E.J. Dionne is a thoughtful columnist for the Washington Post. He writes here about the extremists on the left who defend the terrorism and butchery by Hamas. I repost his article because his views are similar to my own. I deplore the callousness and undemocratic policies of the Netanyahu regime. I support a two-state solution. I hope for the day that Israel and its neighbors are willing and able to collaborate to improve the standard of living for everyone in the region. And I deplore the horrific terrorism that Hamas inflicted on Israeli civilians of all ages on October 7. Hamas knew that their attack would provoke a ferocious response by Israel, and that the world would react with fury towards Israel. Hamas uses the Gazans as human shields.
I hope that Netanyahu is permanently disgraced by his failure to seek reconciliation and by the security lapses that allowed Hamas to slaughter civilians. I hope that everyone involved in the attack on Israel is captured and punished. I am deeply concerned about the humanitarian crisis in Gaza and pray for the safety of innocent Palestinians and for a swift end to the Army’s incursion. Above all, I pray for peace among the Israelis and their neighbors.
He writes:
A conversation I had last week with a progressive Jewish friend is, I think, representative of many discussions happening on the left. Most liberals are horrified and outraged over Hamas’s killings and kidnappings in southern Israel but also strongly support a Palestinian state and are deeply critical of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s government.
My friend anguished over parts of the left — yes, they are very vocal online but a tiny minority of a broader movement — that not only failed to condemn Hamas’s atrocities but in some cases justified terrorist acts against innocents, many of them left-wing Israelis in kibbutzim who long for peace based on justice for Palestinians and Israelis alike. For my friend, this moral failure signaled that antisemitism had embedded itself in the wing of politics with which she has long identified.
To comment on this intra-left controversy risks distorting the political stakes, since there is a rare consensus in mainstream politics that Hamas’s terrorism was “an act of sheer evil,” as President Biden said in his powerful speechon Tuesday. Little pockets of sympathy for Hamas will have no effect on U.S. politics going forward. The important contrast is between the moral and strategic seriousness of Biden’s response and the petty, unhinged and self-involved rantings of Donald Trump. Maybe, just maybe, Americans pondering a vote for the former president will see more clearly that returning him to the White House would be an act of democratic suicide.
But liberals and supporters of the democratic left like to pride ourselves on being sensitive to injustice, decent in our instincts and capable of making distinctions. To rationalize the sadistic crimes of Hamas meets none of these standards. Doing so also undercuts the arguments that the vast majority on left wants to make about the future of Israel and Palestine.
It’s true that years of right-wing governance in Israel, the spread of settlements on the West Bank and the assault on democracy by the Netanyahu government have altered the balance of forces on the left. Older liberals such as Biden (and, yes, I’m in that camp) have an unshakable and ingrained sympathy for the survival of a Jewish homeland in Israel, while also empathizing with the injustices and suffering that Palestinians confront. We continue to support an increasingly distant two-state solution precisely because we want the Jewish homeland to be democratic and we want Palestinians to have a democratic government of their own.
But the destruction of Israel would be a moral catastrophe, and Hamas longs for that outcome.
Unlike the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Palestinian citizens of Israel, Hamas is explicitly antisemitic and will accept nothing short of the end of Israel. Netanyahu thought he could keep Hamas in check and ignore Palestinians, who, like so many of the Israelis slaughtered in the south, were willing to take risks for peace. The strategy of containing Hamas and privileging settlements on the West Bank has failed in an abysmal and tragic way.
The sharp turn to the right in Israel that Netanyahu engineered has undercut support for the country among younger Americans in the United States. Most of these increasingly vocal critics have resisted supporting Hamas, but the gut liberal sympathy for Israel has largely disappeared among those born after Biden’s generation and mine. If Hamas’s shameful attack has mostly restored consensus in the Democratic Party around the need to defend Israel against mass terrorism, the underlying opposition to Israel’s settlement policies and its refusal to engage with Palestinian demands for self-determination remains.
