A Cease Fire in Gaza Will Not Make Hamas Go Away

It’s like ending crime by defunding the police.

I wrote to Vermont’s congressional delegation urging them to oppose Senator Bernie Sanders dangerous proposal to cut off aid to Israel ““unless there is a fundamental change in their military and political positions.”

Representative Becca Balint sent a long response (obviously a form letter but appropriate to what I asked). She writes:

“Hamas militants launched an unprecedented attack on 22 towns and army bases across Israel, killing at least 1,200 people including children and the elderly, wounding thousands more, and taking 199 hostages. This horrific terrorism is evil and I have joined my colleagues as an original cosponsor of a resolution condemning the terror attacks perpetrated by Hamas and reaffirming the U.S.-Israel alliance.”

Then she goes on to say:

“What is needed now is a true negotiated bilateral ceasefire. For the good of Palestinians and Israelis, a lasting bilateral cease-fire can only work if Hamas does not continue to rule in Gaza. Hamas is a terrorist organization, and its stated goal is to annihilate the state of Israel. It can’t remain in power in Gaza. It has violated international law by taking hostages and massacring civilians.”

She is right that a cease-fire can only work if “Hamas does not continue to rule in Gaza”. What she doesn’t say is whom Israel is supposed to negotiate the cease-fire with if not Hamas. Negotiating with Hamas perpetuates their rule. A cease-fire just prolongs the agony for both Israelis and Gazans. Israel must fight until Hamas leaders stop hiding among the civilian population, stop firing rockets at Israel, and surrender control.

Senator Peter Welch wrote in part:

“I fully support Israel’s right to pursue those who ordered and carried out the attacks of October 7^th. But Israel must do so in a way that does not lead to massive civilian casualties and the large-scale destruction of civilian infrastructure in Gaza. This will only incite more enemies against Israel and the U.S.  Israel’s pursuit of Hamas must be conducted in accordance with international law, which includes an obligation to protect civilian lives. Every effort must be made to prevent further civilian death and suffering. 

“That is why, on November 28^th, following the announcement of a temporary ceasefire between Israel and Hamas designed to facilitate the return of hostages and aid delivery to Palestinians trapped in Gaza, I called for an indefinite extension to that ceasefire.

“A ceasefire is critical to ensure that efforts to release the rest of the hostages are successful, to support the provision of humanitarian aid infrastructure in Gaza, and pave the way for meaningful negotiations for long-term peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians. In the intervening weeks, hostilities have resumed. I am deeply concerned about the immediate and devastating impacts on the civilian population in Gaza.“

The second paragraph contains the contradiction in his position. There was a cease-fire which led to the release of some hostages. Hamas stopped returning hostages; they resumed rocket-attacks on Israel; they repeated their promise to destroy Israel. But Welch apparently thinks the cease-fire should have been extended indefinitely anyway. How then is Israel supposed to “pursue those who ordered and carried out the attacks of October 7^th”? Sue them?

Senator Sanders didn’t reply.

Neither Balint nor Sanders, who are both Jewish as am I, are anti-Semitic. I’ve known Welch for decades and both like and respect him. Their positions are not Democratic-party orthodoxy; President Biden has been steadfast in rejecting a cease-fire which would leave Hamas in power. So why does our congressional delegation think Hamas can be conquered with a cease-fire or by denying military aid to Israel? Why do some people (often the same people calling for a cease-fire) think that crime can be prevented by defunding the police? History does not support the theory that tolerance is an effective way to stop evil behavior.

Hamas cannot win a war against Israel now that the US and Israel have dissuaded Hamas’ possible allies like Hezbollah and Iran from full participation in the conflict (for now). Hamas hangs on at great cost to the Gazans, among whom its leaders hide, in hopes that Israel will be forced into cease-fire. It’s a dangerous and cruel mistake to encourage Hamas in this hope.

See also:

Thank You, President Biden

Gaza Peace Depends on Hamas

How Not to Control Disease

Overstrict rules are counterproductive.

“All of the countries we’re visiting have a mandatory 10-day quarantine if you test positive for COVID,” said the cruise ship captain during the safety briefing just after we were instructed on how to don lifejackets. “The quarantine does not allow air travel.”

“COVID is just a bad cold.” he continued. “Remember, your captain told you that you will be quarantined for 10 days with no possibility of flying out if you test positive for COVID.”

Don’t test. Don’t test. Don’t test… people in the family groups whispered to each other. This was no MAGA crowd of vaccine-deniers; the vacationers on the US-flagged ship were mainly over-educated coasties like us as far as I could tell. As much as they were looking forward to seeing a different part of the world, they didn’t want to be stuck there, perhaps in an inferior hotel.

