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

•••

In response to a Nov. 6 letter writer who urged a cease-fire in Gaza: Being Jewish does not mean anything when you seem to leave out some facts. Daily there are rockets raining down on Israel from Gaza and/or Lebanon. There also have been ballistic missiles launched from Yemen. Where is your call to end that? My wife and I are longtime residents of Minnesota who moved to Israel over two years ago, and because of Hamas' barbaric actions have been forced to flee back here with our 3-year-old granddaughters rather than subject them to — at a minimum — weekly trips to the bomb shelter, not being able to go to school and not being able to even go outside without fear. Where is your sympathy for them and the thousands like them in Israel? Israel did not start this, but is determined to finish it. Remember that Hamas, like ISIS, has no regard for human life — not Muslim and especially not Jewish life. If you think there should be a cease-fire (and what is happening to the Palestinians in Gaza is horrific), then why don't you demand an immediate release of all hostages, or is Jewish life not as valuable as Muslim life?

Bill Lerman, Jerusalem (currently residing in Mendota Heights)

•••

An Oct. 27 article in the New York Times was titled "As Gazans Scrounge for Food and Water, Hamas Sits on a Rich Trove of Supplies." The article describes months of fuel, food and water to supply the 40,000 Hamas fighters stored in their tunnels. Yet most articles and protests decry the inhumanity of the Israelis for blocking the import of these necessities. Shouldn't Hamas care for its Palestinian brothers and sisters enough to share their supplies? Hamas' callous disregard for the basic needs of the citizens they govern deserves a public outcry here in the U.S. and around the world. Why aren't we hearing it?

David Widdifield, Minneapolis

Hamas has won. Please let me explain. Firstly, we need to determine Hamas' motives in carrying out that barbaric and clearly suicidal attack on Israel. Was it retribution for decades of oppression at the hands of Israeli policy? That will only get us a small part of the way, although it is a very useful tool for the recruitment of dejected youths deprived of any meaningful future. However, the main reason appears to be a shock and awe approach with the primary aim of triggering a brutal response from the Israeli military, which will paradoxically tilt the worldview toward the Palestinian plight and vilify Israel. And the latter did not disappoint as it carried out what is tantamount to genocide of the civilian Palestinian population in Gaza — because the mass slaughter of innocent men, women and children via remote bombing is no less barbaric than shooting them face-to-face point blank. Although it does apparently make it easier to dismiss as "the tragedy of war" per the words of Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Lt. Col. Richard Hecht, the equivalent of a monumental "meh."

And now, the continued massacre has indeed started to dramatically shift world opinion against Israel, is causing soaring rates of antisemitism everywhere, is leading to extreme strain to the U.S.-Israeli relationship, and is fraying the tentative thawing of relations between Israel and the Arab world. There is even talk of war crimes. So who in the end will benefit from this cataclysmic disaster? Certainly not Israel. My bet is on Hamas. Yes, it will suffer dire consequences, but it will not be eliminated as long as Palestinian suffering remains, creating fertile ground for new blood, something the current Israeli political leadership apparently seems unable, or worse, unwilling, to grasp. Perhaps, having sadly already crossed inhumanity's Rubicon, the only remaining option to these flawed intellects is to forge forward regardless of consequences.

How does one recover from such a path? To that I have no answer, only tears for the all the senseless bloodshed between two people who have coexisted peacefully for centuries ...

Walid Maalouli, Eagan

•••

That horror continued as we also learned that young children were among those kidnapped in Hamas' web of underground tunnels (tunnels which hundreds of Gazan children have died building, by the way — where is the outrage about that?), children who are still held captive today in flagrant violation of the laws of war and the standards of human decency. I cannot imagine how it would feel if my own children were held captive by Hamas, but I know for sure that I would want my government to do everything in its power to bring my children home alive and safe. While I of course share the deep concern and anguish so many feel for the well-being of the innocent Gazan children caught in this awful crossfire, I wish that just as many would feel as much concern for the fate of the Israeli children captured by Hamas terrorists.

Andrea Nadel-Tikh, Minneapolis

The letters "Can't we take an hour off?" (Nov. 2) and "I request a longer break" (Nov. 4) regarding nonstop election campaigning were absolutely dead-on. Political candidates in the United Kingdom campaign for only a few weeks before Election Day. The rest of the time, they spend focused on governing. Sure, they fight, but it's usually about the governing issues at hand, not trashing each other's reputations. Remind me again why we had a revolution against them? Because our way of doing things is exhausting. Just imagine the benefits of a short campaign season: less time needed for fundraising, less incentive to take money from lobbyists, and less fear to work together and let the other party get a win (when not campaigning). You'd think this would all sound good to our representatives, but they are probably too busy campaigning.

Laurie Stangl, Minneapolis

There appears to be a general lack of enthusiasm among Democrats for Joe Biden as the presidential candidate for 2024 ("Trump leads in 5 critical states," Nov. 6). Given that the Electoral College favors low-population states (currently mostly red states), Democrats will need a big win in the popular vote to have a chance of winning the election (think of 2000 and 2016). A viable third-party candidate could prevent that or even send the election to the House (with obvious results). I suggest that Biden and the party leadership instead find a more acceptable candidate.