The shock of these traumatic events should shake everyone into a reassessment rooted in moral realism. As my Post colleague Max Bootargued last week, the imperative of accountability should lead eventually to Netanyahu’s ouster. Even as supporters of Israel stand up for its right to self-defense, analysts with long experience in the Middle East, including Thomas L. Friedman of the New York Times and The Post’s David Ignatius, warn of the dangers of overreach in Gaza. Having reported alongside them and learned from them during the war in Lebanon in the 1980s, I share their skepticism of grand military plans that promise to settle a conflict for good. We have seen too many such promises fail in the Middle East. And Biden was right in his speech to call attention to moral obligations that apply even in legitimate wars of self-preservation.
The left should not stop advocating on behalf of justice for Palestinians. And Israel’s center and left should not stop demanding that Netanyahu’s plans to undercut the country’s judiciary be shelved permanently. But terrorism will not create a more democratic Israel or lead to self-determination for Palestinians. The Israeli-Palestinian dispute is rife with ambiguities and conflicting moral claims. This cannot be said of what Hamas did. Its actions are, exactly as Biden said, unambiguously evil.

The current of antisemitism now is very disturbing.
LikeLike
yup
LikeLike
The most important collection of events in recent history are those that go under the collective name of the Holocaust. And the most important lesson of the Holocaust is this: never again. Never again must those who desire the destruction of the Jewish people be tolerated. I wish that the geographical location of the Jewish homeland had not been so important to those who sought, after the horrors of the 20th century, to establish the state of Israel. I wish it had been established in, say, Nebraska. There would have been a lot less trouble, and we would have benefitted enormously from having these, our friends, among us. But it is what it is, and Israel is a fact now and has been for a long, long time, and we have a moral duty to defend it. We owe so very much to the Jewish people. Our debt to them is incalculable, our bonds of love and friendship, I hope, permanent and indissoluble.
The attack by Hamas upon innocent civilians, including babies and toddlers, was cowardly and evil. May every terrorist who had a hand in this, on the ground or in the planning, be brought to justice.
LikeLike
Hamas intended their attack to be as horrific as it was, and they knew that it would inevitably provoke an Israeli response. No way that Israel could see the slaughter of civilians and do nothing. The purpose of the attack was to bring about the response, which was sure to cause the deaths of many Palestinians, unite the Arab world, and torpedo the normalization of relations between Saudi Arabia and Israel. It is telling that Israel urged Gazans to move away from the part of Gaza where bombs would fall, but Hamas urged them to stay in place, thus maximizing civilian deaths.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is indeed!!!
LikeLike
And of course Egypt won’t take any refugees in.
LikeLike
I think Nebraskans might have had something to say about that especially since rabid antisemitism was not confined to Europe. I know you were being facetious, but it does point out that Jews were only tolerated at best no matter where they went. Their historic home seemed the logical place especially since there was no Palestinian state.
LikeLike
I was NOT being facetious. I was deadly serious. Nebraska is an extremely low-population state and was even more so in 1947-48. There was discussion at the time of the possibility of establishing a homeland elsewhere. The population of Nebraska in 1948 was 16 people per square mile.
LikeLike
Michael Chabon’s novel, “The Yiddish Policemen’s Union” is an alternative history where Jews were settled in Alaska. To be more accurate, it’s a detective novel set in that alternate history.
LikeLike
Thanks, NYCPSP. I’ll check it out.
LikeLike
Probably much like other rural states, but the main point was that antisemitism was so prevalent even after the Holocaust that sticking them in their desert homeland among other Semitic peoples was easier to rationalize as well as being appealing to the Jewish people who looked to their 5000 year old roots.
LikeLike
I have seen a map of the Mideast that included all the majority Muslim nations and Israel. In that context, Israel looks like a pea in a very large bowl of mashed potatoes. There ought to be a way to make peace and enable Israel to share its agricultural technology with its neighbors. Israel has made the desert bloom. Why not spread the knowledge and know-how?
LikeLike
I wonder if there are NGOs doing that sort of collaboration now?
