Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Bobby Ghosh's Nov. 8 commentary "No, Gazans can't rise up against Hamas" (StarTribune.com) stating that it was impossible for Gazans to overthrow their Hamas masters is, plainly, nonsense. Certainly, organizing to topple such evil masters wouldn't be easy. It wasn't easy for Britain's North American colonists to topple British rule. It wasn't easy for French peasants and workers to overthrow the powerful French state. It wasn't easy for Russian peasants and workers to topple a similarly autocratic empire crossing many time zones. It wasn't easy for the Iranian people to topple the U.S.-backed shah. It wasn't easy for the African National Congress to topple apartheid in South Africa. It wasn't easy for Egyptians to topple Hosni Mubarak.

If Gazans can't topple Hamas, I suggest that part of the reason is that none of the neighboring or nearby Arab states have the political will to ensure that the billions of dollars in humanitarian aid to Gaza actually were used for humanitarian aid instead of rockets and tunnels. Or that they lacked the political will to ensure that aid was used to let Gaza desalinate its own water, employ its workers, ensure the health of its residents, generate their own electricity and provide for the education of its children. Gaza shares a border with Egypt. Many Arab states provide aid to Gazans. What have they been doing since 1948?

Let's not forget that Egypt occupied Gaza and Jordan annexed the West Bank after the War of Independence in 1949. Had they been interested in a Palestinian state, 1948 would've been an ideal time to have created one. Or even 1947, when they could've accepted the far more generous boundaries provided by the United Nations' partition plan. While Israelis were building a state, what was the Arab world doing in Arab-occupied Palestine?

This, of course, doesn't solve the Hamas-Israeli war and the existential danger that Hamas is to Israel. But if we're using history to explain why Gazans are supposedly powerless against their government, let's look at other examples of "impossible" revolutions and also a bit deeper into Middle Eastern history.

Louis Hoffman, Minneapolis

Members of Congress have a right and an obligation as elected officials to express their positions on issues of importance to the nation. It is unacceptable for Congress to censure one of its members for stating his or her position on an issue. Yet that is what was done when Rep. Rashida Tlaib was censured for stating her position on the Israeli-Palestinian issue ("Craig cast vote for Tlaib censure," Nov. 9). The opinions of some members of Congress may be appalling to other members of Congress, but censure is reserved for serious misconduct, not the suppression of opposing points of view. According to the U.S. House of Representatives History, Art and Archives website: "Censure registers the House's deep disapproval of Member misconduct that, nevertheless, does not meet the threshold for expulsion." Using censure to suppress opposing points of view risks a loss of respect for this important tool that should be reserved only for serious misconduct by members of Congress.

Burgess Johnson, Bloomington

•••

Before the United States' invasion of Iraq, I watched an interview with a citizen by an American journalist. The man from Iraq said that he had nothing against the United States. Then he went on, "But I tell you this — if my wife, my children, if anyone in my family is harmed by this attack, I will hate America forever and for as long as I live, I will do everything in my power to exact revenge against its people." I have always wondered what happened to that man's family. After the barbaric attack by Hamas that killed 1,400 Israeli citizens, Israel's response has now killed over 10,000 Palestinians, thousands of them children. So, what does the future hold? Israel, with its recent bombardment and invasion, may well cripple Hamas for years to come, but what will be the response of the thousands upon thousands of Palestinians who have experienced the suffering and death of innocent family members? Given what has taken place, what do leaders of Israel and Palestine expect for the future of their children and grandchildren? Sadly, it seems they don't care that an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life, always seeking to exact revenge, is how future generations will live.

Roland Hayes, Shoreview

Catherine Zimmer, St. Paul

The response by a letter writer to the opinion of Curtis Dahlin ("White victims' graves are sacred, too," Opinion Exchange, Nov. 6, and "A shocking lack of understanding," Readers Write, Nov. 7) was misdirected. Her broad-brush approach missed the mark and did not address Dahlin's basic request.

Dahlin's concluding request is reasonable and threatens no one. Dahlin concluded his opinion piece with his "call [for] the MHS executive council to do the right thing and provide prominent markers at the approximate locations of these graves, and to ensure free and unimpeded access to the site for any person who wishes to visit."

The U.S.-Dakota War of 1862 is quite possibly the single most unequaled blemish on Minnesota's history. Today, Minnesotans remain in the presence of descendants of victims and others affected in the 1862 conflict. In the 21st century, 170 years later, goals of education, understanding, reconciliation and respect are reasonable and attainable. Dahlin's request in his conclusion is clear and simple as it applies to these goals.

Richard Hahn, Forest Lake