Readers weigh in on the awful conflict in the Middle East and other topics

& why I'm Xing Dos Equis off my list of preferred potent potables

To read this issue in your browser, click on the headline above.

Eric Zorn is a former opinion columnist for the Chicago Tribune. Find a longer bio and contact information here. This issue exceeds in size the maximum length for a standard email. To read the entire issue in your browser, click on the headline link above. Paid subscribers receive each Picayune Plus in their email inbox each Tuesday, are part of our civil and productive commenting community and enjoy the sublime satisfaction of supporting this enterprise.

Notes and comments from readers —lightly edited —- along with my responses

Voluminous correspondence this week regarding my commentary on Hamas’ October 7 terror assault on Israel. Many contributors have stronger, better informed ideas than I do about which side is more justified in its grievances and acts of preventive and retaliatory violence. They expressed dismay and anger that I stopped at condemning in no uncertain terms Hamas’ butchery and slaughter and wished I’d gone further than cautioning that a response from Israel that resulted in the deaths of a similar or greater number of non-combatant civilians risked losing the moral high ground and further complicating the chances for peace and long-term safety in the region.

A quick note about a typo in the emailed edition of Thursday’s issue: “The world can condone the deliberate slaughter…” of course should have been “The world cannot condone the deliberate slaughter….” At least a dozen of you pointed this out to me and I fixed it quickly in the online version and hoped that context would make my true meaning obvious. Still, one of the worst typos I’ve ever made!

Joshua P. — Context demands that you make your readers aware that Hamas is deliberately situating its military infrastructure in apartment buildings and other civilian areas. Their apparent hope is that Israel will either be deterred from striking back against Hamas, because of its well-documented reluctance to harm civilian populations or strike anyway, and accept the world's almost-universal condemnation for the strikes, claiming Israel is intentionally bombing civilians.  The Hamas decision to use its own citizenry as human shields is the source of the problem here, not Israeli malevolence.

Under Menachem Begin, two decades ago. Israel not only pulled out, but it forcibly removed the few Jewish settlements established in Gaza. This was Israel's signature move, to allow peace between us and their Gazan neighbors. Gazans could and should have begun building a peacetime economy, better universities, relationships with other Arab and international businesses, and a tourist economy (it has very nice beaches on the Mediterranean).  Nope. Instead, they began firing rockets over the border. They also chose leaders whose stated goal was NOT peaceful co-existence, but eradication of the Jewish state. Don't take my word for it; read the Hamas charter. That's how we got here. 

Rose P. — I do not condone terrorism of any sort, but I understand the anger and desperation that motivates Hamas. Palestinians were robbed of their land and Israel, an apartheid state, keeps them in what is effectively an open-air prison in Gaza. I suggest you read this from Amnesty International which reports on Israel’s “institutionalized regime of oppression and domination against the Palestinian people wherever it exercised control over their rights, fragmenting and segregating Palestinian citizens of Israel, residents of the Occupied Palestinian Territories and Palestinian refugees denied the right of return. Through massive seizures of land and property, unlawful killings, infliction of serious injuries, forcible transfers, arbitrary restrictions on freedom of movement, and denial of nationality, among other inhuman or inhumane acts, Israeli officials would be responsible for the crime against humanity of apartheid.”

Would such treatment not inspire most people to desperate measures?

David S. — There has been no “similarly indiscriminate bombing of Palestinians.” Israel is targeting militants and the infrastructure that supports them.

Civilian casualties are inevitable, which is tragic, but that is not the point or the goal. It is the exact opposite of “indiscriminate.” For Hamas, on the other hand, killing civilians is entirely the goal.

This is not new, a fact that is certainly evidenced by the firing of tens of thousands of rockets over the years into Israel with only a vague idea of where they were headed.

If anything, Israel has been too reluctant to go after Hamas in the past, which bases its operations in schools, mosques, and hospitals precisely because they know Israel does not want to harm civilians. Israel has taken great pains to warn people in the past of impending bombings. Gazans know where Hamas is, and where the rockets are, and they all should be on notice that those places are no longer safe havens – nor should they be.