LikeLike
There are just too many people, in government & in general (not on this site, of course) who don’t know nor understand the immensely complex history & geography of the region, and that all sides have legitimate claims, complaints, outrages and needs regarding living in such a small area amidst fellow Semites (they’re all semitic people from that region). Before lodging an opinion, our elected officials need to brush up on that history so they can make informed & intelligent decisions, but also understand the emotions & claims by all sides about the situation & possible solutions of the region.
LikeLike
I agree with Diane that a two state solution would be the best way to reduce hostility in the region. Israel is very defensive with good reason. It is surrounded by nations that want to destroy them. As Biden mentioned in his excellent speech yesterday, Israel’s secret weapon according to Golda Meir is that the Jews have nowhere else to go. However, it also makes them reluctant to part with any territory they have in this small nation. Like the US Israel is also grappling with political polarization from right wing nationalists. However, without compromise there is little that can be done to minimize the conflict. Biden and Blinken are doing their diplomatic best to keep the lid on this volatile situation.
LikeLike
I know I am going to catch flack for my comments but…. I believe and have for years believed that religions, regardless of brand, have been basis for so many wars and destruction over the centuries. What is going on between Hamas and Israel is just a prime example of where religion has led so called civilized people to over so many centuries — maybe since man/woman discovered fire. Nothing is going to change, only get worse, until the religions of the world stop fighting each other and practice what they preach.
LikeLike
You won’t get any flak from me. Extremists in every religion are intolerant. We need a world filled with kindness, love, and peace. If only everyone practiced their religion as a private choice and respected the right of others to do the same or to have no religion at all.
LikeLike
Yup! Freedom of religion shouldn’t give any group the right to impose their beliefs on others. Religion should be an individual choice and have nothing to do with the affairs of the state, IMO.
LikeLike
RT, the founders knew about the centuries of religious warfare in Europe. In most states, the sovereign told everyone what religion they should adhere to. The founders’ radical idea was to declare that religion and the state should be separate, and that every person should be free to follow the religion of their choice. Or none at all.
LikeLike
“…kindness, love, and peace…”. What a concept. Life would be so much better if people actually lived these ideals.
LikeLike
From the Atlantic today: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/10/hamas-hostage-taking-manual/675691/
A hostage-taking manual that an official in the Israel Defense Forces told me was recovered in the aftermath of the Hamas attack suggests that the group’s hostage-taking on October 7 did not go according to plan. Right now, more than 200 hostages are thought to be in Hamas’s hands in Gaza. The manual suggests that the group at first intended not to spirit all of them into Gaza, but instead to take them hostage where they were found inside Israel, possibly for a protracted standoff.
Become a Subscriber
The Atlantic obtained a copy of the manual from an IDF official, who vouched for its authenticity and who asked not to be identified because of the sensitivity of the materials. Israeli President Isaac Herzog had earlier referred to the document in an interview on CNN, calling it “an instruction guide, how to go into civilian areas, into a kibbutz, a city, a moshav [agricultural co-op].” He said it described “exactly how to torture them, how to abduct them, how to kidnap them.”
The hostage-taking, according to the manual, is meant to happen “in the field,” in areas that have been “cleansed” and brought under control. After the hostages are brought together, it says, they should be culled (“kill those expected to resist and those that pose a threat”); the others should be bound and blindfolded, then “reassured,” to keep them docile. “Use them as human shields,” it says, and use “electric shocks” to force compliance.
“Kill the difficult ones,” it adds. It specifically notes the need to separate women and children from men—confirmation that the snatching of children was planned from the start, and not the product of some kind of excess fervor following battlefield success. The manual specifies that only senior field commanders should negotiate with Israeli authorities, and then only with the advice of their own superiors, presumably still in Gaza. The final section, which has circulated online but was not included in the IDF version, advises the hostage-takers to threaten to kill prisoners if they revolt, or if Israel attacks or tries to gas them. (The document otherwise matches the one I received from the IDF, which would not authenticate the final section.)
