Is peace in Palestine possible? A dialogue between two Davids
- Humanistically Speaking
- 2 days ago
- 7 min read
This Facebook dialogue between David Brittain and David Warden, and several others, took place between 17th and 23rd May as Israel intensified its military campaign in Gaza. David Brittain is the founding editor of Humanistically Speaking and David Warden is the Editor.
David Brittain I have been a sympathiser of the suffering of Judaism all my life and a staunch supporter of freedom and justice for Jews all over the world. But the Israelis seem to be launching into another massive offensive into the West Bank, and it’s terrible to see what I might otherwise have considered a civilised country committing such awful crimes. The lies are so blatant, the starving and traumatised children so distressing, and the seeds of hatred that are being sown now that will surely harvest an even darker future for all sides. It doesn’t bear thinking about, and I do wonder when it will all end – or will it ever end? In my darker moments I sometimes wonder what Hitler would say if he were alive today? Would he have taken a deep sigh and sagely nod his head about what Israel is doing, and then say “I told you so?” I have several Jewish born friends who are as horrified as I am about what is going on in the West Bank, but at the end of the day, being horrified is not enough. It is a matter for the Jews in Israel to be horrified enough to force their government to stop this bloody murder.
David Warden Israel is a democratic country fighting a war against a terrorist organisation which tyrannises Palestinians and steals aid and which seeks the annihilation of Israel. Our fathers and grandfathers were not “murdering Germans”. They were fighting a war against fascism. Israel is fighting a war against a foe that seeks the annihilation and removal of 7 million Jews from the region. War is horrible but sometimes it is moral.
David Brittain I know you well David, and so I do not set aside your position lightly. I am also mindful of Hamas’s terrible crime against innocent Israeli citizens. But the action being taken now is not even in the interests of Israel. Not every child in the Gaza Strip will be killed, and those who survive to grow up will surely nurse a hatred of Israel that will last well into the 21st century. Thus, the killing and misery will surely perpetuate into the future. It’s in the long term interest of Israel that they show restraint. If they don’t, they will be forced to utterly wipe out the entire population of Gaza – an outcome that I know you would find as abhorrent as I do.
David Warden The Allies did not defeat Nazism by showing restraint. Hamas needs to be defeated for the sake of Palestinians as much as the Israelis. There are always civilian casualties in war. As of 19 May 2025, the Gaza Health Ministry reports that at least 53,339 Palestinians have been killed and over 121,000 wounded since the onset of the conflict in October 2023. The ongoing conflict has also led to the displacement of nearly all of Gaza’s 2.3 million residents, with widespread destruction of homes, hospitals, and essential infrastructure. This is absolutely horrific. And ultimately it is the fault of Hamas which is often described as a death cult. Sometimes, as our fathers and grandfathers understood, it is necessary to fight a war to prevent a greater evil which, in this case, would be the annihilation of Israel and its 7 million Jews if Hamas is allowed to recover.
David Brittain I must say that I am conflicted about this whole thing. I certainly agree that Hamas must be crushed out of existence, but I am deeply saddened to see the suffering that the people in Gaza are going through right now. I am also nauseated by the constant media display of suffering children, because it feels that I am being specifically manipulated through my emotions. There is no doubt that Israel is at war, and wars must be won. I recall some years ago being asked, if I were a general leading an army in a war, whether I would kill a million of the enemy’s children if it would save the life of just one of my men. I said that I wouldn’t hesitate, and I was immediately accused of being a murderer, and a fascist. Well, I’m thankful that I am not in that kind of position, and never will be - but if I was, and I decided to SAVE those one million children, I have to ask myself, which of my own men would I chose to die? What would that do to the morale among my own soldiers? And what would that soldier’s family say about my decision? I doubt very much that they would understand. The uncomfortable fact is that if a war is going to achieve anything at all for either side, it MUST be won – and if necessary at all costs – otherwise those who have died along the way will have died for nothing. Wars are never noble. Indeed, a dispassionate observer would see war as a highly organised act of collective insanity, with only the winners able to claim any gain at all. But since WW2, we have managed to ensure that almost every war that has been fought ends with NEITHER side winning – thus, everybody loses! Putin actually understands that, which is why he has no intention whatsoever of easing up in the Ukraine, and why he will play Trump until he ‘wins’. And that’s because I’m pretty sure he knows that if he doesn’t win all of his objectives, he will have lost, and he will probably lose his leadership, perhaps his life.
