RSS
What Sodom and Gomorrah Teach Us About Hamas and Hezbollah
A Torah scroll. Photo: RabbiSacks.org.
There are times when mercy and compassion are essential, the very qualities that can help resolve difficult situations. But sometimes, kindness backfires — becoming not just unhelpful, but downright dangerous and counterproductive. The trick is knowing when compassion is misplaced.
One person who understood this very well was Sir Winston Churchill. Faced with the overwhelming belligerence of Nazi Germany’s advance in 1940, he stood before the House of Commons in his first speech as Prime Minister and declared, “You cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth.”
His strategy was clear: there had to be total, unrelenting resistance if Hitler and his thuggish violence were to be overcome. What Churchill recognized was that compassion for Germans and Germany in the fight against Hitler would be a dreadful mistake, and that the future of the free world hung in the balance.
General William Tecumseh Sherman shared this same insight, as his infamous “scorched earth” march through the South during the American Civil War vividly demonstrated. A pragmatic but devoted unionist, Sherman knew that anything less than decisive, overwhelming action — targeting both military and civilian resources — would likely fail to break the Confederacy’s resolve, prolonging the horrific conflict and deepening the Nation’s rift.
So, he took the hard road, leading a campaign so relentless it crushed the Confederate spirit and ultimately paved the way for the country to reunify.
While Sherman’s methods might seem extreme to modern sensibilities, his choices were grounded in a harsh reality: had he left room for the Confederacy to regroup, rearm, and resist, that would have meant decades of war and suffering that would have been far worse.
As brutal as it was, Sherman’s march was calculated to bring the suffering to a quicker end, because rebuilding could only happen after those intent on destroying peace were decisively defeated.
Similarly, Churchill understood that any attempt to negotiate with Nazi Germany would only prolong the threat, which was why he insisted that peace could only be secured by confronting the enemy head-on, often with military tactics that left devastation in its wake.
The Allied forces targeted strategic cities like Dresden, Rotterdam, and Berlin in overwhelming bombing campaigns that were aimed at breaking Germany’s ability to continue the war. As Churchill put it, there had to be “Victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be — for without victory, there is no survival.”
In Europe, victory required the calculated use of brutal force to dismantle the infrastructure that supported tyranny, paving the way for a postwar rebuilding grounded in true peace.
Now, let’s fast-forward to the present. The tragic events of last October 7th in Israel showed the world the cruelty that groups like Hamas are willing to inflict on innocent civilians without provocation or any attempt to try peaceful resolution first.
But even as Israel began its justified — and unquestionably harsh — military response, most international leaders could only bring themselves to offer cautious, watered-down support, and very quickly began to call for a ceasefire. The “support” offered was accompanied by the kinds of conditions that would inevitably blunt the effectiveness of what Israel was trying to do — namely, root out Hamas once and for all. Israel’s right to defend itself was affirmed with one breath and curbed with the next.
How can pure evil be defeated if misdirected compassion is continually used to tie the hands of those fighting it? By insisting on half-measures and quick returns to “stability,” the international community has only prolonged the suffering, allowing groups like Hamas to regroup and continue their cycle of terror. True peace demands the courage to confront and dismantle the forces of destruction—not giving them breathing room under the guise of compassion.
One can’t help but wonder how things might look today if, years ago, Israel had acted with Churchillian resolve in the face of Hamas, or had they, like Sherman, decided that the only path to peace was one that left no room for enemies to regroup. Instead, we’ve seen decades of half-measures, ceasefires, and so-called negotiations that have served only to buy time for Hamas to rearm and double down.
And it’s not just Israel. And it’s not just Hamas. For years, the Western world has danced around Iran, tolerating its proxy terrorism through Hezbollah in Lebanon, militias in Iraq, the Houthis in Yemen, and its entrenched role in supporting Hamas — and that’s before you consider their attempts to become a nuclear military power.
Iran’s regime is the most outstanding contemporary example of what happens when the world treats an existential threat with kid gloves. Imagine if decisive action had been taken against Iran when its terror network was still in its infancy. Imagine if the West had backed Israel, not with words, but solid, uncompromising support. Wouldn’t the Middle East be a very different place?
Which brings me to Parshat Vayeira, where we find Abraham pleading with God to spare the city of Sodom, bargaining with Him in the hope that even a small cluster of righteous people might justify saving the entire city. I have always struggled with this story. What is the point of the bible remembering Abraham’s abject failure to negotiate a reprieve for this doomed city?
But perhaps his failure is precisely the point. While Abraham’s compassion is admirable, and his willingness to challenge God heroic, ultimately, God is telling him that Sodom’s sins are so extreme, so corrosive, and so reprehensible that redemption is no longer an option.
God’s response is swift, and the angels sent to dispatch Sodom do what has to be done: they rescue Lot and his family and destroy the city until no trace of it is left.
That is the essential lesson here. Compassion has limits. God’s response to Abraham wasn’t dismissive or cruel. Instead, it was a recognition that certain evils cannot be redeemed, and therefore, no attempt should be made to try and redeem them.
