I thought then, and continue to believe, that Israel had a right to retaliate against Hamas for the murderous rampage it carried out on October 7. I also thought that Israel’s retaliation could include an attempt to incapacitate Hamas so that it could not launch such an attack again. To recognize this right to retaliate is not to mitigate Israel’s culpability for the indiscriminate use of tactics and weapons that have caused disproportionate harm to civilians, but I believe that Hamas shares responsibility for many of Israel’s war crimes. Hamas’s leaders knew, when they planned the attack, that Israel had the most right-wing government in its history, at immense cost to the civilian population of Gaza.
Hamas’s operatives do not wear uniforms, and they have no visible military bases. Hamas has embedded itself in the civilian population of Gaza, and its extensive network of tunnels provides its combatants the ability to move around quickly. Even if Israel’s bombers were intent on minimizing harm to civilians, they would have had difficulty doing so in their effort to destroy Hamas.
And yet, even believing this, I am now persuaded that Israel is engaged in genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. What has changed my mind is its sustained policy of obstructing the movement of humanitarian assistance into the territory.
His essay was a well-informed and compelling read, wasn’t it? It’s a clear journey of his shift in mindset, well substantiated with his comprehension of facts as they became available to him. I’d expect no less from the former director of the ACLU.
I definitely appreciate that he considered the point of view of the Israeli government, as too many people are black and white on this matter, before reaching his conclusion.
Right. He weighed on all perspectives of attack and defense, and still came to the conclusion that this could not be seen as anything other than an act of genocide.
His essay was a well-informed and compelling read, wasn’t it? It’s a clear journey of his shift in mindset, well substantiated with his comprehension of facts as they became available to him. I’d expect no less from the former director of the ACLU.
I definitely appreciate that he considered the point of view of the Israeli government, as too many people are black and white on this matter, before reaching his conclusion.
Right. He weighed on all perspectives of attack and defense, and still came to the conclusion that this could not be seen as anything other than an act of genocide.