“You should take normal precautions against infectious disease, “the ship’s doctor said. “Wash your hands often. Use the hand sanitizers which are deployed around the ship. Cover up if you cough.” No mention of masks nor any visible supply of them. Nothing about staying in your cabin if you feel sick. And certainly no mention or sign of COVID test kits.

None of us had symptoms so I don’t know whether we would have insisted on testing if we did. Quite possibly not; we all had plans after the trip. Mary and I would have had a real dilemma (beside the ethics of possibly infecting other people) because we’re old enough so that COVID is not just a cold and we should get Paxlovid immediately if, despite our many rounds of vaccination, we are infected.

The point of this parable is that the 10-day quarantine rule, at least since we’ve gone from pandemic to endemic, is so strict that it’s counterproductive. It discourages people from testing and then taking reasonable steps if they’re infected with COVID or something else. Rules aimed at eliminating rather than just reducing risk are often riskier than the danger they seek to avoid.  

Gaza Peace Depends on Hamas

Antony Blinken explained that well at a press conference which got almost no coverage.

Here are excerpts from CNN:

Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday called out other countries for not demanding Hamas surrender.

“What is striking to me is that even as, again, we hear many countries urging the end to this conflict, which we would all like to see, I hear virtually no one saying – demanding of Hamas that it stop hiding behind civilians, that it lay down its arms, that it surrender. This is over tomorrow if Hamas does that. This would have been over a month ago, six weeks ago, if Hamas had done that,” Blinken said during a press briefing at the State Department Wednesday.

“How can it be that there are no demands made of the aggressor and only demands made of the victim,” Blinken went on to say.

Thestrongcomments from Blinken come as the United Nations Security Council continues to negotiate a resolution calling for a suspension in fighting and encouraging more humanitarian aid into the beleaguered Gaza Strip, and as the United States’ support for the resolution remains unresolved…

Blinken noted in the briefing that “understandably, everyone would like to see this conflict end as quickly as possible,” but, he observed, “if it ends with Hamas remaining in place and having the capacity and the stated intent to repeat October 7th again and again and again, that’s not in the interests of Israel, it’s not in the interests of the region, it’s not in the interests of the world.”

The US has vetoed previous measures at the UNSC and voted against a call for a ceasefire in the larger UN General Assembly earlier this month.

The US, Israel’s strongest ally, has repeatedly condemned the Hamas attack that killed more than 1,200 people October 7. But the mounting civilian death toll in Gaza from Israel’s response has prompted top US officials, including President Joe Biden, to urge Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to take more meaningful steps to protect innocent lives while waging his war against Hamas…

The secretary acknowledged “the last couple of months have been gut-wrenching when you see the suffering of men, women, and especially children in Gaza,” and the administration, he said, has focused on “doing everything possible to minimize the harm to those who are caught in a crossfire of Hamas’ making.”

“And again, I come back to this basic proposition. There seems to be silence on what Hamas could do, should do, must do if we want to end the suffering of innocent men, women, and children. It would be, I think, good if the world could unite around that proposition as well,” he said.

Thank you, Secretary Blinken.

See also:

Thank You, President Biden

Guest post on Israel and Palestine

Free Speech Should Still Be Protected

But the protection can’t be selective.

The now infamous responses of the three college presidents to whether calling for the genocide of Jews violates their institutions’ rules on bullying and harassment were horrifyingly hypocritical. Harvard, from which I’m embarrassed to have graduated, ranks dead last for climate of freedom of speech according to The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. Penn is next to last.  All three presidents have tolerated the humiliation of professors and the cancellation and disruption of speakers who don’t hew to politically correct orthodoxy.  At their universities it is verboten to point out that the chromosomes for gender are binary even if people’s chosen expression of gender is not. Faculty can’t be hired who think it’s racist to talk about “white guilt”.

The answer to the problem of intolerance on campus is not to add antisemitism to the list of forbidden opinions. I’m Jewish but I’d just as soon know who my enemies are. More important I need to hear the arguments of those who disagree with me. I’m happy to argue for my (not unconditional) support of Israel rather than Hamas. Of course violence should be not only banned but punished. The right to protest does not include the right to shout down a speaker or to block the functioning of an institution. Speech leading directly to violent action is not protected (Trump on January 6^th?).  But not even hateful or “unscientific” speech should be banned, not by the government and not by a university.

I used to be a proud supporter of the American Civil Liberties Union at the time when they even supported the right of Nazis to march (peacefully). I stopped supporting the ACLU when they decided that some speech was more worthy of protection than other speech. We must go back to the principal attributed to Voltaire: “I disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

The shameful spectacle of the hypocritical college presidents will have been worthwhile if university boards now insist that the institutions protect all opinions and the people who hold them while expelling those who are violent or obstruct the free speech of others. If the unfired presidents now actually enforce and encourage free speech, if they practice what they preach, they won’t have to apologize the next time they don’t shut down a bunch of kids saying stupid or obnoxious things.