Of course, God allowed Abraham to advocate, to hope, and to express compassion — we are always expected to explore compassion as an option. But in the end, Sodom’s fate was sealed. The destruction of Sodom didn’t mean Abraham had failed; even kindly Abraham had to learn that mercy, too, has boundaries.
As we look at the situation in Israel and the Middle East today, the parallels to Sodom and Gomorrah are impossible to ignore. Groups like Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, and, in particular, their Iranian puppet masters, don’t just oppose Israel; they undermine regional and international stability and twist their own people into tools for a vile nihilistic agenda.
They have proven themselves beyond redemption, operating with methods that prioritize terror over any semblance of peace. And, just as Abraham learned, we too must realize that there are times when standing firm against such forces is not only necessary — it’s moral.
The incoming US administration’s cabinet and diplomatic appointments this week show that this message has finally made it to the highest levels, and the self-destructive mercy of those who advocate for a ceasefire might finally be overruled by those who have the greater good and a strategic vision at the center of their focus.
In Parshat Vayeira, we see that not every plea for mercy is good, nor every act of destruction bad. There is a place for compassion, and there is a place for resolve. And in a world where Sodom still thrives, knowing when to draw the line may be the key to safeguarding what we truly value.
The author is a rabbi in Beverly Hills, California.
The post What Sodom and Gomorrah Teach Us About Hamas and Hezbollah first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Hamas Says No Interim Hostage Deal Possible Without Work Toward Permanent Ceasefire
Explosions send smoke into the air in Gaza, as seen from the Israeli side of the border, July 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Amir Cohen
The spokesperson for Hamas’s armed wing said on Friday that while the Palestinian terrorist group favors reaching an interim truce in the Gaza war, if such an agreement is not reached in current negotiations it could revert to insisting on a full package deal to end the conflict.
Hamas has previously offered to release all the hostages held in Gaza and conclude a permanent ceasefire agreement, and Israel has refused, Abu Ubaida added in a televised speech.
Arab mediators Qatar and Egypt, backed by the United States, have hosted more than 10 days of talks on a US-backed proposal for a 60-day truce in the war.
Israeli officials were not immediately available for comment on the eve of the Jewish Sabbath.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s office said in a statement on a call he had with Pope Leo on Friday that Israel‘s efforts to secure a hostage release deal and 60-day ceasefire “have so far not been reciprocated by Hamas.”
As part of the potential deal, 10 hostages held in Gaza would be returned along with the bodies of 18 others, spread out over 60 days. In exchange, Israel would release a number of detained Palestinians.
“If the enemy remains obstinate and evades this round as it has done every time before, we cannot guarantee a return to partial deals or the proposal of the 10 captives,” said Abu Ubaida.
Disputes remain over maps of Israeli army withdrawals, aid delivery mechanisms into Gaza, and guarantees that any eventual truce would lead to ending the war, said two Hamas officials who spoke to Reuters on Friday.
The officials said the talks have not reached a breakthrough on the issues under discussion.
Hamas says any agreement must lead to ending the war, while Netanyahu says the war will only end once Hamas is disarmed and its leaders expelled from Gaza.
Almost 1,650 Israelis and foreign nationals have been killed as a result of the conflict, including 1,200 killed in the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attack on southern Israel, according to Israeli tallies. Over 250 hostages were kidnapped during Hamas’s Oct. 7 onslaught.
Israel responded with an ongoing military campaign aimed at freeing the hostages and dismantling Hamas’s military and governing capabilities in neighboring Gaza.
The post Hamas Says No Interim Hostage Deal Possible Without Work Toward Permanent Ceasefire first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Marks 31st Anniversary of AMIA Bombing by Slamming Argentina’s ‘Baseless’ Accusations, Blaming Israel
People hold images of the victims of the 1994 bombing attack on the Argentine Israeli Mutual Association (AMIA) community center, marking the 30th anniversary of the attack, in Buenos Aires, Argentina, July 18, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Irina Dambrauskas
Iran on Friday marked the 31st anniversary of the 1994 bombing of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association (AMIA) Jewish community center in Buenos Aires by slamming Argentina for what it called “baseless” accusations over Tehran’s alleged role in the terrorist attack and accusing Israel of politicizing the atrocity to influence the investigation and judicial process.
The Iranian Foreign Ministry issued a statement on the anniversary of Argentina’s deadliest terrorist attack, which killed 85 people and wounded more than 300.
“While completely rejecting the accusations against Iranian citizens, the Islamic Republic of Iran condemns attempts by certain Argentine factions to pressure the judiciary into issuing baseless charges and politically motivated rulings,” the statement read.
“Reaffirming that the charges against its citizens are unfounded, the Islamic Republic of Iran insists on restoring their reputation and calls for an end to this staged legal proceeding,” it continued.
Last month, a federal judge in Argentina ordered the trial in absentia of 10 Iranian and Lebanese nationals suspected of orchestrating the attack in Buenos Aires.
The ten suspects set to stand trial include former Iranian and Lebanese ministers and diplomats, all of whom are subject to international arrest warrants issued by Argentina for their alleged roles in the terrorist attack.