Israel has always been willing to trade land for peace, and the primary reason the crisis continues is that Gazans, through their representatives, are unwilling to agree to peace. While there are many Palestinians who want peace, the majority of Gazans have turned to terrorists as their representatives.

Instead of using foreign resources to build a better society, Hamas has squandered those resources on guns and rockets.

Crowds in Gaza, and in Chicago, reacted with glee at the killing of innocents, and marched with banners proclaiming “from the river to the sea,” meaning a Palestine with no Israel and no Jews. I note also that Israel’s neighbors, Egypt and Jordan and others, have done nothing to facilitate peace, and want nothing to do with the Palestinians and Hamas for fear of radicalizing their own citizens. Even in the current war, Egypt has refused to let Gazan civilians across their shared border.

I am a leftist and have been first in line to criticize Israel and especially Israel’s current government over many of its policies toward the Palestinians. Israel can be blamed for many things, but what happened on October 7 is not Israel’s fault. Full stop.

The line between being anti-Israel and anti-Semitic has been blurry at times, but this week it is crystal clear. Many on the left in the United States will rally around every oppressed people except the Jews, which is terrible and terrifying. Israel should take all necessary steps in the short term to prevent further atrocities from emanating out of Gaza in the long term. Civilians will die, but the blame is not on Israel or on “both sides”; it is squarely on Hamas.

Of course there needs to be debate, and concern, about Israel’s response to this week’s massacre and hostage-taking.

Of course there are no easy solutions, and reasonable people can disagree on what Israel should do.

But your post was just so dumb. You put forth false equivalencies while claiming you were trying not to. You used the Trump-esque device of “many people are saying” Gaza is an open-air prison, as if that makes it true. You totally ignore the fact that the blockade of Gaza is enforced by both Israel and Egypt, blaming only Israel.

I don’t have any good answers, and I certainly have no idea what constitutes a war crime — and I’m guessing you don’t, either. But refusing to supply power and sustenance to your enemy, particularly in the very short term, doesn’t offend me. You want the power back? Give back the hostages. I acknowledge that well-meaning people can and will disagree with me, and they are entitled to their opinions.

The fact that you’re getting criticism from people who think you’re not hard enough on Israel, at this time and in this moment, should provide you no gratification. In the very wise words of Amare Stoudemire, fuck those people. Defending Hamas is no different than defending Al Qaeda. America is not perfect, but it would be lunacy to blame 9/11 on America. It’s no less crazy, and no less offensive, to blame Israel for the massacre perpetrated on its people by Hamas. I worry less about attacking Gaza than I do about getting mired in a 20-year occupation that destroys lives on both sides and doesn’t achieve the primary objective of getting rid of the terrorists — like what happened to America in Afghanistan.

Please take me off your distribution list.

Zorn — I don’t consider it a false equivalence to say that that these grievances and hatreds and suspicions run deep and go back many decades, and that escalating these hostilities with war crimes and acts of terror in response to war crimes and acts of terror is only going to lead to deeper hostilities. Maybe I’m wrong and history will vindicate your verdict that my post was “dumb” because a blockade and invasion of Gaza will make Israel far more secure in the long run despite the deaths of perhaps thousands of Palestinian noncombatants.

Obviously innocent people die in wars and have always died in wars. It’s inevitable and morally regrettable no matter what the purpose or outcome — note that we are still debating the bombing of Dresden and Hiroshima/Nagasaki among other events perpetrated by the good guys that resulted in massive death among hapless people just trying to live their lives under repressive regimes.

“The majority of Gazans” haven’t been allowed to vote for their leaders since 2007, and they have no safe recourse to express political differences. Yet at the same time it’s ironic that so many on the far left are expressing such solidarity with a people that have antithetical to barbaric views when it comes to, say, gay rights or religious freedom.

Cutting off electricity, food, and fuel to more than 2 million civilians in a way likely to cause significant fatalities among children, the sick, the wounded and the elderly among others as leverage against the terrorists hiding among them meets the definition of a war crime as I see it.