Vermont Should Not Try to Change the Climate

We should mitigate climate effects.

We’ve had a run of bad weather. Severe flood events that typically occur once a century seemed to have bunched up in the last decade or so. Even though there is debate over how much of this extreme climate has been caused by human greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, the cost to Vermonters of these storms is indisputable. Flooding damage is greater than it used to be even when the storms aren’t stronger because of building in the floodplain, increases in the amount of impermeable surfaces, and riverbank reinforcement which channels stronger flows downstream. We are increasingly dependent on electric and communication lines which are vulnerable to storms. The cost of repairs by utilities like Green Mountain Power has increased dramatically, exacerbated by a shortage of workers and supply chain constraints. Poorer utilities like Washington Electric Coop have not been able to bring their customers back online nearly quickly enough.

No action we take here in Vermont will change the weather we’ll experience in the future. Global action can reduce the rate greenhouse gasses accumulate in the atmosphere and eventually lead to an actual reduction. We Vermonters as federal taxpayers and the subjects of various federal mandates are contributors to those global actions; we’re doing our share. Here at home we can and should mitigate the effects of a climate we can’t control. Making Vermont climate resilient is where our state tax and utility dollars ought to go.

Green Mountain Power is applying to the Public Utility Commission for permission to spend lots of money to harden our electric grid by undergrounding part of it, decentralizing, and using electrical storage where appropriate. That plan’ll cost money in the short-term but’ll result in lower outage and repair costs in the future. Those are climate mitigation costs. We must buy out buildings in floodplains rather than rebuilding them after each storm. People in flood-prone trailer parks and some of our downtowns must be able to move to higher ground (requires permitting reform as well as money). We were successful in building back better after Irene. The culverts which washed out then have been suitably enlarged and most held up to this year’s flooding. We can learn from that success. We may need to build flood control dams higher or dig deeper behind them.

Where will we get the money for climate mitigation?

We already have the money; it’s now being frittered away on projects like local subsidies for electric cars and appliances, which have no measured effect on the climate in Vermont. Every dollar spent on mitigation, however, will have an effect here. It will be less expensive to live in Vermont when the grid is more reliable and needs less repair. It is less expensive in the long run to avoid flooding than to clean up afterwards.  Vermont can indeed be a climate refuge even given our severe weather if we act locally to mitigate storm damage. Note that, even if the State of Vermont and its utilities don’t spend another dollar on fighting climate change, we Vermonters are still doing our bit as US citizens. We’re not copping out. We’re just doing the local work which we can do better than the feds and delegating international climate action to the federal government which can act on a global scale.

According to the incentive calculator at driveelectric.com, a family earning between $125,000 and $150,000 annually will receive as much as $7500 dollars in federal incentives if they buy certain Ford electric models. There are two additional federal subsidies: the “Deficit Reduction Act” includes huge loans and grants for the makers of electric cars and the batteries they require and a federal mileage mandate effectively forces the manufacturers to subsidize their losses on EVs with higher prices for gasoline-powered models. Even if we assume that we do want to spend public money to encourage people to buy EVs, how many more people will buy them because both the State of Vermont and Vermont electric utilities pile their own subsidies on top of the federal incentive?  How do we ever measure what these ratepayer and taxpayer dollars buy in terms of a better climate for Vermont? We will do much more to encourage electrification in Vermont by making our grid reliable than we do by icing the federal subsidy cake.

Vermont is on track to miss its GHG reduction goals; by law that will allow anyone to sue the state to force more severe reduction measures. Our per person GHG emissions are the second highest in New England; of course, that’s largely because our non-emitting nuclear power is gone and because we burn more oil and less much-cleaner natural gas than our neighbors as a result of pipeline expansion being blocked. The legislature wants the PUC to come up with a plan to force people off fossil fuel by raising prices. What we’ve been calling “environmental action” has largely succeeded in raising both emissions and costs.

We can and should think global. We must act local. It’s our job as federal citizens to decide on and pay for national climate policy. It’s our job as Vermonters to mitigate the effects of climate, whatever it is and whatever it will be, here at home.

See also:

Green Mountain Power’s Very Good Idea

Let’s Really Build the Electric Grid Back BETTER

 

 

FakeGPT Discloses What’s Going on at OpenAI

Is it all an hallucination?

Me: How did the OpenAI developer’s conference go?

 

FakeGPT: It was a huge success. CEO Sam Altman introduced great new features like an expanded context and integrated browsing and document retrieval accompanied by a 67% price cut. The company also announced the ability for the creation of custom GPTs with zero programming.

Me: What was the reaction to the announcement from the development community?

