What they said

Using the security forces without a direct, immediate and non-postponable threat could lead to destructive repercussions for Israeli democracy and citizens' trust in the institutions of governance

Israel is passing through a complex and explosive security reality

We stopped Israel from reaching Sidon

If that is the case, why did you refuse my request to obtain an operational update through the official channels, as is customary? And why are you trying to delay the convening of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Security Committee until next week?

Eisenkot's letter is an irresponsible step to discuss sensitive security issues publicly. All decisions taken by the government were based solely on security considerations and in full coordination with the security establishment

The use of security agencies without a direct and immediate threat that cannot be delayed may lead to destructive repercussions for Israeli democracy and for citizens' trust in institutions of governance

We are no longer Trump's America. Americans chose to rediscover our better angels instead of self-destruction. I hope you will do the same.

The America you knew no longer exists.

We defeated our own Benjamin Netanyahu, and now it is time for you to defeat your own Netanyahu.

Progress in the peace talks will depend to some extent on the outcome of Witkoff and Kushner's talks in Russia

The economic campaign (against it) is highly destructive.

Geographically distant American military installations, including those we have not yet attacked... we may strike some islands that they believe lie beyond the range of our missiles.

If American planes take off from an American military base — even if it is located in a European country or in another distant region — to bomb Iran, we will target those bases as well.

Keep the Israeli army out of politics and do not harm Israel's security and unity of command

Do not put the army before a constitutional conflict

If Gadi Eisenkot were truly interested in the country's security, he would request a secret meeting with the prime minister and the chief of staff, review the intelligence information, and express his opinion/demand in a closed session. Eisenkot was chief of staff, and he knows well that sensitive security matters are discussed in closed sessions, not in public. His public message sent through the media aims to undermine confidence in decision-making processes within the Israeli army and in Israeli society, and is a regrettable and direct continuation of the Israeli left's readiness on the eve of war to harm Israel's security and use it as a political pressure card to achieve political goals. I demand you, Gadi Eisenkot, keep the Israeli army away from politics, and do not recklessly endanger Israel's security and the unity of its leadership. Simply, don't do it.

The party has observations on the framework agreement, and there are things that should have been included or addressed, but it is not about to form a political front to bring down the agreement or weaken the Lebanese state in favor of Iran or any party linked to it.

The army commander is more aware than anyone of the military institution's capabilities and limits, and burdening it with responsibilities it cannot carry out may open the door to an internal confrontation that is not in Lebanon's interest.

Criticizing public institutions is a legitimate right, but talking about the army is different because of the sensitivity of its role amid internal and external turmoil.

So why did you refuse to receive an operational update through the official channels as usual? Why are you trying to delay the convening of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee until next week? I will not allow a vacuum in oversight of a government that has lost the Knesset's confidence. I will not allow any deviation, even slight, from security considerations. I promise you that.

Moving cautiously with dangerous steps that can be postponed until a new government is formed.

All decisions taken by Netanyahu's government were for purely security reasons and in full coordination with the security establishment. Instead of spreading fear and division, we should act responsibly. Eisenkot's message is an irresponsible step to discuss sensitive security issues publicly.

They should be silent and behave properly.

There is no exclusivity for the resistance's weapons, and no control, prevention, or disarmament under the ceiling of Israeli occupation.

We are ready to agree on the most complex issues; even the weapon we discuss, but after the withdrawal and the end of guardianship.

I will not allow a vacuum in oversight of a government that lost the Knesset's confidence

On November 5, a letter arrived in Lebanon, specifically to the Minister of Youth and Sports, from the International Olympic Committee and the Asian Olympic Council, asking her to recognize and deal with the Olympic committee chaired by Pierre Jalkh, and she must implement the decisions of the Court of Arbitration for Sport that recognized Jalkh's committee before the 15th of this month, but this has not happened so far. If the deadline set by the International Olympic Committee expires, it is sad that we may reach the point of suspending Lebanon internationally, preventing the national anthem from being played when our champions rise at international forums, and depriving them of wearing the Lebanese national uniform. We hope this issue reaches a happy ending in the coming hours.

We are facing a real turning point and crisis at present, and are only days away from matters deteriorating and the possibility of suspending Lebanese sports from international participation, which would restrict it and negatively affect all national teams and champions wishing to compete, in a country where sport is the only outlet, especially since the current era, led by President Joseph Aoun, aims to put Lebanon on the right track.

High readiness must be maintained on all fronts and threats must be preempted

For Lebanon, between sovereignty and protecting it through the army, the resistance and the people, and between guardianship, occupation and surrender, our choice is sovereignty.