The manual is printed out and marked confidential on top. It is written in Arabic, and includes a guide to Israeli military ranks and weaponry. There is one small, handwritten comment on the first page, and the graphics on the cover suggest that it was an official production of the unit that created it. It is impossible to tell whether the manual was a guide for all hostage-taking operations, or only for those at the site where it was recovered. The document bears a cover with the seal of the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades (Hamas’s military wing), and a watermark from something called the “al-Quds Battalion.”
All of the manual’s instructions suggest that the scenario originally envisioned was a standoff within Israeli territory. Such standoffs occurred over the course of the attack, such as in Kibbutz Be’eri, but none lasted for days, as the attackers seem to have expected. A whole section is devoted to “supplies,” in particular the hoarding of food and drinks, flashlights, batteries, and other equipment useful in holding out during a protracted siege. “Don’t use your own supplies to feed the hostages,” it cautions, “except in an emergency.”
The apparent discrepancy between the situation Hamas seems to have planned for and the one that is still unfolding explains some of the haphazard nature of the hostage-taking. Hostages were brought into Gaza with improvised transport, including SUVs, golf carts, and motorbikes. No such improvisation is mentioned in the manual I obtained: The Hamas members appear not to have expected that they could transfer their victims in such a disorderly manner, or indeed transfer them at all. Just as nearly all Israelis were shocked at how little resistance Hamas encountered, Hamas itself was likely put off balance by its quick dominance of the battlefield and ability to continue dominating it for hours, without encountering the full force of a modern military.
Graeme Wood: Hamas may not have a step two
The al-Quds Battalion barely exists online. Subunits of armed groups in Israel and Palestine proliferate and divide rapidly, so the existence of a new named group is not itself unusual. Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), another group with a significant presence in Gaza, has an al-Quds “brigade” (saraya). And on October 6—the day before the Hamas atrocities—PIJ announced that an al-Quds “battalion” (katiba) would operate in the West Bank. But this manual is clearly marked as an al-Qassam Brigades operational manual.
A Quranic quote also appears on the cover: “Our forces will certainly succeed” (37:173). The author of the manual foresees the hostage situation ending—he does not say how—with Hamas leaving the site. He says to mark the burial sites of Hamas’s dead, so they can be disinterred and moved after Israel’s eventual withdrawal from the land. But the effect of Hamas’s success was not predictable either by its perpetrators or by its victims. Two hundred hostages, ranging from little babies to old women, is an order of magnitude more hostages than Israel ever contemplated in its worst nightmares, and Israel’s conviction that Hamas must now be eliminated is in large part due to the enormity of this crime. The hostage-takers carried out a more successful operation than they expected, possibly even more successful than they wished.
LikeLike
Hamas’s Oct 7 attack will hurt Palestinian people for decades.
LikeLike
It will. And nothing will change as long as hatred of Jews is taught from childhood on by certain people. A few years ago, my ex-wife had a student from this part of the world (I am purposefully withholding the nationality), a “lovely fellow,” she described him as. And at the end of the year he gave her a parting present that he said would explain a lot to her about how the world REALLY works. It was a modernization of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, translated into English.
Aie yie yie. It never freaking ends.
LikeLike
Who thought it was a good idea to locate Israel in a sea of Arabs/Muslims and to displace the people who had been living in the designated area at that time. I think that the USA, Canada, Mexico, Australia and New Zealand (for example) should have taken in all the Jews after WWII. However, that never happened and we have to deal with these terrible slaughters and destruction. What happens when one of these terrorist groups gets hold of a suitcase nuclear device and explodes it in Israeli cities? These Hamas-type terrorists don’t give a damn if the radioactive fallout descends on Palestinian inhabited lands.
LikeLike
Jews were always a part of that area and left or got pushed out and then dispersed throughout Europe (I believe before the Roman Empire?). It IS their Homeland as well as the Homeland for Arabs/Muslims.
LikeLike
They don’t give a damn, and that’s a very real danger.
LikeLike
I’m a combat vet. I have fought in a war, and I agree that “War is hell!”
Civil War General William Tecumseh Sherman coined that phase several years after that war.
