In response to Lora Lucero’s letter, “If Israel wants peace…,” published on July 25, the truth of the matter is that Israel could quite easily “bomb its way to peace” if it wanted to. It is only out of mercy that the country has not, yet.
I am a convert to the Israeli side of this issue, having supported the Palestinians for decades.
I saw that over the last 40 years, Israel, of which I am not a big fan, has made concession after concession. The Palestinian leaders, on the other hand, have practiced nothing but deceit, making agreements and then launching missiles.
The U.N. was wrong in the way it created Israel. But this is old news now, almost 70 years old, and the Palestinians need to move into the modern era and take their place as full citizens of the Israeli state, as have Christians and other Muslims.
Instead they would rather kill and die over land that was never really theirs to begin with; land that was owned and occupied by many powers since the days of Jesus.
When Israel was created, that land was not a “Palestinian state.” It was ostensibly owned and run by the British and French, regardless of how much the Palestinians may have thought it theirs.
Journal readers, and many of its columnists, love to express their hatred of the Jewish state, though Israel has never forced Muslims to leave Israel under threat of death. But I notice none of the usual Israel haters has written about ISIS forcing Christians to evacuate Iraq or be executed.
It seems that the Journal’s mostly liberal audience is just fine with Muslim violence, especially if directed at Christians, but Israel defending itself is repugnant to them. I noticed the Journal has not printed this story, either, even though it is two days old as I write.
In the face of America’s current lack of leadership on this issue, I believe Israel has shown remarkable restraint.