Forgive me

I stand with Israel?

I don't dare purport to offer a comprehensive moral evaluation of the complex history at play. Israel's grave decision to shoot through the human shields, dictated by Hamas' deliberate endangerment of said shields, tragically raises the death toll but, to me, underscores Hamas' sole moral culpability.

While my political stance is irrelevant, and I don't endorse any political figures, religions, or reforms, it's clear, to me at least, that at the heart of the moral impasse, Hamas, at 30,000 strong, embodies a greater evil, with any strident and shrill support for them on the streets, campuses and internet posts only furthering a legacy of utter moral bankruptcy.

One of the more common whataboutism comebacks to my position might be that the initial Israeli civilian casualties were not mere bystanders but accomplices of an oppressive regime.

Some may argue that the targeting in cold blood of Israeli civilians was lamentable, “BUT, it was the sole avenue for resistance available in an unbearable asymmetric battle.”

This comeback fails. Just as one can’t exceed the speed of light, deliberate and direct violence against civilians violates my ethical principles. Whereas continuing to open fire at Hamas, even when human shields are present, hideous as it may be, doesn't break the fundamental law of morality to which I ascribe.

I have known struggle and oppression. I have eaten the dust out of the carpet to survive while tax evading criminals order top shelf liquors bedazzled with flecks of gold. But I have never dreamt of sliding a blade across the throat of my oppressor, let alone their children.

Hamas (and the memetic cancer of their violent forms of Jihad) must be stopped now even if that tragically means collateral damage of innocent children. In admitting this, I'm shocked and bewildered, but I've checked my math twice, utilitarianism and deontology. Just as the intricacies of E=mc² elude the average person, couldn't the discernment of certain moral complexities also elude the average mind? Could it be that the moral calculus involved with the Israel-Hamas war has exceeded the intuition of the general populace?

Indeed, we can agree on this: the moral quandary intensifies with each innocent life lost. Yet, to my mind, the fundamental blame always comes back to Hamas. They first targeted civilians deliberately and directly and subsequently exploited human shields.

I bristle with anger at the staggering numbers reported on the Palestinian side. But I stand with Israel, for they are doing the most complex of things that nobody should ever have to do. Hamas and their proximate actions are the primary catalyst for every life lost in this war. As such, an appropriate legal deterrent must be in place, and Israel is installing it thanklessly.

Most of us couldn't execute such a deterrent; its nature is so numbing and heartbreaking that we often deny its necessity, even to ourselves, in whispers and prayers. And can we be fully blamed for this denial? Are we not all entitled to believe in comforting nonsense?