Thanks, George. Can you maybe address the 'sins of the father' question? I want someone to ask the IDF or the Israeli cabinet whether a baby on an incubator in Gaza deserves to die because of the terrible things his or her father (or brother) did. I'd expect them to say Hamas put that baby in danger – it's up to them to make them safe. But it's the absence of the slightest expression of human sympathy for innocent Gaza lives that's so depressing.
That's a very very strong point Markie, thankyou. Depressing is the word. It's the photos of children, like those on the front of the Times today, that get you every time. The helplessness and bewilderment in an adult world that isn't theirs and is meant to protect them. I've just been on radio to say that one of the darkest elements of this is the Israeli minister who yesterday said that the civilian population was complicit and must pay the price. That's the road to hell. But I feel a shift in the breeze in the West today from "We stand with Israel" to "Escalation must be proportionate" (my paraphrase). Let's hope and pray so. xx +
Thanks George, for this which I largely agree with. The important thin, I think is first to make sure that the evil of Hamas and their deeds and those who stand behind them is uneqivocally condemned as evil without any temporising references to history, context, other suffering or any other 'whataboutery'. Other evils can and must be condemned on their own terms, but relativising one evil against another is to avoid truth telling.
The key question which is so difficult, is how can Israel - and we in our minds and words - separate Palestinian people - in Gaza in this case - from Hamas. I listen to the stories of Gazan families suffering and who could not empathise. But how are Hamas to be punished, ejected or defeated without wholesale suffering of ordinary Gazan families. I have no answer other than looking to examples of people rising up against what is being done in their name - in Iran at present or the Confessing Church in Hitler's Germany in the past. All such involve very great suffering and nothing of what many would call victory.
Thanks again Guy. I'm an enemy of whataboutery too. But I don't think it not moral relativism applies to a fear of escalation and reprisals. I fear the Israeli minister yesterday who said that the civilian population were complicit with Hamas and must pay the price. I sense a sea change in the West from "Israel must defend itself" to "Civilians must be defended" and I'd like to think the Christ-like place is the second statement. Though I'm conscious the gospel injunctions I cite of "neighbour" and cheek-turning sound feeble in this context. I do think it's just to point out that giving Gazans hours to leave is cynical - how do they leave a city reduced to rubble, with no fuel and the Egyptian border closed? I fear Israel may be poised to grab censure from the jaws of support and solidarity.
Thanks, George. Can you maybe address the 'sins of the father' question? I want someone to ask the IDF or the Israeli cabinet whether a baby on an incubator in Gaza deserves to die because of the terrible things his or her father (or brother) did. I'd expect them to say Hamas put that baby in danger – it's up to them to make them safe. But it's the absence of the slightest expression of human sympathy for innocent Gaza lives that's so depressing.
That's a very very strong point Markie, thankyou. Depressing is the word. It's the photos of children, like those on the front of the Times today, that get you every time. The helplessness and bewilderment in an adult world that isn't theirs and is meant to protect them. I've just been on radio to say that one of the darkest elements of this is the Israeli minister who yesterday said that the civilian population was complicit and must pay the price. That's the road to hell. But I feel a shift in the breeze in the West today from "We stand with Israel" to "Escalation must be proportionate" (my paraphrase). Let's hope and pray so. xx +
Thanks George, for this which I largely agree with. The important thin, I think is first to make sure that the evil of Hamas and their deeds and those who stand behind them is uneqivocally condemned as evil without any temporising references to history, context, other suffering or any other 'whataboutery'. Other evils can and must be condemned on their own terms, but relativising one evil against another is to avoid truth telling.
The key question which is so difficult, is how can Israel - and we in our minds and words - separate Palestinian people - in Gaza in this case - from Hamas. I listen to the stories of Gazan families suffering and who could not empathise. But how are Hamas to be punished, ejected or defeated without wholesale suffering of ordinary Gazan families. I have no answer other than looking to examples of people rising up against what is being done in their name - in Iran at present or the Confessing Church in Hitler's Germany in the past. All such involve very great suffering and nothing of what many would call victory.
Many thanks Guy for taking the trouble. I'll revert when I'm off this next deadline! G
Thanks again Guy. I'm an enemy of whataboutery too. But I don't think it not moral relativism applies to a fear of escalation and reprisals. I fear the Israeli minister yesterday who said that the civilian population were complicit with Hamas and must pay the price. I sense a sea change in the West from "Israel must defend itself" to "Civilians must be defended" and I'd like to think the Christ-like place is the second statement. Though I'm conscious the gospel injunctions I cite of "neighbour" and cheek-turning sound feeble in this context. I do think it's just to point out that giving Gazans hours to leave is cynical - how do they leave a city reduced to rubble, with no fuel and the Egyptian border closed? I fear Israel may be poised to grab censure from the jaws of support and solidarity.
*I don't think it nor moral relativism*