Reasonable people can differ about what the appropriate and productive long-term response from Israel ought to be in the name of its long term safety and security while explicitly and vehemently condemning Hamas' attack. I see no inconsistency in expressing revulsion at the terror attacks along with great apprehension about the wisdom of responding to that atrocity with military acts that will inevitably have atrocious results, which was my take in which you were so disappointed. Explanations are not excuses.

As an aside, you are among several readers who told me they wanted off my mailing list over this one opinion, which, come on, may not have been the most useful or informed commentary on the matter but was relatively anodyne compared to the hard-line postings elsewhere. Too many people have lost the ability to be exposed to opinions with which they are not 100% in agreement with without indignantly blocking/muting/unfollowing or unsubscribing. I’m not advocating deliberately and regularly exposing oneself to rhetorical poison — there are certainly publications and newsletters in which I find nothing smart or useful — but I think there’s value in considering legitimate, mainstream differences of opinion.

Peter Z. — Your reaction to the Hamas attack seemed very measured and somewhat detached. What was your reaction to 9/11 in America? Did you advocate for restraint or did you demand immediate justice against the perpetrators?

Zorn — Here are a few excerpts from my columns back then:

9/15/2001: This country at its best — democracy at its best — proceeds wisely and fairly. Whatever form our "war" against the sponsors of this carnage takes, if it's not as smart and principled as we hope always to be, then one way or the other, we'll lose.

If we violate what the flag really stands for in an effort to achieve quick and satisfying revenge, we'll insult the memories of those who died. And worse, we'll inspire more terrorism that will challenge us again to find images to fathom the unfathomable.

9/25/2001: The goal of the international anti-terrorist coalition must above all else be a more peaceful world — a world with more freedom and less fear.

What should that coalition do? It's interesting to me how many people have strong, sure opinions about how to battle terrorism and terrorist states: Bomb them. Feed them. Starve them. Dialogue with them. Insult them. Apologize to them for our misdeeds. Kick their butts. Mend our ways.

Here we have this elusive, hate-drunk, fanatical, decentralized enemy standing on the Bouncing Betty of Middle Eastern strife, and America is filled with armchair strategists and self-styled intelligence experts who know just what to do next.

I regret to say I'm not one of them. The geopolitical, military and religious nuances are beyond me. I'm glad the Bush administration has lately given many signs that it recognizes how volatile the situation is and how easy it would be to play into the hands of those now hoping for a holy war.

I'd just add my me-too to the National Council of Churches forceful yet vague entreaty that our nation "make the right choices in this crisis" and that we focus on "global peace, human dignity and the eradication of injustice that breeds rage and vengeance."

Peace is too important to be a left or right issue. It is the most mainstream idea of all, and the last, best hope we've got.

David L. — It is critical context that the founding documents of Hamas explicitly call for the complete annihilation of the state of Israel and its citizens. Beyond that, my heavy heart does not allow me any further political discussion on this, other than to say that I am very grateful for President's Biden's condemnation of terrorism aimed at civilians and the barbaric murder of the elderly, non-combatant women and children including infants and his strong words in support of Israel.

Zorn — Progressives who want to romanticize Hamas ought to read that dreadful document carefully.

Avram S. — I do not believe it is smart or helpful to publicly question what Israel decides to do. I believed that in 1974, and I believe that now. While nobody, myself included, wants to see a single innocent person suffer, as a practical matter, there is a cost to rooting out evil.   Although some innocents may be caught in the middle as Israel moves to root out and destroy Hamas, the alternative — doing nothing — will result in more death and destruction like what we saw this past weekend.  That, we know.

Zorn — I would like to think there is a strategic middle ground between doing nothing — which I don’t think is the right response — and causing the sort of civilian deaths and suffering we’re seeing in Gaza this week; an approach that will result in less death and destruction in the long run.

Jake H. — Israel has been fighting for its existence since its beginning. Its enemies hope the world will get tired of it, and Western commentary, if not quite yet Western political leadership, increasingly offers evidence that that strategy is a smart one and likely to succeed.