So you will understand, David, that I am genuinely conflicted about all this, because whilst my MIND can see the logic of the situation, my EMOTIONS are still utterly horrified by the suffering. Coming back to the Israeli/Hamas conflict, it seems that Hamas has wedded its way into the core of Palestinian society, and if that’s correct, the killing will go on until Hamas has been utterly destroyed - and therefore, I cannot see an easy end to this conflict until one side absolutely crushes the other. And at the moment, it looks as though the Israelis will occupy the Gaza Strip, and stay there for a very long time – maybe even annex it and stay forever. But that comes with another tragedy, because one way or another the killing will go on through terrorism at least, and into an uncertain future.
You mentioned the relentless killing in WW2, David, and the outcome was SO terrible, that the World was galvanised into coming together and forming the UN with the specific aim of ending conflict. In taking that approach the UN has worked hard (and heroically, it has to be said) to reduce the terrible anguish and suffering caused. But that seems to have sanitised war, and I am concerned that quite apart from reducing the likelihood of conflict, the UN’s worthy ideals may have actually INCREASED it, because in reducing the pain, some leaders might calculate that possible gains made through conflict might actually be worth the cost, and if things go pear shaped, they can always appeal to the (reluctant) ‘referee’ (that’s the UN) to intervene. So where do we go from there? What can the world do to truly reduce the incidence of conflict? We need to expose and control misinformation, of course, and to that end we need to establish an ‘honest broker’ that people can trust – the kind of thing that the BBC is trying to do. But above all, we need to expand the European Union ideal that, for all its strengths and weaknesses, seems to have been successful in making war within the EU unthinkable. We urgently need to establish cultural and economic links between states that are so strong that potential despots can only see economic and social ruin with conflict. But that will be easier said than done, particularly where religious and cultural differences are so deep. Indeed, it may not even be possible, but I do think it’s our only chance for long term, worldwide peace. Until then I will quote a comment from a very mild and gentle elderly lady friend of mine. “We are totally fucked!”
David Warden Thank you David for your very thoughtful reply. You write that you feel “nauseated by the constant media display of suffering children, because it feels that I am being specifically manipulated through my emotions.” I do not watch mainstream media so to a large extent I am insulated from such manipulation if that is what it is. This is not to say that I do not abhor the terrible human suffering involved in war. You write that you are conflicted between the logic of needing to win a decisive victory and the emotions triggered by the spectacle of suffering. I agree. We all want to see an end to the suffering. The calculus of war is brutal, but a decisive victory with all the immediate costs that entails may be far more effective at ending suffering into the future than a premature ceasefire which precisely leads to the inconclusive result you alluded to.
I’m afraid I do not see the BBC as an “honest broker” but as an extremely one-sided propaganda machine. I also think that the UN has perpetuated the conflict through UNWRA in particular. The European Union ideal could be applied very constructively to Israel/Palestine. It could be a thriving economic and cultural union. But the main blockage is religion. Radical Islamists believe that the whole region must be returned to Muslim rule and that the Jewish State must be overthrown and the “infidels” driven into the sea. Until this fascist ideology is decisively defeated then your friend’s comment is completely apt.
The theme of Humanistically Speaking in June is “peace”. Would you agree to publishing our dialogue if suitably edited?
David Brittain Of course I would agree, David! And thank you for your response.
I recently saw somewhere children in Gaza paraded with injury for emotive responses from the west. But for every child victim from war, theres another child hostage or assassination victim by Hamas.