When is Enough Enough?

 When is Enough Retribution Enough?

Retribution: isn’t that just a nice word for revenge? Netanyahu’s campaign is being defended and rationalized as destruction of Hamas and justifiable retribution for 7/10/’23. His campaign is being attacked as genocide of Arabs in Gaza and the West Bank, an unjustifiable retribution for 7/10/’23.

In 1943, the Nazi regime in Germany had instigated war and, as some people knew, was committing war crimes against their Jewish citizens, other minorities, and political opponents. “Bomber” Harris and General Spaatz collaborated on “strategic bombing” of Germany, a campaign aimed at destruction of war industries and, moreover, at demoralization of civilians -- a campaign rationalized in part as retribution. The Russians felt it; the western allies felt it – the satisfaction of revenge.  Hamburg, Dresden, Frankfort, Berlin, and other cities we obliterated; in all, 1,080,000 civilian casualties resulted, 300,000 killed and 780,000 wounded, in the bombings of Germany. 

After the war, a comprehensive US Government assessment, the US Strategic Bombing Survey, concluded that strategic bombing “significantly weakened Germany’s war economy” but “did not break civilian morale.” The campaign against civilians was defended by some as a strategic necessity and attacked by others as genocidal retribution.  

Is there a difference between then and now? How do Netanyahu and Major General Asor, head of Isreal’s Southern Command, which includes Gaza, differ from Roosevelt and General Spaatz, head of Strategic Air Command in WWII? Are they war heroes or war criminals?

When and how do you stop retribution; how much killing is enough? The Israelis lost 1,195 citizens on October 7^th; they have killed 72,000 Gazans since invading to eliminate Hamas – and to exact retribution?

How does one cease retribution, to declare it over and enough? Especially in a democratic republic where leaders draw their legitimacy from a majority of the electorate? If people want revenge, they must have it – unless.

Unless there is a leader, a movement, a spiritual wave that eschews hate and revenge.  Jesus taught love of enemy. The Buddha taught that hatred is never appeased by hatred. Muhammud taught that forgiveness is superior to retaliation; that violence is only justified against attackers and that violence against civilians and non-combatants, especially women and children, is forbidden. Rabbinic law replaces ayin tachat ayin, an eye for an eye, with compensation, measure for measure.

The best way out of retribution is to never enter into it. More easily said than done, obviously. Humans are wired for revenge – an eye for an eye appears in the Code of Hammurabi, in the Torah, and later in the Bible books of Exodes, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. But the bloodbaths of the 20thC should have taught us that vengeance, retaliation, revenge doesn’t work. In the end, the vengeful are as wounded as their victims, if not more so, and the victims will spawn multitudes seeking their vengeance in turn.

Ghandi said “an eye for an eye will make the whole world blind.” Confucious said “before taking vengeance, dig two graves”. Netanyahu isn’t listening. The new ayatollah isn’t listening. Trump isn’t hearing. What other world leader will lead his people into vengeful victimhood, into the dead-end of retaliation? Who will have the strength of character to say “no, enough”?