I know very little about the internal politics of Israel, and I have no basis for judging every aspect of Netanyahu's leadership. What I do know is that after October 7th, Israel faced an enemy whose declared purpose is its destruction. The first duty of any government is the protection of its citizens.
The fundamental issue is not Netanyahu. The issue is whether a civilized nation has the moral right to destroy those who seek its annihilation.
Hamas and the broader Islamist movement do not seek peace, coexistence, or reasoned persuasion. They seek the destruction of Israel and the subjugation of individuals to a religious collective. They deliberately target civilians, celebrate murder, and regard death as a virtue.
A government that refuses to defeat such an enemy is sacrificing the lives of its own citizens. A war is not fought to display good intentions. It is fought to eliminate the threat.
My criticism of Israel's conduct after October 7th is not that it defended itself too vigorously, but that it often fought with one hand tied behind its back. A nation at war cannot place the interests of its attackers above the lives of its own people. The moral responsibility for civilian suffering rests first and foremost with those who initiate aggression and use civilians as shields.
I support Israel's right to defend itself because I support the right of a free society to survive.
The deeper question is why so much of the world condemns Israel more fiercely than the movements openly dedicated to its destruction. Why is the free nation held to impossible standards while theocrats, terrorists, and dictators are excused? Why is civilization treated as guilty and barbarism treated as a grievance?
The issue is not Netanyahu. The issue is whether one stands with reason, individual rights, and civilization—or with those who seek to destroy them.