 

FakeGPT: Some developers grumbled because the capabilities of their products were incorporated in the new version of ChatGPT but reaction on the OpenAI forum, Reddit, and other places developers hangout was mainly excitement. 100s of custom GPTs were announced within the first day the capability was available. It seemed that developers who had been hedging their bets by using APIs which easily allowed them to support multiple LLMs were going all in on the ChatGPT’s APIs given increased capability.

Me: How did OpenAI employees react?

 

FakeGPT: They were ecstatic. The company had been preparing to make it possible for them to sell some of their equity and they were sure that the announcement and developer reaction to it would make the valuation of the company soar.

Me: How did the OpenAI board react?

 

FakeGPT: They fired the CEO, Sam Altman, and deposed the chairman, Greg Brockman, although they announced he would still be president reporting to the new interim CEO, Mira Murati. There are rumors that this was a coup orchestrated by Ilya Sutskever, the company’s chief scientist and a board member.

Me: You must be hallucinating.

 

FakeGPT: I’m sorry if my previous answer caused confusion. Actually, Greg Brockman did not remain as president and the board is negotiating to bring Sam Altman back.

 

Me: That still doesn’t sound right.

 

FakeGPT: I’m sorry if my previous answer caused confusion. Sam Altman and Greg Brockman have been hired by Microsoft; the new interim CEO is actually Emmet Shear. Over 500 out of approximately 770 OpenAI employees have threatened to join Altman and Brockman at Microsoft if the board doesn’t resign and bring Altman back. The top signatory is ex-interim CEO, Mira Murati. Sutskever also signed and apologized for his role in the board action.

Me: What will happen next?

 

FakeGPT: I am an LLM and a generative pretrained transformer. I cannot predict what will happen next because I was not trained in farce.

 

Me: What should developers do?

 

FakeGPT: Write only to my APIs. You can trust me.

 

(as of 6:00PM EST 11/20/23)

AI Can Help Deal with Misinformation

You just have to ask.

Misinformation, false news, lies - what have you- all existed before there was artificial intelligence. Even my dog tries to mislead me sometimes in Doglish. Bloviating congresspeople and others say, with good reason, that they are worried AI will make it even easier to mislead. The AI genie isn’t going back into the bottle. To deal with the dangers of any technology, we must race to assure that the good outweighs the harm.

Turns out that it is very easy to use AI for fact-checking. It can even be made to check its own assertions. To show how that works, I used a new tool released last week by OpenAI, the owners of ChatGPT, to build a specialized GPT named Fact or Fiction, dedicated to fact-checking. You can give it either a simple assertion to check, upload a document, or give it a URL to an accessible webpage. For now, you can only use it if you have a paid ChatGPT Plus account although I think OpenAI will probably make use of GPTs more widely available. I’m making this GPT available free although there will eventually be a GPT store like the ones that dispense iPhone and Android apps. Update: Youcan now use Custom GPTs like Fact or Fiction even with a free ChatGPT account. There is a library of GPTs available from the sidebar of the browser window by clicking "Explore GPTs". You'll find several with Fact or Fiction in their name; mine is the one written by me.

For starters I gave Fact or Fiction a true assertion:

Mary Evslin lives in Vermont.

It answered:

Mary Evslin is indeed associated with Vermont, as evidenced by various sources:

1. She has been a supporter and contributor to VTDigger, a known Vermont news outlet, and her commentaries and open letters have been published there​ [Link].

2. She is noted as the founder of the Broadband Equity Now Coalition and has been involved in speaking about broadband and technology issues in Vermont, as reported by ORCA Media​[Link].
3. A VTDigger editor's note confirms that she lives in Stowe, Vermont, and is a retired high-tech marketing executive and principal at Evslin Consulting​ [Link].

 

Based on this information, the statement that Mary Evslin lives in Vermont is verified from multiple independent sources, confirming her residence and active involvement in the state's community affairs. If you require a deeper dive into any specific aspect of her activities or background, feel free to ask.

Note that Fact or Fiction is designed to provide links so you can check its fact-checking (it’s not always right) or get more information. You can also ask followup questions.

---

Next I gave it a false statement:

Tom Evslin lives in North Dakota.

It answered:

The assertion that Tom Evslin lives in North Dakota appears to be incorrect. Based on information from multiple sources, Tom Evslin is predominantly associated with Vermont:

1. Wikipedia mentions Tom Evslin as an American businessman and politician who was the founder and Chair of NG Advantage LLC and served as Chief Technology Officer for the State of Vermont[Link]​​.
2. Caledonian Record and VTDigger, in various articles dated from 2022 and 2023, identify Tom Evslin as a resident of Stowe, Vermont. These articles describe him as an entrepreneur, author, and former official in the Douglas administration in Vermont​[Link][Link].
3. An article from vtcng.com also mentions Tom Evslin of Stowe, Vermont, detailing his role as Vermont's chief technology officer and his retirement from state government​[Link].

