Israel cannot afford to fall for the appeasement trap in Hamas war

Israel cannot afford to fall for the appeasement trap in Hamas war

The vile atrocities committed by Hamas on October 7 were a clarion call for Australians to support our Jewish communities and democratic Israel. Shamefully, however, we have instead witnessed egregious anti-Semitism and moral equivalising exacerbating the anguish caused by the invasion. If Australia were invaded by an enemy inflicting unspeakable barbarities on its civilians, we would expect our government to prosecute war against the invader until it was neutralised or had unconditionally surrendered.

We would expect our allies to support our cause. Nothing less would be acceptable. The bloodshed of Palestinians is entirely in the hands of Hamas, which exists today because of its supporters and the useful fools who have ignored its ideology and intentions. Appeasement has created this beast, and it must be eliminated, or it must surrender unconditionally to Israel. We are witnessing repugnant attacks and threats against Australia’s Jewish population. It’s time for all Australians to stand uncompromisingly in support of Israel in its fight for survival – it faces an existential threat from an implacable and bloodthirsty foe.

Some politicians have shown themselves to be morally bankrupt with their equivalising, implicitly supporting Hamas’s propaganda and attempt at genocide against the Jewish people – this is clear when that dreadful chant “from the river to the sea” is not immediately condemned as a hate crime. MPs are supposed to represent the best of their electorates, not encourage or give a platform to anti-Semitism. Where is the courage to stand up against the hate and offer succour to our Jewish communities? I stand with the Australian Jewish community and support Israel in its fight against barbarity.

Paul Lindwall, former Productivity Commissioner, NSW

Experienced hands

The Optus meltdown is no surprise to seasoned telecommunications engineers. Nor is NBN’s countless, admittedly less disastrous, problems over many years. Both seem to be run by HR departments in concert with sales and finance teams, ignorant of engineering, focused on boosting balance sheets and virtue signalling. They determine appointments to key engineering positions – and who is retrenched. The latter typically are those with crucial experience in risk calculation and mitigation – a core component of planning for and managing network upgrades that have occurred for decades. The young and cheaper replacements, lack the experience.

A conservative approach of trialling and testing, which costs more in time and money in the short term, is jettisoned by the non-engineer executives.

Guy Yeomans, St Ives, NSW

Modern parents

Reading Stephen Lunn’s recent article (“The kids are far from all right”, 18-19/11), I was struck by the comments of the people Lunn interviewed contained almost no reference to the role of parents in dealing with the stresses and anxieties of their children. Michael Bernard said schools were not spending enough time each week focused on working with children on ways to “build their resilience and manage their stress”. No role for their parents? I have no data to substantiate my comment but I think many modern parents delegate some of their responsibilities to the school their child attends. Schools are designed for the education of the young; they are not a substitute organisation for parenting.

Martin Tooley, Broadwater, WA

Going to water

Anthony Albanese seems to have been caught out with the Chinese navy turning on its powerful sonar to injure two Australian navy divers. This incident took place not in China’s territorial waters but in international waters. Albanese constantly talks about Australia’s national interest, but on this serious occasion it looks like he went to water.

Coke Tomyn, Camberwell, Vic

Remembering JFK

Troy Bramston is to be commended for his balanced assessment of John F. Kennedy’s legacy (“John F. Kennedy’s leadership legacy lives on, 60 years after Dallas”, 21/11).

Kennedy himself was blessed by his own good looks, the age of television and a phenomenal speechwriter in Ted Sorensen. He was also smart enough to appoint his younger brother, Robert, as his campaign director for the 1960 presidential election. While John Kennedy’s subsequent appointment of his 35-year-old brother as US attorney-general drew inevitable criticism of nepotism, few can argue that the younger Kennedy was ineffective. Bramston is right to point out that John Kennedy was slow to act on civil rights.

Had JFK not been assassinated, an interesting historical issue is whether he would have fallen into the same Vietnam abyss as Lyndon Johnson.

Bob Miller, Leederville, WA