Obama Officials Ben Rhodes and Tommy Vietor Have Discussion That Hamas Would Love

(AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)

It seems a fairly simple thing to understand.

If terrorists are firing on you and trying to obliterate you, you respond and take them out. If they try to use civilians as cover, you try to avoid the civilians, but you still have the right of self-defense.

Israel gave the media organizations warning and time to get out, so no one was hurt. But they had the right to take out the terrorists.

So, what was the response of the “Obama bros,” former Obama Administration officials Ben Rhodes and Tommy Vietor? Did they come to the support of Israel or say they had the right to respond to the terrorists by hitting the building? Nope.

What’s fascinating about this is that you can see in their discussion why the Dems are always getting their Middle East policy wrong, why they always take the wrong side.

“Last thought on this,” Vietor said. “I’m sure Hamas offices were in that building & that they purposefully co-locate operations with civilians. But that is not a new problem. And if the IDF wants to claim that the military effort is targeted, precise, etc…then you shouldn’t hit that building.”

So, what’s the result, if you take this posture, that you shouldn’t hit the building if they take human shields? You should just continue to let them pound Israel with rockets? And then they take more human shields, because they know the tactic works? That’s what this advice would lead to. It’s not a hard concept to understand, except apparently for Obama bros.

Ben Rhodes responded to Vietor.

“What does hitting that building achieve?” Rhodes argued. “What degradation of Hamas relative to the civilian harm and targeting of the most prominent news outlets in Gaza? It’s hard not to conclude that the collective punishment of all people in Gaza is the point.”

Um, Ben? Degradation of Hamas is sort of the point here. Why do you have an issue with degrading Hamas? I’m just guessing that Israel has a little bit more understanding than you about the importance of the target. There was no “civilian harm” since they got the people out of there. But then Ben really goes overboard with the Hamas propaganda, calling it a “hard not to conclude that the collective punishment of all people in Gaza is the point.” How is that anything but completely taking up for terrorists? They warned the people to get out. Of course, let’s not forget who backs Hamas, Iran, one of the other things Ben seems to love a lot.

More? Vietor says he hopes that Biden is warning Netanyahu to not move troops in on the ground and “demanding that the IDF de-escalate.” This is the Obama folks, and you wonder why they were always cutting Israel’s legs out from under them.

I wrote that this discussion is fascinating, but not just because it shows why the Obama team was such a failure in the Middle East.

It’s also a likely window into what’s now going on with the Biden team, who are heavily influenced by the Obama folks. That explains why we get comments from Jen Psaki that we wrote about earlier, “We have communicated directly to the Israelis that ensuring the safety and security of journalists and independent media is a paramount responsibility.”

Israel took care of that and ensured their safety. Their paramount responsibility is protecting the lives of their people and defending their country from attack. So, Psaki’s tweet is to chastise Israel and feed those on the left.

HT: Twitchy