This is not about borders or finding the reasonable deal. The past proves that. Israel must always be open to it and shouldn't actively prevent it. I'm no fan of Likud and I despise the far right in Israel. But let's not lose sight of the ultimate grievance and the ultimate stakes. This is about the fact that a mere 7 million Jews in the Middle East -- living in the only democratic state in the region, about the size of New Jersey, the only one not a basket case of grubby authoritarian political leadership -- is 7 million too many.

Zorn — This is just a small sample of the messages I got on this topic, and I’m grateful for all of them, even the patronizing ones.

I also got a lot of mail on my recommendation that those who have the Tribune home delivered on Sundays call customer service — 312-546-7900 — and demand that they permanently not be charged an extra $10 a month for “premium issues,” which are those supplements on the order of “Summer entertaining guide” and “NFL preview.”

Previously subscribers could only opt out for six months at a time, a strange and abusive practice. But a friend told me she got the charge permanently removed by threatening to cancel her subscription, and then I got the charge permanently removed when I called and simply insisted on it. Another friend had the same good luck.

After I published this last week, word evidently got around the call center and operators began refusing these demands, and I heard about it from readers. So I called customer service to be sure the promise I’d received last week was still good. It was not reflected in their records so I asked, “Was I lied to last week? Maybe you should check the recording you make every call just to check.”

They said they’d escalate my query and get back to me. Reader, they have not.

Etc.

Skeptic — I suggest you map a hotkey in your text editor that will type out "When reporters asked him about __, Mayor Brandon Johnson gave an answer both unresponsive and weird.” Based on how he has responded to questions thus far, I expect you will get a lot of use out of it.

Zorn — Johnson is so far proving an inartful dodger of direct questions. This pre-defined text string is likely to come in handy.

Rima — The men wrongfully convicted of Jeanine Nicarios' murder could hardly be described as innocents.

Zorn — No, in fact Rolando Cruz, in particular, committed a vile act when claiming to know something about the murders in an effort to screw with the police and perhaps get some reward money. He contributed to the suffering of Jeanine’s survivors and led law enforcement astray. But he and his co-defendants were innocent of the crime of Jeanine's abduction and murder.

Tom K. — “The Mincing Rascals” is one of my favorite podcasts. An immediate must-listen every week. I like that you all can have respectful disagreements!

Zorn — Thanks! I feel really lucky to be part of the team.

Bob R. — Regarding “It’s all passengers for themselves when a plane is late,” the item about your recent experience when airplane passengers refused a flight attendant’s request to stay seated at the gate so passengers in a hurry could make their connections, I was on a flight recently that was really late arriving in Chicago. As we started taxiing, the attendant began calling out seat numbers and asking those people to turn on their call lights.

When she finished, she asked everyone to look at all the blue call lights and said each of those people was trying to make a tight connecting flight, and would everyone else sit until they cleared the plane.

Except for a few fat asses, everyone else let them race by. It gave me a glimmer of hope for the future.

Zorn — That’s good to hear and I salute the flight attendant who made that extra effort. But one “fat ass” — heck, one person with an ass of any size — can slow everyone to a crawl in the crowded aisle of an airplane.

The word-court jury has ruled

Read the arguments here and behold the verdicts:

Also here are the results of a poll on this football-rules question:

I don’t always drink beer, but when I do I now prefer anything but Dos Equis

I was half expecting the “friend” to pitch the uke into the fire at the end of this 30-second attack on making music together — “who wants to jam?” — similar to the way Bluto destroyed the folkie’s guitar in “Animal House.”

I wish they’d go back to their “Most Interesting Man in the World” commercials and leave ukulele jammers out of it.

Related: “Someone’s dissin’, Lord, kumbaya.”

Ya gotta see these tweets!

Here are some funny visual images I've come across recently on social media. Enjoy, then evaluate:

Vote for your favorite. I’ll share the winner in Thursday’s main edition.

Usage note: To me, “tweet” has become a generic term for a short post on social media.

There’s still time to vote in the conventional Tweet of the Week poll!

Thank you for supporting the Picayune Sentinel. To help this publication grow, please consider spreading the word to friends, family, associates, neighbors and agreeable strangers.

.