Earlier this month, wizened veterans and foreign dignitaries gathered on the beaches of Normandy to mark the 80th anniversary of the D-Day landings. The event put Meir Soloveichik in mind of Ronald Reagan’s remarks on a previous anniversary:

In a biblically inspired speech, Reagan described General Matthew Ridgeway listening in the darkness the night before the assault and pondering God’s words to Joshua in the Bible: “I will not fail thee nor forsake thee.”

Tomorrow, as it happens, Jewish congregations around the world read the story in the book of Numbers in which Joshua demonstrates the courage that will qualify him to lead the Jewish people. Reflecting on Reagan’s speech, Soloveichik turns to another one, delivered a year later, at Arlington National Cemetery, when

the president, as at Normandy, spoke of the sacrifices made by those who fell. But he then emphasized another theme . . . that sadly, those who died had had to fight in the first place because their leaders had failed them, because statesmen had spoken of a “peace process” that was merely an excuse to allow evil to fester.

A similar point was once made by one of the 20th century’s greatest Jewish sages:

Rabbi Joseph Soloveitchik once noted that while many religious thinkers wrongly celebrate love as an emotion that is always appropriate, the Bible often calls us to respond to the needs of the times by executing an emotional pivot, from loving actions to violent ones. Rabbi Soloveitchik reflects that we may well wonder “at the ease” with which the emotional tenor of the Bible suddenly switches: “The transition from norms based on sympathy and love to laws calling for stern, sometimes ruthless, action, is almost imperceptible.” This scriptural swivel, he reflected, highlights that for Judaism, a true concern for peace necessitates the destruction of evil; and that, he argued, requires “active opposition,” as well as a “detestation of everything that is base and ugly.”

Recent reports suggest that the White House has at last acted to allow the shipments of weapons that had been withheld from Israel and to end further the delays. On this topic, Elliott Abrams comments, “I don’t know what and how much has been held up, but it shouldn’t have happened. The level of delay should be zero.”

In this interview with Ariel Kahana, Abrams also comments on the failings of U.S. policy toward Iran, and the Biden administration’s refusal to enforce existing sanctions:

According to Abrams, Iran has indeed halted the advancement of its nuclear program on rare occasions. “This happened when Bush invaded Iraq in 2003, and when [President] Trump eliminated Qassem Suleimani in 2020. The U.S. needs to be ready to use force in Iran, but credibility is critical here. Only if [Iran’s leaders] are convinced that the U.S. is willing to act will they stop.”

Abrams claims that the U.S. president tried for two-and-a-half years to revive the nuclear deal with Iran until he realized it wasn’t interested. “Iran has benefited from this situation, and everyone outside the administration sees it as a failure.”