In its statement on Friday, Iran also accused Israel of influencing the investigation to advance a political campaign against the Islamist regime in Tehran, claiming the case has been used to serve Israeli interests and hinder efforts to uncover the truth.
“From the outset, elements and entities linked to the Zionist regime [Israel] exploited this suspicious explosion, pushing the investigation down a false and misleading path, among whose consequences was to disrupt the long‑standing relations between the people of Iran and Argentina,” the Iranian Foreign Ministry said.
“Clear, undeniable evidence now shows the Zionist regime and its affiliates exerting influence on the Argentine judiciary to frame Iranian nationals,” the statement continued.
In April, lead prosecutor Sebastián Basso — who took over the case after the 2015 murder of his predecessor, Alberto Nisman — requested that federal Judge Daniel Rafecas issue national and international arrest warrants for Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei over his alleged involvement in the attack.
Since 2006, Argentine authorities have sought the arrest of eight Iranians — including former president Ali Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, who died in 2017 — yet more than three decades after the deadly bombing, all suspects remain still at large.
In a post on X, the Delegation of Argentine Israelite Associations (DAIA), the country’s Jewish umbrella organization, released a statement commemorating the 31st anniversary of the bombing.
“It was a brutal attack on Argentina, its democracy, and its rule of law,” the group said. “At DAIA, we continue to demand truth and justice — because impunity is painful, and memory is a commitment to both the present and the future.”
31 años del atentado a la AMIA – DAIA. 31 años sin justicia.
El 18 de julio de 1994, un atentado terrorista dejó 85 personas muertas y más de 300 heridas. Fue un ataque brutal contra la Argentina, su democracia y su Estado de derecho.
Desde la DAIA, seguimos exigiendo verdad y… pic.twitter.com/kV2ReGNTIk
— DAIA (@DAIAArgentina) July 18, 2025
Despite Argentina’s longstanding belief that Lebanon’s Shiite Hezbollah terrorist group carried out the devastating attack at Iran’s request, the 1994 bombing has never been claimed or officially solved.
Meanwhile, Tehran has consistently denied any involvement and refused to arrest or extradite any suspects.
To this day, the decades-long investigation into the terrorist attack has been plagued by allegations of witness tampering, evidence manipulation, cover-ups, and annulled trials.
In 2006, former prosecutor Nisman formally charged Iran for orchestrating the attack and Hezbollah for carrying it out.
Nine years later, he accused former Argentine President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner — currently under house arrest on corruption charges — of attempting to cover up the crime and block efforts to extradite the suspects behind the AMIA atrocity in return for Iranian oil.
Nisman was killed later that year, and to this day, both his case and murder remain unresolved and under ongoing investigation.
The alleged cover-up was reportedly formalized through the memorandum of understanding signed in 2013 between Kirchner’s government and Iranian authorities, with the stated goal of cooperating to investigate the AMIA bombing.
The post Iran Marks 31st Anniversary of AMIA Bombing by Slamming Argentina’s ‘Baseless’ Accusations, Blaming Israel first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Jordan Reveals Muslim Brotherhood Operating Vast Illegal Funding Network Tied to Gaza Donations, Political Campaigns
Murad Adailah, the head of Jordan’s Muslim Brotherhood, attends an interview with Reuters in Amman, Jordan, Sept. 7, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Jehad Shelbak
The Muslim Brotherhood, one of the Arab world’s oldest and most influential Islamist movements, has been implicated in a wide-ranging network of illegal financial activities in Jordan and abroad, according to a new investigative report.
Investigations conducted by Jordanian authorities — along with evidence gathered from seized materials — revealed that the Muslim Brotherhood raised tens of millions of Jordanian dinars through various illegal activities, the Jordan news agency (Petra) reported this week.
With operations intensifying over the past eight years, the report showed that the group’s complex financial network was funded through various sources, including illegal donations, profits from investments in Jordan and abroad, and monthly fees paid by members inside and outside the country.
The report also indicated that the Muslim Brotherhood has taken advantage of the war in Gaza to raise donations illegally.
Out of all donations meant for Gaza, the group provided no information on where the funds came from, how much was collected, or how they were distributed, and failed to work with any international or relief organizations to manage the transfers properly.
Rather, the investigations revealed that the Islamist network used illicit financial mechanisms to transfer funds abroad.
According to Jordanian authorities, the group gathered more than JD 30 million (around $42 million) over recent years.
With funds transferred to several Arab, regional, and foreign countries, part of the money was allegedly used to finance domestic political campaigns in 2024, as well as illegal activities and cells.
In April, Jordan outlawed the Muslim Brotherhood, the country’s most vocal opposition group, and confiscated its assets after members of the Islamist movement were found to be linked to a sabotage plot.
The movement’s political arm in Jordan, the Islamic Action Front, became the largest political grouping in parliament after elections last September, although most seats are still held by supporters of the government.
Opponents of the group, which is banned in most Arab countries, label it a terrorist organization. However, the movement claims it renounced violence decades ago and now promotes its Islamist agenda through peaceful means.
The post Jordan Reveals Muslim Brotherhood Operating Vast Illegal Funding Network Tied to Gaza Donations, Political Campaigns first appeared on Algemeiner.com.