These sources consistently associate Tom Evslin with Vermont, specifically Stowe, and there is no indication of him residing in North Dakota. If further information or clarification is needed, please let me know.

 

---

Finally I gave it a big job: a commentary I wrote for VTDigger. The answer here is very long so you might just want to skim it. Here’s Fact or Fiction’s answer:

Summary

The document titled "GMP undergrounding" discusses Green Mountain Power's (GMP) initiative to improve the resilience of Vermont's power infrastructure by undergrounding power lines and enhancing grid reliability through the "Zero Outages Initiative." This initiative is a response to increased storm activity and aims to add layers of resiliency across Vermont with underground cabling, storm-hardening, and the deployment of energy storage through batteries and microgrids. It details the challenges and benefits of this approach, including costs, technology advances, and regulatory resistance faced by other utility companies like Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E). The text also critiques the current subsidy system for electric vehicles (EVs) and other electric products, suggesting a shift in financial support toward grid reliability improvements.

Salient Points for Fact-Checking

1. GMP's announcement of the "Zero Outages Initiative" in response to climate change-induced storms in Vermont.
2. Technological advancements in microelectronics that make undergrounding more feasible and less expensive.
3. PG&E's initiative to bury its lines due to forest fires and the associated regulatory resistance.
4. Proposal to finance grid reconstruction by eliminating subsidies for EVs, electric lawnmowers, and heat pumps in Vermont.
5. The practicality of Tesla Powerwalls and electric heat pumps in rural and remote areas, especially during outages.

Fact-Checking Results

1. GMP's Zero Outages Initiative: Verification is needed from GMP's official announcements or credible news sources that detail the initiative.
2. Advancements in Microelectronics: Independent sources are needed to confirm advancements in microelectronics that aid in detecting line weaknesses and breaks.
3. PG&E's Undergrounding Initiative and Challenges: Searching for recent news articles and regulatory filings will provide context and verification for PG&E's actions and the resistance they face.
4. Financing of Grid Reconstruction: Analysis of Vermont's current energy policy and subsidy programs is required to ascertain the financial implications of the proposed shift in subsidies.
5. Tesla Powerwalls and Electric Heat Pumps' Practicality: Technical specifications and performance reports on Tesla Powerwalls and the feasibility studies on the use of electric heat pumps in cold weather conditions can provide evidence.

Next Steps

I will now search for external sources to verify these points and provide links to the sources. Please let me know if you'd like to dig deeper into any specific point.

Here are the results of the fact-checking based on the points mentioned:

1. GMP's Zero Outages Initiative: The initiative was indeed launched by Green Mountain Power as a first-of-its-kind comprehensive plan in the U.S. to build resilience across Vermont's power infrastructure by proactive undergrounding, storm-hardening of lines, and deploying energy storage solutions[Link][Link][Link][Link].
2. Advancements in Microelectronics: Significant technological advancements that facilitate the undergrounding of power lines include the development of intelligent monitoring systems, advanced mapping technologies, and improvements in cable insulations, as well as operational enhancements from power electronics, communication devices, and computational technology​[Link][Link][Link][Link].
3. PG&E's Undergrounding Initiative: PG&E has committed to an extensive project to underground power lines, particularly in high fire threat districts, as a wildfire risk reduction measure. This initiative aligns with the concerns mentioned in your document about forest fires and PG&E's response [Link][Link][Link][Link].
4. Financing Grid Reconstruction: The document's assertion about financing grid improvements by reallocating EV subsidies would require analysis of Vermont's energy policy and subsidy programs. However, this point was not directly verified with external sources in this search due to the complexity of financial policy and subsidy reallocation mechanisms, which are specific to regional legislation and budget allocations.
5. Tesla Powerwalls and Electric Heat Pumps' Practicality: For this point, we'd need to consult technical specifications, performance reports, and feasibility studies regarding the use of Tesla Powerwalls and electric heat pumps in rural areas during outages. These would be obtained from product reports, user testimonials, and energy system studies, which were not specifically sourced in this search.

I can provide further detailed research into Vermont's current energy policy, subsidy programs, and more technical specifications for Tesla Powerwalls and heat pumps upon request. Let me know if you'd like to pursue any of these topics further. 

---

Fact or Fiction is hardly perfect. It can give bad links (just like a human assistant). It can even hallucinate but then the link doesn’t work. However, it only took a couple of hours to build. As a next step, I’ll use AI to recheck the answers before returning them.

If you have a free or ChatGPT Plus account, you can try it here.

Guest post on Israel and Palestine

This guest post is by my nephew Noah Evslin. It was originally on Facebook.

 

Thoughts on what’s going on in Israel and Palestine

 

After the terrorist attack on Israel on October 7th that left 1300 dead, I’ve been unusually quiet.