No matter what anyone thinks, we cannot change the fact that “War is hell!” by imposing rules of combat on troops that say innocent civilians should not be wounded, abused or killed during a war. That is an impossibility and hampers the ability of one side to end wars.
The Western rules of war today did not exist until after World War II. Those rules imposed by the United Nations after World War II were meant to stop the atrocities that happen to innocent civilians during that war and all of the wars going back millennia.
I think those rules do not work. They have failed and caused even more suffering because they exist. I think all they do is create wars that never end.
How many wars have democracies that support those rules of war won since the end of World War II?
The answer is NONE.
The Korean war ended in a stalemate and North Korea, where there are no democratic rules in place to protect innocent people, still exists and continues to threaten the West with its nuclear weapons. Even the Chinese Communist Party tried to get rid the brutal Kim regime and its threat to life on this planet but failed.
The Vietnam war ended when our troops pulled out after about 20 years of war. Still, even with the enemy the US fought for so long taking over that country, Vietnam didn’t turn into North Korea. I think it is arguable that the Vietnamese people are better off today than they were under French rule or during the long war with the US and its allies in Vietnam, Cambodia and Laos, where the United States dropped more bombs than were dropped during World War II. In Laos alone, the U.S. dropped more bombs than that country’s population. In Cambodia more than a quarter of a million cluster bombs were dropped and still blow off limbs and kill people today.
The United States and its allies fought in Afghanistan longer than 20 years and today, that country is ruled by the brutal and ruthless Taliban, the enemy we fought.
During World War II, the allies waged war against everyone that lived in the Axis countries. We firebombed cities in Germany and Japan killing more innocent civilians of all ages than were killed with the two atomic bombs dropped on two Japanese cities.
Why was our alliance so ruthless? Because we were fighting an enemy that refused to surrender. The enemy in Germany sent millions of innocent civilians of all ages to die in gas chambers, in ovens, or to be machine gunned and then buried in mass graves.
During World War II, the enemy in Japan slaughtered more innocent civilians of all ages in China (and other countries to a lesser extent) than all of the innocent people that Hitler’s Third Reich murdered in Germany’s concentration camps. There was the Nanjing Massacre, and in Shanghai my father-in-law (more than 90 today) witnessed a cousin of his get beheaded by a Japanese officer who was competing with another officer to see who could behead the most Chinese in the same amount of time by running through the streets and lopping off heads with their swords as fast as the could. My father in law, a teen at the time, was home sick and his cousin was coming to see how he was doing after school ended. Ness was inside the house looking through the window as his cousin was walking toward his front door and lost his head without warning. His cousin, about 12 years old at the time, didn’t even see it coming.
Hamas is no different than the Nazis in Germany and the Japanese military during World War II. Hamas, supported by Iran and other Islamic terrorist groups, has sworn to destroy Israel and drive every Israeli into the sea. Because of the rules of war that ignore the fact that WAR IS HELL, Hamas uses Palestinians and hostages as human shields.
If Israel follows those rules of war that ignore the fact that WAR IS HELL, Hamas will survive and continue to fight without those rules slowing them down until they achieve their primary goal, an end to Israel and Judaism, not matter how long it takes.
LikeLike
Lloyd, I am speechless with admiration for your straight talk.
LikeLike
Sadly you are correct.
LikeLike
So right. During peace time, it’s imperative that people support policies of peace. During war, it’s imperative that every single member of society supports the war effort. No exceptions. There are only two sides during war. I am a liberal, unabashed. I support the annihilation of Hamas.
LikeLike
Lloyd, you write the unabashed hard truth of war. Civilians die in war, but only Jews are not allowed to kill any civilians. This is a war for survival of the Jews in Israel. Where do the people of the radical left want 7 million Israeli Jews to go—especially those of the radical left who are Jewish. My grandparents had 15 siblings all together. Only about 4 branches survived because they immigrated to the Palestinian British Mandate or the United States. The rest were murdered in cold blood. If there would have been an Israel in the 30s and 40s, maybe a Holocaust could have been stopped. To me, Israel is my safe haven if I ever have to abandon this nation if it became a fascist totalitarian state. Evil has to be destroyed and if you condone evil and genocide, you have no moral center.
