficult to see a reasoned, intellectual approach in the decision of the Hebron settlers not to bulletproof the vehicles that transport their children to school. Their explanation is that bulletproofing their vehicles would only elicit a more violent response from the Palestinians, thus creating a greater danger for the children. Without this, the government would have had to deal with the security issue in a more far-reaching way, and perhaps we would have never reached the stage of shooting at children. The dispute between the Hebron settlers and the Ministry of Education, which demanded during Yossi Sarid's tenure as minister that the vehicles used to transport children be bulletproofed, reflects not only the way these settlers view reality, but also the general public's uncomfortable feeling with this reality.
Nothing arouses sympathy for the settlers more than an injury to a child.
But if the settlers are accused of using their children for ideological purposes, one must also recognize that their critics also make political use of their own children. No one criticized the residents of Kiryat Shmona for endangering their children by living under the shadow of Katyusha rockets. No one made a call to evacuate children from Sderot after the city was exposed to mortar fire. A foreigner looking at Israeli sees the entire region as one of high risk, and many indeed wonder how it is even possible to raise children here - in Tel Aviv just as in Beit El. From this perspective, the distinctions between the two are merely nuances.