How many more images of starving children must we see before we, as a nation and as people of conscience, speak with moral clarity about what is happening in Gaza?
What began as a campaign against Hamas has become something far more harrowing. We are witnessing the deliberate starvation of civilians, the destruction of homes, the suffocation of hope. The Israeli government under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has crossed a line — from war to widespread humanitarian atrocity.
This is not just a military operation. It is a policy of deprivation, displacement and collective punishment. Food and water are cut off. Aid is obstructed. Families are left to scavenge while their children wither from hunger. This is a stain on our shared humanity.
Dare we acknowledge the echoes of history? We say “never again” with solemnity, but here we are — watching the deliberate denial of food and medical care to a trapped population. The difference is that this time, the suffering is being inflicted by a state that should know too well the horrors of systemic dehumanization. And still, many hesitate to speak out.
Let us be clear. Condemning the Netanyahu government’s policies is not antisemitic — it is moral. It is necessary. Silence in the face of starvation, particularly of children, is complicity. We must find the courage to separate political fear from human truth.
This is not about geopolitical alliances or partisanship. This is about children. About families. About the simple, undeniable truth that no government has the right to bomb civilians into submission or starve them into silence.
History is watching. Our moral integrity is being tested.
Will we fail this test?
— Joseph Harrod, Chicago
Hamas has lost
I’ve read many articles about the horrendous conditions in Gaza. War is always a tragedy for all involved, particularly when one side has clearly lost but continues to fight — causing more destruction and loss of life than necessary.
In looking at history, Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee surrendered long after it had become clear that the Confederacy had lost the war. Likewise, Adolf Hitler’s Germany surrendered to the Allied forces only after the destruction of Berlin, despite the successful invasion on D-Day and defensive offensive actions of the Russian army.
If the Confederacy and Germany, both of which like Hamas started the wars at issue, had surrendered sooner, much less loss of life would have occurred, not to mention destruction of cities. Think of the loss and suffering that would have been avoided if Japan, which was given opportunities to surrender prior to U.S. nuclear bombs being dropped, had done so.
War is complicated, and each side has positions that are entrenched in nationalism and sadly strong emotions such as greed, hate and racism. Still, history shows that eventually it becomes clear to one side the cause is lost.
It is time for Hamas to stop the suffering of the Palestinian people it claims to lead and protect. Hamas has lost the war. Thus, it is not, given the rules and construct of war, for Hamas to attempt to govern the terms of surrender. If Hamas would release the Israeli hostages and withdraw its forces from Gaza, what does it think Israel would do? Certainly, with all eyes on Israel at that point, Israel would be compelled to immediately provide aid, engage in reconstruction of Gaza and treat the Palestinian people with dignity.
However, according to Israel’s terms, this can only be accomplished once the threat of Hamas is eliminated from Gaza. Hamas must recognize it has lost, surrender and end the unimaginable suffering of its people.
— Clare Connor, Chicago
Time for surrender
Does anyone know what the term “unconditional surrender” means? It means that war is ugly. If Hamas wants to stop children from starving, it needs to surrender unconditionally.
Ask Nazi Germany. Ask Japan. Our expert news reporters never ever mention this fact.
— Daniel Kotara, Huntley
Root of the problem
I am one of the Jewish people painfully sad about the starvation and armed killing inflicted upon innocent Palestinians and their children by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, his ultra-right coalition and his firepower orders to Israeli military forces. The increased antisemitism in this country is, in effect, mostly anti-Netanyahu-ism. His original response to the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas massacre of Israelis and others certainly was expected — a death penalty for the Palestinian terrorists who make even their own people suffer. But he has carried on the Gaza assault for so long and indiscriminately that it has stricken an unthreatening population to the extent that it is considered a genocide by Israeli human rights groups.
There are several other unfortunate factors in this ungodly situation. First of all, there is really no chance to totally kill off a hate-filled faction such as Hamas. Also, Netanyahu and his formidable intelligence team were unprepared for the Oct. 7 horror, although the danger always was warned. And it took hours before Netanyahu had his forces respond.
Before this happened, a majority of Israelis would have voted an unpopular Netanyahu out of office over the corruption charges against him. The war with Hamas changed all that.
For many years, Netanyahu has refused to accept a two-state solution. So he is at the root of this problem; the current part of it devastating beyond words.
— Ed Stone, Northbrook
In hands of Hamas
There’s strength in numbers, and Arab states have taken a positive step to stop the carnage in Gaza Everyone wants the war in Gaza to end, especially Israel.
Many wonder why the media and the noisy protesters at American universities seem to understand how to bring the war to a conclusion. I’ve yet to read or hear of anyone talking about Hamas laying down its weapons. If its fighters lay down their weapons, the war is over.
Moral responsibility for protecting children from starvation is in the hands of Hamas, which started this war.
— Laurence Nelligan, Ponte Vedra, Florida
On the same page
The front-page headline in the July 29 Tribune trumpets: “Trump pushing Israel on Gaza aid.” Really? President Donald Trump has supposedly been “pressuring” Israel for a long time, with no results.
Trump generally doesn’t hesitate to threaten other countries, as demonstrated by his tariff war. If he was actually pushing Israel, he could simply threaten to terminate our aid, as he did so publicly with Ukraine. But he won’t because he and Israel likely are on the same page. It’s called plausible deniability.
— Craig Zabel, Sugar Grove
Regarding David L. Applegate’s letter to the editor (“Higher ed’s liberal bias,” Aug. 1): Applegate defends Donald Trump’s withholding of federal funds to force universities to abandon a perceived left-leaning bias. What Applegate’s argument fails to note is that the initial attacks on the universities were based on an “emergency” of antisemitism as declared by the president. After such declaration, draconian measures have been threatened and executed.
In the past, standard procedures were used to handle allegations of antisemitism, such as letting the institution know; asking them to address the claims, if found to be legitimate; and giving the university time to address the incident. If these avenues were not taken to the liking of the government, additional steps might be taken.
Trump deemed himself investigator, judge and jury, jumping almost immediately to “atomic bomb” measures. Even worse, though, is piggybacking the unreasonable demands about who universities can hire to teach, what they can teach and who they can teach. This has nothing to do with antisemitism. It is just a ruse to force age-old, right-wing ideals on universities they don’t like.
If you want your kids to learn in a right-wing environment, send them to schools that embrace that ideology. Simple as that. Trump’s tactics are winding through the courts. Hopefully some or all of it will be deemed unlawful. One can hope.
— Andy Olcott, Glenview
Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@chicagotribune.com.
