Also on the subject of military powers not prepared for attack, the books of Numbers and Deuteronomy mention Og, ruler of the kingdom of Bashan—roughly equivalent to the modern Golan Heights—whom the Israelites, led by Moses, defeat in battle. Og is described as being an enormous man, and as “the last of the Rephaites,” who seem to be a race of giants. While the Hebrew Bible spends only a handful of verses on Og, rabbinic literature constructed an array of tales about him, linking him—or even identifying him—with a number of other characters. Stuart Halpern takes a look at these stories:

Og clung to the side of Noah’s ark during the flood, the Talmud tells us. Though God was raining down boiling water, the side of the boat miraculously cooled, allowing Og to eventually emerge unscathed on dry land. The midrashic collection Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer, in an alternate rendering, has Og sitting down on a piece of wood under the gutter of the ark, fed by Noah’s family after pledging them his undying loyalty. The medieval sage Rashi records yet another survival scene: Og ran to Israel, the land of God’s protection, which was divinely spared from the flood.

Fast forward a few chapters in Genesis, and Abraham replaces Noah as the Bible’s main character. Wouldn’t you know it, Og pops up again in a supporting role. Eliezer, a servant of Abraham mentioned in the text, in the rabbis’ creative retelling, had a secret identity. He was actually Og.

To the rabbis, Og’s many manifestations were more than an amusing series of “What ifs.” They were an extended testament to the belief that while the Jewish people would be faced throughout their history with towering forces seeking their destruction, God would ultimately provide their salvation.

Robert Satloff has some harsh words for the U.S. government in this regard, words I take especially seriously because Satloff is someone inclined to political moderation. Why, he asks, have American diplomats failed to achieve anything in their endless rounds of talks in Doha and Cairo? Because

there is simply not enough pressure on Hamas to change course, accept a deal, and release the remaining October 7 hostages, stuck in nightmarish captivity. . . . In this environment, why should Hamas change course?

Publicly, the U.S. should bite the bullet and urge Israel to complete the main battle operations in Gaza—i.e., the Rafah operation—as swiftly and efficiently as possible. We should be assertively assisting with the humanitarian side of this.

Satloff had more to say about the hostages, especially the five American ones, in a speech he gave recently:

I am ashamed—ashamed of how we have allowed the story of the hostages to get lost in the noise of the war that followed their capture; ashamed of how we have permitted their release to be a bargaining chip in some larger political negotiation; ashamed of how we have failed to give them the respect and dignity and our wholehearted demand for Red Cross access and care and medicine that is our normal, usual demand for hostages.

If they were taken by Boko Haram, everyone would know their name. If they were taken by the Taliban, everyone would tie a yellow ribbon around a tree for them. If they were taken by Islamic State, kids would learn about them in school.

It is repugnant to see their freedom as just one item on the bargaining table with Hamas, as though they were chattel. These are Americans—and they deserve to be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States.