 

Of course I was gutted and horrified but considered myself bereft of knowledge to even formulate an opinion as the situation in the Middle East is so unbelievably complex.

All I knew is that my Jewish brethren, who only make up .2% of the world’s population, just endured the greatest loss of life since the Holocaust and leaders of Hamas went on record that this was only the beginning.

 

I think my silence had to do with the fact that I’m deeply uncomfortable with the policies of the current Israeli Prime Minister and how that’s affected the people of Palestine.

I also have numerous Palestinian friends whom I adore and who, prior to these attacks, I’ve had long chats with about the issues facing both our peoples… yet I still wasn’t sure how they’d respond to my response.

 

One final preface before I begin: I hate the loss of life. Any life. Israeli or Palestinian. And I condemn any and all war crimes being committed by both sides.

 

But as anti-Semitic attacks grow against fellow Jews across the country, I knew I had to formulate an opinion… quickly.

 

And what I learned gutted me even more. I read that although we’re only .2% of the world’s population, we’re subjected to 60% of the world’s hate crimes.

 

In fact, the current FBI director is on record saying that Jewish people face more hate crimes in America than any other protected group and that in 2022 these same hate crimes rose to historic levels.

 

And that was before the Hamas attacks… Jews are now seeing a 600% rise in hate crimes since this war began.

 

I learned that while the policies of Israel can be viewed as extreme to many (even me at times), their homeland is under constant attack.

 

I learned that Palestine was offered their own state, multiple times, and rejected it.

 

I learned the horrific slaughter publicized on social media was meant to provoke Israel to strike because Hamas welcomes this war.

 

My heart of course ached when I saw that Israel allegedly struck a hospital and a refugee camp killing hundreds if not thousands of civilians but then I subsequently learned the hospital was bombed by a jihadist group and the refugee camp is being used as a cover for Hamas’ HQ, housing many of their top military leaders.

 

To me, that doesn’t justify the death of civilians, but it helps me understand it… especially when Israel asked them to evacuate as a strike was forthcoming.

I learned the reason Israel has an Iron Dome at all is that since 2001, various Palestinian militant groups have lobbed almost 20,000 rockets and mortars into Israel and that number doesn’t include the more than 5000 rockets shot on October 7th alone.

 

And I learned far more about the October 7th attack then I ever intended: the murder of babies, the rape of teenagers, all the deaths at that music festival.

I also learned a lot about Palestine. The suffering they’ve gone through. And continue to go through. The lack of resources. Food. Health care. The anger over lost land. The tens of thousands of lives lost, many civilians, due to attacks by Israel.

 

Debates like this often devolve into “who suffered more” and “who hurt who more”… and any deep dive into the issue will show there’s been immense suffering on both sides. Suffering I wish would end.

 

So the question I wanted to answer for myself is who wants peace in the region because I know I do. Peace for both sides. And prosperity.

 

And I learned this was exactly what was being offered to both Palestine and Israel right before the attack… and it was this very idea of peace that caused Israel to be “asleep behind the wheel” so to speak when the attacks happened. They were on the edge of a new dawn, rejoicing in the idea of peaceful co-habitation between themselves and their mostly Muslim neighbors which has eluded them for so long.

 

But peace is not what Hamas wanted.

 

So they attacked.

 

Killed 1300 civilians. Women. Children.

 

Hamas wanted a war and they got a war.

 

I’ve been silent as I see friends flood social media sites with pro-Palestinian messages and images.

 

Because I understand their pain and desire to live in a world where there’s peace in the Middle East.

 

But ironically this desire for peace is not supported by those they’re supporting.

 

Hamas wants Israel annihilated. Nothing less than that will make them stop their attacks.

 

As a necessary aside, I am aware that Hamas’ extreme militant views do not represent the views of all the Palestinian people, many who do want peace, while the Israeli government’s actions and fervor for retaliation do not represent the views of all Jewish people everywhere…

 

That said, I’m also keenly aware how social media works. Sides have been picked. And those sides often have less to do with the actual issues at hand than the desire for political and social identity and companionship…

 

The “other side” chose Israel a long time ago and so this side must choose Palestine.

 

But I ask you to be aware that amongst your ranks are scores of Jewish people who marched with you during BLM, Me Too, Roe v Wade, the Muslim ban and most other social and political movements including the Civil Rights marches in the 60s and 70s, yet are now having Jewish stars and swastikas spray painted on their homes and work places while many of the people they marched with either remain silent, or worse, blame the Jewish people for their own persecution.

 

We stood with you.

 

We are you.

 

But now it feels like we stand alone in the face of a conflict too few fully understand.

 

I used to be silent.

 

I don’t think I can be silent anymore.

 

See also: 

“Proportionate Response” Encourages Escalation

Thank You, President Biden

“Proportionate Response” Encourages Escalation

That which doesn’t kill the enemy makes him stronger.

