OPINION
The Israel-Gaza war is morally crystal-clear in a way that no conflict has been for the last eighty years.
In the early 1940s, there was no moral equivalence between the Allies and the Axis. The enormities of Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were so beyond the pale of basic human decency that destroying them utterly was the only rational, indeed moral, response.
That goes doubly for Hamas.
Hamas must be destroyed. No decent human being could seriously argue otherwise. A regime whose only moral compass is slaughter, as ostentatiously barbaric as possible, does not deserve to exist. And that is exactly what Hamas is. Its progrom on October 7 was never intended to achieve a military objective, was never intended to conquer territory. It was an exercise in mass slaughter directed explicitly at non-combatants, and explicitly intended to be as horrific as possible.
Hamas did not just deliberately kill civilians, it tortured and mutilated them as barbarically as possible. Women were raped and killed, their naked corpses paraded as trophies in the streets of Gaza to cheering crowds. Grandmothers and teenage girls were burned alive. Babies were not just slaughtered, but dismembered, burned, and beheaded. Pregnant women were gutted and their unborn babies were stabbed repeatedly.
All of this is beyond dispute because the monsters responsible recorded it all. They didn’t just proudly upload the evidence for the world to see, they used the victims’ own devices to send the images to the victims’ families.
They did not reclaim territory — they took hostages. Hundreds of men, women and children. Entire families: in at least one case, three generations.
The idea that anyone could respond to such animalistic barbarity by taking the side of the perpetrators is mind-boggling.
And yet, it’s happening.
The Greens have accused Israel of unleashing “utter horror” in Gaza, arguing the Jewish state’s retaliation for the murder of more than 1400 of its people is not an act of self defence.
Deputy Greens leader Mehreen Faruqi, wearing a Palestinian keffiyeh scarf, told the Senate Gaza was being “strangled and “bombed to death”, after the horrific attack of Israelis and the kidnapping of an estimated 200 people […]
Greens senator Nick McKim called for Israel to abandon its planned “invasion” of Gaza, argued that Palestinians were being “slaughtered”.
Faruqi is doing the equivalent of donning a brown shirt and waving a swastika flag in response to the bombing of Berlin in the 1940s.
McKim is calling for hundreds of Israeli civilians to be left at the mercy of Hamas.
Have the fanatical appeasers of Hamas no shame?
Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-CEO Alex Ryvchin said the Greens had shown themselves “to be utterly compromised and morally bankrupt when it comes to foreign policy issues”.
“If they had a shred of integrity they would be calling for the unconditional release of 199 Israelis held by sadistic animals in Gaza,” he told The Australian.
“If they had a shred of integrity they would be calling for the dismantlement of a jihadist terror group that uses rape, torture and abduction as weapons of war.”
The Australian
The disgusting rhetoric of the Greens is no different to anyone who responded to the bombing of Berlin by wringing their hands and whining, “But what about the Germans?” They would have been instantly known for what they were: miserable Quislings, unworthy of the least respect.
Firstly, because they were too gutless to come right out and say what they really meant: that Germany and Japan should be left free to institute their reign of barbarism. Which is the exact consequence of their argument.
Secondly, because of their repugnant self-contradiction: that the Allies were entitled to wage war in self-defence, but not allowed to actually wage war.
“There is,” Orwell wrote. “Something very distasteful in accepting war as an instrument and at the same time wanting to dodge responsibility for its more obviously barbarous features… all talk of ‘limiting’ or ‘humanizing’ war is sheer humbug, based on the fact that the average human being never bothers to examine catchwords”.
“all talk of ‘limiting’ or ‘humanizing’ war is sheer humbug, based on the fact that the average human being never bothers to examine catchwords”
George Orwell
Think of what it would actually mean, should Israel abide by the fervent wishes of the Quisling left.
It would mean that Hamas’ atrocities would go unpunished.
It would mean abandoning the hundreds of hostages to torture and death.
“They’re coming in…” was the last in a series of terrified text messages Yarden Bibas sent before Hamas terrorists broke into his home in southern Israel and kidnapped him and his wife and children.
Mr Bibas’s Australian aunt, Michal, wants her local member, teal independent Kylea Tink, to see those texts and understand what her family is going through, after the MP’s attempt this week to accuse Israel of war crimes.
“I have loved ones being held hostage by Hamas in Gaza as I write,” Michal told Ms Tink in an open letter on Wednesday.
“I am appalled that my ‘representative’ resisted the Australian parliament’s unequivocal condemnation of Hamas’s massacre of more than 1000 civilians in Israel” […]
“You’re asking Israel to stop trying to protect itself,” Michal said. “They’re not sending popcorn to Israel, they’re sending missiles every single day.
The Australian
The moral clarity of this conflict is unassailable.
Revoltingly, we’re seeing just which side too many people are prepared to take.