Even prior to when Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) began fighting Hamas after their October 7th deadly slaughter of Israeli citizens, some who decline to help Israel focus on just one aspect of the hostilities. France’s President Emmanuel Macron, who falsely believes his shrinking country still has 21st century relevance, along with arguably the world’s most anti-Semitic organization – the U.N. – are committed to persuading the United States (Israel’s closet ally) to emphasize a ceasefire and thus end the current war’s hostilities. But they should be going in a demonstrably different direction altogether.
A ceasefire may have made sense to someone at one point in this war, but no longer. When one side of the hostilities is totally dispatched by the other side, there is only one thing to do. Likewise, when that same side is hiding amongst its own citizens to avoid being eliminated and thus causing mass casualties to their own citizens, there is only one thing to do. Finally, when that same side is continuing the fight causing the destruction of housing, office buildings and commercial centers with no hope of winning, there is only one thing to do. Hamas should obviously surrender.
Historically, has an army that has been attacked by another army stopped its fighting to let their opponent continue to exist when the army of the aggrieved country has the upper hand? I am sure that a true historian can dig up some obscure war between two countries that no longer exist from sometime in the first millennium when someone stopped their counterattack while having the upper hand. I would bet the country that stopped attacking ultimately regretted that decision.
Abraham Lincoln did not stop the Civil War after Gettysburg. The Union armies went on to thoroughly defeat the South and ended the Confederacy. Franklin Delano Roosevelt (FDR) insisted at the Casablanca Conference in 1943 attended by Churchill and De Gaulle and others that the Axis powers unconditionally surrender. Anything less was unacceptable.
FDR laid out three reasoned points as to why his position made total sense. First, he believed anything other than unconditional surrender would eventually lead to Germany, Italy, and Japan rearming and resuming aggression. Second, FDR wanted to ensure the total elimination of the military power of the Axis members. Third, he believed taking this approach would shorten the war and lessen the loss of life on both sides.
Someone likely questioned this strategy at the time and called FDR a warmonger. That would have been a difficult argument to promote since the allies were the aggrieved party.
Let’s look at how this turned out. Combined with provisional governments (which I previously recommended for Gaza) that were put in place, Germany, Japan, and Italy have become three of the finest countries in the world. People live freely under democratically elected governments with phenomenally successful economies.
Does anyone now believe Hamas has any hope of moving forward militarily or winning the war they started? It is obvious that the three points defined by FDR eighty years ago are absolutely applicable today. Let me remind you that as radical and dangerous that Hamas is perceived to be by Israel, the people of the world perceived Germany and Japan at that time in the same manner.
If you have any doubt of the world’s widespread anti-Semitism, simply listen to the people calling for a ceasefire. The ones who are calling for a reduction of the level of hostilities are only marginally less anti-Semitic. Do you hear any of those people making the same assertions for the war in Ukraine or other military actions?
Hamas are the “people” (really monsters or animals) who caused every one of the deaths on both sides in this war. They are causing the mass destruction of buildings in Gaza. The only reason they are hanging on at this point is that they hope to resurrect their operations and sucker former financial supporters into again starting up Hamas’ destructive activities.
The focus should be on what needs to be done to end this death and destruction. Hamas must surrender. They have shown they have no concern for the people of Gaza. The world should unite in the call for their surrender. Whoever is providing them with funds needs to promptly stop.
This is the only realistic path to termination of hostilities – Hamas’ unconditional surrender.
