Letters to the Editor: Say Israel accepts a cease-fire — then what? Hamas survives and attacks again?
To the editor: The suffering and loss of life in the Gaza Strip has to end. But say Israel agrees to a cease-fire — what then? ("Cease-fire now. The killing in Gaza must stop," editorial, Nov. 16)
In time, the cycle of violence and destruction would almost certainly resume indefinitely.
Israel is fighting for its life, and the danger to Israel must end. The wretched life of the Palestinians must change, and these people must have the opportunity to live normal lives. Both can only happen if Hamas is no longer a force in the area.
A cease-fire has to be a two-way street that leads to an unimaginable peace under the present circumstances.
To help the people of Gaza seek refuge in the south, Israel should provide security and safe passage with buses to take people from the north. Then, it should provide shelter, provisions and security for the Gazans.
Sid Pelston, Marina del Rey
..
To the editor: The cease-fire that existed on Oct. 6 was broken on Oct. 7. Israel didn't break it.
What would another cease-fire accomplish? Allow Hamas to regroup? Plan when and how they will break it again?
Civilian deaths have always been a tragic trade-off of war. More German and Japanese civilians died in World War II than British and American, so were the Allies not justified in destroying these fascist regimes?
Pushing Israel to accept the inevitable sequels to the Oct. 7 massacre because there is no possible way to destroy Hamas without civilian casualties does two things: It incentivizes hiding among civilians as a military tactic, and it says to Israelis, "You must accept the death of your civilians with no viable recourse because the lives of Palestinian civilians must be spared above all."
Christopher Romberg, Palm Springs
..
To the editor: Yes, there should be a cease-fire — as soon as Hamas has released all the hostages and is out of power, no longer able to commit shockingly brutal massacres against Israeli civilians as it did on Oct. 7. Hamas has promised to do it again and again.
Without Hamas gone, even bigger massacres of Israeli civilians and endless misery for Palestinian civilians are guaranteed. No nation but Israel would be asked to accept living with such genocidal monsters next door.
You would not demand it of the U.S., and you should not ask it of Israel either.
Sara Miller, New York
..
To the editor: I am deeply disappointed by your editorial asking for a cease-fire in Gaza. It does not even mention the more than 200 hostages taken from Israel, nor does it call on Hamas to surrender and release all the hostages.
A surrender by Hamas would end the bloodshed immediately and with more lasting effect than a cease-fire. It would also provide the opportunity for Gaza to rebuild in a way that benefits its civilian population rather than its despotic rulers.
Aaron Glatt, Woodmere, N.Y.
This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
