Regarding “PM: Hamas could drop some hostage deal demands” (October 29) – we keep discussing the demands of the Hamas terrorist organization for the release of the hostages kept captive for over a year. Firstly, whatever happened to the approach that we don’t negotiate with terrorists?
It also seems that the government is now prepared to make the “painful sacrifices” of which Prime Minister Netanyahu has always spoken, namely the release of terrorists held in prison for committing heinous crimes. In return, Hamas would release a few hostages. It is shameful for us to even consider such a “deal.”
This is a repeat of the Schalit deal that set free over 1,000 terrorists, including the monster Sinwar who orchestrated the October 7 massacre. Surely we could have reached this surrender to the terrorists months ago when there were still more hostages alive!
Better still, of course, would have been the obvious and moral action to take on October 8 last year, to allow our IDF and IAF to destroy Hamas and everything and everyone aiding it, which would have allowed for the release of as many hostages as humanly possible. At this late stage, we must not show weakness and desperation. We have to continue until we win.
If we are still not going to be for ourselves, who are we and for what do we stand?
EDITH OGNALL
Netanya
All the hoopla
There has been a new mantra making the rounds that the war will end after the new American elections (“‘US candidates’ Israel stance influences 91% of Jewish, Israeli-American voters,’” October 29).
Regardless of which party is believed to facilitate this conclusion more to Israel’s benefit, this fantasy does not take into account that a new administration would not take office until late January, and even after that, a new slate of cabinet officers would have to be chosen and approved by a new sitting Congress, and even when selected, it would take time for the new officials to even settle into their new offices, much less initiate international policy.
The wishful dreaming includes the notion of a strong savior figure lifting Israel from its present morass, which brings to mind a historical question regarding the attraction of dictatorial figures. I saw this for myself when on a visit to Russia, I asked people why Putin was so popular and was told that the people wanted a strong “father” figure who would solve everything for them.
I think with all the hoopla here in Israel about the American elections, we should remember that the US, with its system of checks and balances, moves with deliberate process and Israel may not be on anyone’s primary agenda.
We should remain realistic in our expectations that the solution to our problems will come from a single event or person from abroad, even if from the United States.
MARION REISS
Beit Shemesh
Iran getting bloodied
Regarding “Six takeaways from Israel’s airstrike on Iran” (October 27): The United Nations, World Heath Organization, European Union, numerous left-wing NGOs and media outlets, and the Biden-Harris Democrats are screaming, “enough is enough.” Israel is expected to end its fight against Iran and its proxies, which Islamists consider an offensive, rather than defensive, war. Jews are not supposed to fight back.
Iran’s enablers pussyfoot around the October 7, 2023 slaughter of Israeli innocents, Hezbollah firing more than 8,000 rockets into Israel, and Iran itself firing hundreds of missiles at Israel before Israel responded. Interestingly, the Arab world seems far less upset than we in the West are about Iran getting bloodied.
The war in Gaza will end when the Gazans have had enough and surrender. The war in Lebanon will end when Hezbollah has had enough and abides by UNSC 1701. The war in Iran will end when its nuclear program is set back permanently. That is America’s responsibility. If it does not step forward, Western civilization will be in peril and the Iran/China/Russia coalition will dominate the world.
If Israel must act, it will, for its own preservation, but alone it cannot prevent the West’s decline.
LEN BENNETT
Ottawa
Number one priority
Regarding “Iran exposed” (editorial, October 27): Would I be wrong in assuming that if Iran had attacked the US on two separate occasions firing off nearly 500 ballistic missiles, the response to such attacks would have been greater than that carried out by Israel? When will we ever learn that signs of weakness merely embolden the enemy and that the phrase “at least for now” just postpones the need to take more aggressive and specific action further down the line.
Meanwhile continuing in the same vein, we are experiencing wars on numerous fronts tragically resulting in the deaths of more of our brave citizens. Yes, “no man is an island,” and Israel must have consideration for the consequences which its actions evoke. However, a country must, as a number one priority, be true to itself and the citizens which it pledges to protect.
STEPHEN VISHNICK
Tel Aviv