Michael Oren was the former Israeli Ambassador to the United States. His 10/23/23 Op-Ed in the Wall Street Journal is titled "Hamas Mortally Threatens Israel's Existence." Contrary to the way Professor Myers minimized the threat to Israel from the Palestinians (Hamas), Oren asserts "if the conflict ends in stalemate or cease-fire, the terrorists will have gotten away with mass atrocities on Israeli soil. We will never be secure from future onslaughts. Tourism and foreign investment will vanish, and many Israelis will raise their children elsewhere."
By the way, everyone notice how the D-MSM and others on the left and in the Democratic Party have been fretting about the displacement of the people in Gaza, because Israel warned them to get out of the way of their bombing. I haven't seen the same concern about all the Israelis displaced from both southern Israel (because of the Hamas attacks) and northern Israel (from the attacks by Hezbollah). Myers also ignored how Israelis in the much of the country are afraid of leaving their homes. And, of course, he ignored the blow to the Israeli economy as a result of so much of the country being effectively shut down, or having to leave their jobs to serve in the IDF.
Walter Russell Mead is a regular commentator in the WSJ. In his 10/10/23 Op-Ed, he wrote this: "Hamas has done all it could to keep Gaza wretched while inculcating an ideology of genocidal rage." And: "...there is no doubt that Iran trained, supported, advised and equipped the killers." How nice to see an Op-Ed with such clarity. This opinion, of course, is directly to the contrary of the Biden Administration saying Iran was not directly responsible for the current attack by Hamas. I get it. Biden does not want to see a wider war. But that statement was so obviously farcical, it was of no help whatsoever.
Mead: "As Winston Churchill said to Neville Chamberlain after Munich, 'You were given the choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war." (Recall Chamberlain agreed to concede the Sudetenland to Nazi Germany, in exchange for Germany not pursuing further territorial objectives. Chamberlain announced "peace for our time." Of course, that was short lived, with the Nazis next invading Poland.) And here is, perhaps, the key point made by Mead, a point that is missed by the D-MSM Op-Ed writers: "...the war must be won before peace can be built." In just those few words, Mead spoke with the moral clarity so lacking in the leftwing commentators.
Similarly, Jerome Marcus wrote in the 10/24/23 WSJ: "Israel Needs Unconditional Surrender." Marcus tells us that an unconditional surrender was exactly what the Allies demanded of Nazi Germany. As Hamas shares the Nazi's goal of extermination of the Jewish people, the only acceptable outcome is an unconditional surrender. Marcus: "At the Potsdam Conference in the summer of 1945, the Allies agreed on a complete disarmament and demilitarization of Germany, the transfer of land from Germany to Poland and the Soviet Union, and the expulsion of German populations from the countries Germany had attacked. The Allies also provided for 'de-Nazification - removing Nazis from positions of authority, eliminating Nazi political organizations, and the arrest and trial of war criminals."
Here is a question I would like to ask all of the leftwing, D-MSM commentators: Why do you not believe in winning? Does it somehow offend your sense of "fairness?" Do you not want to make a judgment as to which side is "right?" Whatever is going on with these leftwing opinion writers, one thing is clear - they are lacking in moral clarity. Something that can only be found in conservative circles.
Eugene Kontorovich writes in the 10/17/23 WSJ: "The Siege of Hamas Is No War Crime." While acknowledging that having civilian victims of war is a tragedy, he says: "But if even unintentional harm to civilians constitutes illegal 'collective punishment,' as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has called Israel's operations in Gaza, even defensive war is effectively precluded." The result would be that Israel has to just sit back and take it. Absurd. Quoting the U.S. Defense Department law-of-war manual, Kontorovich says siege is a "legitimate" part of a lawful war.
"Only starvation directed at civilians is prohibited," per the manual. Kontorovich: "This should be obvious: An army need not help its enemy obtain provisions during a conflict." Should be obvious, but it's not to the Left. I believe Biden made a huge error in announcing that humanitarian aid would be sent to Gaza, without asking anything in return. Here is what I would have said to Hamas, while simultaneously announcing it to the entire world: "No one wants to see the civilians in Gaza suffer. You, Hamas, are the governing authority in Gaza. Aid will flow as soon as you release all the hostages. Please tell the world what is more important to you - the welfare of your people or the holding of innocent hostages."
Kontorovich: "The evacuation of civilians is a standard measure to avoid humanitarian crises. Israel has moved tens of thousands of its own citizens away from the area of the Gaza border. (And, I would again add, from northern communities given the firing of rockets and missiles by Hezbollah.) Hamas, by contrast, has ordered its civilians to stay put, presumably to increase the tally of civilian deaths for propaganda purposes." That latter point is one that I have often stated, as the point needs to made repeatedly, because the D-MSM falls for the Hamas propaganda all the time.
As an example, Hamas said Israel targeted a hospital, killing 500 people, so the D-MSM dutifully reported that as fact. (The story was false.) But that is the leftwing media, taking the word of a terrorist organization, an organization that excels at propaganda. The reality is that Hamas places their missile launchers and military facilities in or under hospitals, schools, mosques and the like. They do so knowing that Israel will have to respond, resulting in civilian deaths. I want to know why Arab and Palestinian Americans are not out protesting Hamas. Why aren't they protesting the atrocities committed by Hamas? Why aren't they out protesting the way Hamas has mistreated the people of Gaza 17 years? And why aren't they protesting the way Hamas uses the citizens of Gaza as "human shields?"
As one letter to the editor in the WSJ said: "If the Palestinians want peace, they must have the courage to denounce terrorist activities. It isn't Israel's fault that their entire infrastructure is being sacrificed in the defense of Hamas. If they are going to embrace a group that calls for death to Israel, expect there to be painful consequences." Got that everyone?