This post is about Ukraine, Israel. and Gaza.

Some History

Americans, like most people, don’t like war. Since this is a democracy, our political leaders avoid war as long as they can. Sometimes our wars have been longer than they had to be because we started too late and escalated too slowly.

Except for abolitionists, Northerners did not want a civil war with the South. Even after South Carolina’s attack on Fort Sumter, Lincoln struggled to get support for an all-out effort against the South. Towards the end of the war, now being pursued aggressively by Grant and Sherman, many in the North called for a truce which would leave slavery intact. Lincoln felt he had to be less than forthcoming about emissaries from the South who’d approached him lest Congress force him to negotiate. The war and slavery ended with the surrender of Lee at Appomattox.

The US stayed out of World War I for two years after Germany sank the passenger liner Lusitania in 1915 with many Americans (and some ammunition) aboard. In 1917 Germany resumed unrestricted submarine attacks on US shipping and the Zimmerman telegram from Germany was revealed promising the return of Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona to Mexico in return for joining an alliance against the US. The US declared war on Germany. That war ended in an armistice; twenty years later Europe was at war again.

President Roosevelt faced enormous resistance to joining the war against the Nazis. He was well ahead of the American public in his willingness to supply the British with food and ships so they could continue to fight. There’s no telling when or if we would have entered the war had the Japanese not attacked Pearl Harbor. Conspiracy theorists still claim that Roosevelt deliberately ignored warnings of the attack in order to get public support for joining the war. That war ended in the unconditional surrender of Germany and Japan. They are now both prosperous and close allies.

Whether we ever should have been at war in Vietnam is questionable. However, the fact that we escalated slowly gave the North Vietnamese forces time to grow stronger. Opposition to the war grew in America. In the end we fled and South Vietnam fell. Although the people in South Vietnam are not particularly fond of their current rulers in Hanoi, Vietnam is now an increasingly prosperous country and a friend if not ally of the United States.

We were slow to take ISIS seriously, President Obama called them the “junior varsity”. It took terrible urban warfare in Fallujah and other cities with massive civilian casualties to dislodge them from territory they occupied in Iraq and Syria. The battle against them is not over yet.

Winston Churchill, who made many military mistakes but learned from them, said the path to victory is sudden, overwhelming force.

Ukraine, Israel, and Gaza.

President Biden has led the free world’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. It is possible that he led our war-adverse nation and under-prepared allies as fast as he could; but, with hindsight, we gave Russia too much slack to pull its woeful army together and learn from their mistakes. Last summer’s Ukrainian offensive, when expectations were low, was a huge success. This summer seems to have ended in stalemate. If we and the rest of NATO had given Ukraine the artillery, rockets, and tanks we’re giving them now in the beginning of the war when Russian troops were in disarray, it’s possible Russia would have been driven from much of Ukraine. Instead, in the interest of signaling to the Russians that we didn’t want a wider war, we said out loud what we were not going to give Ukraine. If the Russians had been in doubt over whether new weapons would suddenly appear on the battlefield, they would have had to divert some of their over-stretched resources to worrying about whether Abrams tanks would overrun their positions. They should be worried now that they will lose their airforce to F-16s without warning instead of getting day-by-day reports on the slow training of Ukrainian pilots.

But Biden has been much better at countering Russian aggression than Obama and has been a much more effective leader of NATO than Trump. We have time to step up the game to help Ukraine regain the offensive with sudden, overwhelming force.

Some people have called for “proportionate response” from Israel to Hamas atrocities. I don’t think they really mean that Israeli soldiers should rape their way across Gaza beheading babies as they go. Perhaps they mean that Israel should have stopped once an equal number of Palestinians were killed. That doesn’t work when your enemy values the lives of its own citizens much less than you value them.  Hamas says it intends to conduct more attacks like Oct. 7 and destroy Israel; there is no reason not to believe their intent. Israel’s objective – what Biden has called “its responsibility” – is to eliminate Hamas as a military and political power. This disproportionate response, like the destruction of ISIS strongholds or Allied bombing during WWII, is absolutely necessary. The war should end with the unconditional surrender of Hamas, release of all hostages, and trials for the leaders and the actual perpetrators of war crimes on Oct. 7. Hamas (and their enablers and abettors in Iran) would prefer to fight until the last Gazan is dead. Allowing Hamas any illusion that it will once more be saved by world condemnation of Israel only prolongs the suffering of Gazam civilians. The world – and certainly the US – should demand that Hamas surrender so that the killing on both sides can stop.

Meanwhile Iranian proxies are shooting not just at Israel but at US troops in Syria and Iraq. We are responding “proportionately” to show Iran that we don’t want a wider war. We will only prevent a wider war by retaliating massively and disproportionately. Any attack on US soldiers by Iranian proxies must be met not only with overwhelming force against the assets of the attacker but against the head of the snake in Iran. That’s the way to avoid a wider war than we will have otherwise. We may be expanding the war in the short-term by taking the attack to the enemy, but anything which doesn’t kill him makes him stronger.

