Are Charlestonians Right to Forgive the Man Who Murdered Their Families?

This is a question on which Judaism and Christianity disagree, as Yonason Goldson explains:

In an extraordinary example of human nobility, relatives of those killed in the Charleston massacre expressed their forgiveness for . . . the domestic terrorist who opened fire and took nine lives from the historic Emanuel A.M.E. church community. . . .

To be able to see past one’s own pain and find a mitigating factor to excuse violence is truly noble, even saintly. However, in the case of conscious, calculated evil, forgiveness may actually be a perversion of morality. Moral values should be so deeply rooted within that we can’t help responding to any violation of them with indignation and outrage. If we are truly committed to the values of good, how can we possibly tolerate evil, or those who do evil, especially when they do it in the name of good?

This is what the sages of the Talmud meant when they said, “Be discerning in judgment.” Look for every possible means of explaining away bad behavior. But after all is said and done, evil remains evil. Non-judgmentalism is an empty slogan that allows evil to proliferate unchecked.

What often gets lost in the discussion of forgiveness is the matter of accountability. If I break your window, my apology means nothing unless I’m willing to pay for the window. And if I’ve caused damage that can’t be repaired, punitive restitution may be the only means through which society as a whole can preserve respect for the rule of law and confidence in the institutions of justice. . . . . To take the life of any one person is, on some level, to take the life of every person. Justice must be served. Only then may it be possible to forgive.

Read more at Jewish World Review

More about: Christianity, Forgiveness, Judaism, Racism, Religion & Holidays

What a Strategic Victory in Gaza Can and Can’t Achieve

On Tuesday, the Israeli defense minister Yoav Gallant met in Washington with Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin. Gallant says that he told the former that only “a decisive victory will bring this war to an end.” Shay Shabtai tries to outline what exactly this would entail, arguing that the IDF can and must attain a “strategic” victory, as opposed to merely a tactical or operational one. Yet even after a such a victory Israelis can’t expect to start beating their rifles into plowshares:

Strategic victory is the removal of the enemy’s ability to pose a military threat in the operational arena for many years to come. . . . This means the Israeli military will continue to fight guerrilla and terrorist operatives in the Strip alongside extensive activity by a local civilian government with an effective police force and international and regional economic and civil backing. This should lead in the coming years to the stabilization of the Gaza Strip without Hamas control over it.

In such a scenario, it will be possible to ensure relative quiet for a decade or more. However, it will not be possible to ensure quiet beyond that, since the absence of a fundamental change in the situation on the ground is likely to lead to a long-term erosion of security quiet and the re-creation of challenges to Israel. This is what happened in the West Bank after a decade of relative quiet, and in relatively stable Iraq after the withdrawal of the United States at the end of 2011.

Read more at BESA Center

More about: Gaza War 2023, Hamas, IDF