Strident?…Working On It..

I apologized today to a dear friend for, as he put it, “scratching an itch” when the topic of the Iran–Hamas war came up. I got more strident than I intended and talked more than I listened. To be fair, he asked the question—but I responded too loudly, too verbosely. I’ve made the same mistake with my family. To friends and family, I apologize.

His question: “Isn’t there a better way to go here?”

My answer: “Better way to do what?”

He clarified: “To stop the killing of Palestinians.”

I replied: “That’s the wrong question—from the Jewish and Israeli perspective. The right one is: how do we disarm Hamas so they can’t keep indiscriminately killing Jews?”

And off we went.

In reflecting afterward, I realized I had not articulated my core beliefs—about Israel, Jew-hatred in jihadist Islam, and rising Jew-hatred in the U.S. and Europe. That’s when it became clear: we didn’t just disagree. We saw the world through fundamentally different lenses. And I am unclear how to bridge that gap. Facts alone will not do the job. Somehow, I need to engender sympathy for what Israel and the Jewish community are going through – not just “the Palestinians” perspective. In other words, this discussion will be a meaningless exercise without understanding each other’s context.

What I believe:

• Iran and its proxies—Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, and others—want to destroy Israel and kill the Jews who live there. There is no desire for peace.
• Jihadists believe it is a religious obligation to kill Jews and never surrender land they claim, regardless of the world’s opinion.
• It is antisemitic to believe:
  • Israel should not exist;
  • Jews are not indigenous to Israel, Judea, and Samaria (aka the West Bank);
  • Israel has no right to defend itself against terrorists dedicated to its annihilation.

Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons is an existential threat to Israel. Unlike other nuclear standoffs, Israel would not survive even a limited strike. A nuclear hit on Tel Aviv—and the ensuing fallout in Jerusalem (23 miles away) and Haifa (57 miles away)—would be catastrophic.

When someone tells you they want to kill you,
believe them.

The surge of Jew-hatred in America stems from a false narrative: that Israel is a white colonial occupier oppressing people of color. That myth, pushed by far-left progressives in the U.S. and Europe, is rooted in anti-West ideology—hostile to liberty, individual autonomy, limited government, economic and religious freedom, and free speech. In this worldview, Jews are cast as privileged white oppressors. Zionism—the belief in Jewish self-determination—is recast as racism.

Personal context:

My grandparents fled Eastern Europe and the Pale of Settlement to escape Jew-hatred. Most of our relatives were murdered in the Shoah. My Grandmother came up with some 60 relatives never heard from again. My father faced antisemitism in college, society, and business. I was bullied in high school for being Jewish—and later in life excluded from the same country club my friends joined. Jew-hatred was not theoretical; it was my inheritance. I always believed, and still do, that America—besides Israel—is the best place for Jews to live. But the margin with the rest of the world is narrowing.

The conversation always winds up here:

“The Israelis are killing innocent civilians. It must stop.”

My response: This is a war. Hamas, Hezbollah, and others will not stop killing Jews in Israel—or abroad—unless they are defeated and disarmed. Israel not only has the right to defend itself—it has the obligation.

Then comes: “There must be a better way.”

I always ask: “What do you think that better way is?”

And that’s where things fall apart. Because unless you believe terrorists can be persuaded to stop, there is no alternative.

What might work—some combination of:

1. The total destruction of terrorist infrastructure, personnel, and equipment.

2. The Palestinian people rejecting Hamas, rising up, and establishing leadership not devoted to Israel’s destruction. (Spoiler: it’s not the Palestinian Authority.)

3. Halting the flow of money—intended or not, enables terror. That includes funds from the UN, the U.S., the EU, and Arab/Islamic dictatorships like Iran and Qatar.

What won’t work:

Another cease-fire that lets Hamas regroup and rearm. Palestinian leadership has rejected peace—in exchange for a state—at least five times. Rejected it outright. Why? Because peace would mean recognizing Israel’s right to exist. Peace meant a stop to killing Jews which, if you are a jihadist, is a requirement.

Then came the question:

“So the whole world—except the U.S.—is against Israel?” Isn’t that a bit paranoid?

My answer: Pretty much yes. And here’s why.

         It is not paranoia when “they” really are out to get you.

• The Western Left: fueled by post-colonial ideology that sees Jews as white oppressors and Israel as illegitimate.
• Europe: they are more left than the US left, and they have a long history of entrenched and violent anti-Jewish bigotry. Many European leaders are afraid of their own radical Islamist minorities, are too left and too cowardly to do what is necessary to stop or control anti-Jewish bigotry.
• Russia and China: see Israel as a proxy of the West and thus believe it is to their advantage to undermine Israel.
• Arab and Muslim countries that continually reject peace due to religious fanaticism and political convenience—they use Israel as a scapegoat to distract from their own oppression of their own people.
• It is notable that countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Syria feel obligated to deride Israel in public, but privately are seeking normalization through the Abraham Accords. P.S. The United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Sudan, and Morocco have already signed the Abraham Accords. Jordan and Egypt have peace treaties with Israel. How many of those countries have peace treaties or want to establish something like the Abraham Accords with Iran?

So yes. Much of the world is biased against Israel because of history (most of Europe), politics (left wing mostly) anti-Jewish bigotry (part of the history) fear of home-grown terrorism (UK, France, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway) and expedience (Turkey). Oh yes, and oil.

Let’s talk about the media:

I don’t trust major outlets when it comes to Gaza. Many rely on “facts” from Hamas and biased NGOs like Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. Are some of their reports accurate? Probably. But overall, mainstream and social media on this topic are unreliable and biased. The New York Times, Washington Post, and others continue to use Hamas related “journalists” as sources and/or have been forced to “apologize” for factually incorrect and inflammatory reporting.

Let’s talk about Iran:

I believe if Iran had nukes, it would use them on Israel. I believe the regime would do it. The Ayatollah heads a fanatical regime. The victims, other than Israelis, are Iranian civilians.

Let’s talk about Netanyahu:

Should he be Prime Minister? On domestic matters, I’d say no. His judicial reform attempt was pure politics and vengeance. But Israel is a democracy and it is not up to non-citizens. The elected him, and will get a chance to retire him. But when it comes to Iran and dismantling terror infrastructure and the commitment to protect Israel and the Jewish people, I believe he understands the stakes—and has the will to act. And unless he’s ousted in an election, he’s not going anywhere. And as long as the world continues to refute or ignore Israel’s right to exist and to defend itself, Netanyahu has an enviable track record of doing right.

Let’s talk about Hamas (Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Palestinian Authority):

• They have repeatedly rejected peace in favor of killing Jews.
• The leadership is corrupt – enriching themselves (most of whom live in luxury in Qatar), using “humanitarian” aid to build terrorist infrastructure, and oppressing their population.
• The continue to promulgate, support, and encourage a cult of death.
• They cannot and will not agree to peace with Israel and thus peace is impossible (as is any idea of a two-state solution) as long as they are armed and leading the “government.”

Continuing the Apology:

That, my friend, is what I meant to say—in a calm, measured, even-tempered voice.

Instead, I let fear, anger, and pain do the talking. I’d like to try again.

No promises of success.

Only effort.