LikeLike
I found this article from JSTOR interesting.
https://daily.jstor.org/revisiting-yeshayahu-leibowitz/?utm_term=Read%20More&utm_campaign=jstordaily_10192023&utm_content=email&utm_source=Act-On+Software&utm_medium=email
LikeLike
Roy,
That is an interesting article, and I found myself mostly agreeing with Leibovitz’s views.
However, had the Arab nations not launched a war in 1967, they would still control the Golan Heights and the West Bank. Had they not used the Golan Heights to fire on Israelis, Israel would not have wanted to control them. Had the PLO implemented the 1993 accords, there would be two states.
I do not excuse Israel’s actions and I despise its role as a colonial power; but historical context matters. If the Arab nations had agreed to a two-state solution when Israel agreed, today there would be peace. At the time, the Palestinians and their Arab supporters wanted Israel to be eliminated, which made peace impossible. There were so many factions that Israel never had a negotiating partner who could make a deal and keep it.
LikeLike
I meet the news arriving from the Gaza Strip with horror and sadness. While it is true that Israel must do something, I cannot see the end of this at all. There was some hope, perhaps, before the murder of Rabin, but radicalism always seems to stir the pot before the reasonable advocates of freedom, justice, and dignity can bring the meal to the table.
LikeLike
Did you forget that after Rabin in 99 Ehud Barak is elected. He clearly stated in 1999 that Israel has two choices to become an apartheid minority state. Or to have a two state solution in which they peacefully co exist with a Palestinian State on the West Bank and Gaza.
At Camp David with Clinton and Arafat in 2000 he agreed to give 92% of the West Bank to a demilitarized Palestinian State and all of Gaza. He committed to removing all Jewish settlements in Gaza and the West Bank with passage in between. The other 8% of land the Palestinians were to be compensated for(presumably with US tax Dollars ). Arrangements were to be made for Jerusalem to effectively be neutral with access to all.
Arafat agreed to nothing and started the Second Intifada. Barak then gets defeated and Sharon elected… Barak later said there was nothing Arafat was willing to agree to and his presence was just a show.
But I will do a little twist on a famous quote.
“I can forgive Hamas for their terrorist attacks . I can not forgive them for making me support Netanyahu.”
LikeLike
Joel,
Thank you for your long memory. I remember the famous handshake between Ehud Batak and Yassir Arafat. That was the last genuine chance for peace and Arafat rejected it.
As for your last quote, I can’t imagine anything that would cause me to forgive the butchery of October 7.
LikeLike
The actual quote that I twisted.
“When peace comes we will perhaps in time be able to forgive the Arabs for killing our sons, but it will be harder for us to forgive them for having forced us to kill their sons. Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us.”
Golda Meir
LikeLike
Great quote.
LikeLike
This is all very vague. In order to discuss and debate the issue we would need to see the specific statements from those on the left “who refuse to criticize Hamas.” The left wing anti-establishment pundits on the left that I watch always begin by making it very clear that they do not condone or support what Hamas has done before they discuss what they believe are the root causes of the nightmare.
LikeLike
ArtsSmart,
You can read the statements from progressive groups on campuses or the statement by the Squad in Congress. They may make a pro forma statement condemning the savage butchery of men, women, children, and the elderly, then fervently demand an immediate ceasefire. That’s not going to happen. When terrorism goes unpunished, it encourages more terrorism. That’s why Biden and European leaders agreed that Israel has a right to defend itself. Israel should not target civilians, as Hamas did, and I think they were wrong to cut off the supply of food, water, electricity, and fuel. As I recall, the Israeli demand was that Hamas release the 250 hostages and Israel would restore essential services. War is an abomination. Muslims believe that Israeli colonialism is the root cause of the quagmire. Israelis believe that Muslim desire to eliminate Israel and every Jew is the root cause.
LikeLike