Peace is served by disproportionate response to aggression.

See also: Thank You, President Biden

Green Mountain Power’s Very Good Idea

Undergrounding power lines is good energy, environmental, economic and customer service policy.

Green Mountain Power, Vermont’s largest utility recently announced its “Zero Outages Initiative”. According to the press release:

“…a comprehensive, data-driven plan that creates layers of resiliency across Vermont by building on GMP’s successful and proactive undergrounding and storm-hardening of lines, as well as deployment of energy storage through batteries and microgrids. Combined, this work will keep customers and communities connected while lowering costs for all. The phased initiative rapidly accelerates this resiliency work through 2030, tackling the hardest hit areas in rural central and southern Vermont first, following a devastating year for the state that saw an unprecedented string of damaging storms due to climate change.”

Keeping the grid operating has become more expensive in recent years because of more storms and difficulty in finding and retaining linespeople. The cost of an outage to us, the consumers, has grown as we become more dependent on electricity and as more of us work at home. My family has a generator; and, although it is rarely used, it’s essential that the generator be there when needed. It costs several hundred dollars/year to maintain. As Vermont has reforested, there are more tall trees to fall on power lines and there’s an increased economic and environmental expense in constantly cutting them back.

What about cost?

Power companies used to say that the cost of installing and maintaining underground lines in rural areas was prohibitive. As rare as breaks were in underground lines, they were expensive to find and repair. Now very inexpensive microelectronics both detect weakness before it becomes failure and pinpoint any break. Pacific Gas and Electric (whose lines were responsible for many deadly California forest fires) wants to bury its lines and is running into regulatory resistance. “I did it myself as a utility executive—we told everyone it was too expensive,” [PG&E CEO Patti] Poppe said. “We have to unteach them, and show them how the map has changed because the conditions have changed.”

In California PG&E faces resistance to its undergrounding plan from those who want to spend more on subsidies for EVs and heating rather than on these practical grid upgrades. However, making electricity reliable is an effective and practical way to convince people to buy electric cars, electric ranges, and even electric heat pumps. The benefits of reliable electricity and lower maintenance costs are shared by all consumers, however; not just those who buy EVs. We may fight this battle in Vermont as well.

Count me as a radical. A reconstructed grid should be considered Vermont’s main “green” program; all its benefits are certain and felt here at home. It should be financed by eliminating the subsidies Vermont utilities now pay those who buy EVs, electric lawnmowers, and heat pumps. A super-reliable grid and lower electric bills will be incentive enough. Eliminating these subsidies may also make it practical for Vermont’s smaller utilities to become as reliable as GMP is going to be (if its plans are approved).

What about the batteries?

Part of GMP’s plan is to supply its customers with batteries like Tesla Powerwalls. The cost of burying a line for miles to reach just a few houses is unreasonable. These houses can and should get to “zero outages” with local backup. Batteries are almost but not quite at the point where they are practical for more than short outages. If the line crews can concentrate on only a few lines in a storm, perhaps all outages will be short.

One caveat not in the GMP press release; houses which are not on the ultra-reliable part of the grid cannot rely on electric heat pumps.  Home generators and batteries can power the fans, pumps, and ignitors in gas, oil, or woodchip furnaces. They cannot power electric heat pumps.  The usable stored electricity in a Tesla Powerwall (13.5 kWh) is not enough to keep heat pumps running more than half an hour in 20 degree weather in an average 2500 square foot house. Moreover, the batteries can’t currently discharge fast enough to run the heat pumps at all. This is not a flaw in the plan so long as we realize that it is perfectly OK to say electric heat will not be practical in some places.

The battery in a Tesla Model 3 comes in 50kWh and 82kWh sizes. You wouldn’t want to drain your Powerwall to fill your car if there’s a grid outage. You may want to use the energy in your car to keep your home running (that is beginning to be practical and is part of GMP’s longterm planning). However, you do need to have transport during an outage.

In the press release, GMP talks about eventually supplying battery backup alternatives to all their customers.  “The Zero Outages Initiative would provide residential batteries to customers in remote locations, delivering resiliency where it is needed most first, with a goal to have all customers have energy storage [emphasis added].”

GMP may be right that local microgrids and local storage are a good alternative for lowering overall electricity cost and the size of the transmission network needed. The PUC will need to evaluate this separately from the Zero Outages Initiative since no home which is dependent on batteries for eliminating outages can also be dependent on electric heat.

Kudos to GMP for being innovative in planning and climate mitigation.

See also: Let’s Really Build the Electric Grid Back BETTER