This column has a rule to not be one of the “Me-Too” variety. In this context, a “me-too” is when everybody and their dog is writing on a given subject. To warrant yet another take on such a huge subject requires what I believe to be a unique viewpoint.
While reading many of the same things you likely saw, I found there were some amazingly inane comments by supposedly serious people. These are not from your neighbor or cousin; these are from “serious people.” Their statements will become part of the discussion as if they are real unless someone calls them out.
First there is the granddaddy of stunning statements – of course it comes from our Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken. It refers to the recent $6 billion given to Iran as part of an exchange of prisoners. “Not a single dollar from that account has actually been spent to date,” Blinken said on ABC’s “This Week.” “And in any event, it’s very carefully and closely regulated by the Treasury Department to make sure that it’s only used for food, for medicine, for medical equipment.”
It is startling how ignorant Cabinet members of Mr. Biden’s think we are. First, numerous real people have commented on the fungible aspect of money. A teenager knows that. How about the fact that a leader of Iran clearly stated they will spend the money as they wish? There is the fact Blinken asserts our Treasury Department will monitor every last dollar spent. What about the billions of dollars lost to fraud currently in the Employee Retention Credit (ERC) program? Or the billions of dollars in fraud in unemployment benefits or the food stamp program. And the program best executed — the PPP program — still had billions of unauthorized payments. Yet, the mullahs are going to track every last dollar assuring it is properly spent.
The other aspect is Iran doesn’t need the $6 billion that badly since Biden’s policies have filled their coffers with an additional $50 billion as Larry Kudlow and others have estimated.
Here is an idea: Give the $6 billion to Israel. Reparations.
Then there is the “dean” of foreign issues columnists, New York Times’ Thomas Friedman. He whipped out a column on the topic because that is what he does. “Personally, I do not believe that Hamas can ever be a partner for a secure peace with Israel. Hamas has had way too many chances for way too many years to prove that the responsibilities of governing in Gaza would moderate its goal of destroying the Jewish state. But the Palestinian Authority can be a partner.”
Friedman wants to stake the future of peace on 87-year-old Mahmoud Abbas who has no discernible successor since first being elected in 2005 followed by term extensions with no end in sight since 2009. While he is not as out of control nuts as Hamas, he does not offer any hope for a civilized peace. If he did, the West Bank would be an independent state by now.
Let’s look at Friedman’s colleague at the Washinton Post, Max Boot, who has authored books on foreign policy. “An Israeli-Saudi normalization deal, assuming it preserves the possibility of a two-state solution, could make an important contribution to Israel’s long-term security.” What two-state solution? With whom? American leaders have been pitching this for ages with Biden resurrecting this pipe dream. Palestinians have been in control of a totally unoccupied territory, Gaza, since 2005. In 18 years, they have done nothing to show they are interested in doing anything other than live on welfare from the EU, United States and Arab countries. How about Saudi Arabia behaving like the rest of the Arab countries and giving up on people who don’t want to help themselves? Max, why are you still pitching this failed idea?
Senator Ed Markey is not the only one who has stated the next sentiments. One would think that when fellow senators were actually in Israel and could have been murdered by the rampaging terrorists, he might show a little restraint. Or better yet some realization his comments are going nowhere. He stated “Hamas wants continued instability, not normalization. They are violent extremists. They gain support when there is a crisis. That is why the United States, and the international community, must keep pushing for diplomacy and the ending of civilian casualties on all sides. There must be a de-escalation of the current violence.”
You know someone is just blabbering when they say, “all sides.” Israel should negotiate with violent extremists? What Senator Markey and his ilk are stating is that Hamas should be able to kill 1,200 Israelis in barbaric fashion and take a substantial number hostage and Israel should just ask for peace talks.
There is the ever-enlightened Editorial Board of WaPo. They wrote, “The United States has an important role to play here as well. It can and should offer diplomatic support and emergency military assistance and work with the Israeli government, Palestinian leaders, and humanitarian organizations to help ensure that civilian casualties and suffering in Israel and Gaza do not spin out of control.” Sorry folks, aren’t you a little late for that? Or, like Senator Markey, you think the Israelis should lick their wounds, bury their dead, and pray for return of the hostages?
Last, there is our new Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Charles Q. Brown. He issued what has been characterized as a “stern warning” to Iran. He urges Iran not to get involved in the ongoing conflict between Israel and the Palestinian armed Islamist group Hamas. General Brown, it seems you are massively late — by years. Not a sterling beginning in the first crisis under his command.
Having thought leaders and government leaders spewing so much nonsense can only lead to a muddled perspective for our fellow citizens. And this is just the first few days.
Let me end by providing what I believe to be a clear perspective. What was done on Saturday by Hamas is unequivocally and absolutely uncivilized. There is an argument it is “just the few in Gaza.” Not true; they are all guilty. Their system breeds hatred for Israel and Jews. They are no different than the Germans during World War II. If you don’t believe that read Hitler’s Willing Executioners by Daniel Goldhagen. Or watch the documentary on Netflix, Ordinary Men. You will come to the same conclusion: they are all guilty.
As for the people protesting in support of Hamas, let’s make this clear. This was not an attack on Israel alone; it was an attack on America. At least 27 Americans were killed, and an unidentified number have been taken hostage. Maybe these Hamas supporters are just Jew haters in their minds. But they are cheering on the people who killed Americans and want to kill more. They should be characterized as “traitors.” What else would you call people supporting those who murdered Americans?
And people are complaining about misinformation on X? Just a little clarity here.
