Butler is a husband, father, grandfather, business executive, entrepreneur, and political observer.
The bloody and tragic conflict in Gaza could continue for months and even years. It is an extension of conflict that started before most of us were born and seems intractable. But Israel cannot eliminate Hamas, in the same way that the United States has been unable to eliminate Al Qaeda, ISIS or the Taliban.
These terror groups are not just people, but extreme ideologies. Attempts to eliminate the people of Hamas, especially with the inevitable and tragic “collateral damage,” will ultimately result in more ideologues. Only those who both support Hamas (whether actively or through their inaction) and live with the direct results of that support can end the ideology.
How did it get to this point? The land now referred to as Israel and Palestine has been the home of both Jewish and Arab peoples, and their ancestors, from before the beginning of recorded human history. The area has been conquered and controlled by a range of national entities over the centuries, with the local Jewish peoples usually being oppressed and sometimes forced from the area, later to return and re-establish themselves in what they saw as their homeland.
In modern times, since the end of World War I, there has been an international consensus for a two-state solution and, in November 1947, the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution for a “Plan of Partition with Economic Union” that provided for “Independent Arab and Jewish States and the Special International Regime for the City of Jerusalem.” This two-state solution was rejected by neighboring Arab countries, which invaded Israel the day after it was formally established in 1948.
This begs a thought experiment:
Where would Palestinians and Israel be today if on May 15, 1948, the day after the creation of the state of Israel, the Palestinians had declared their own state and initiated diplomatic relations with Israel and the broader global community? What if members of the Arab League had welcomed this new state of Palestine and initiated diplomatic relations with Israel? I’ll leave you to think through what might have been, but we should also consider what could be.
Arab nations and the Palestinian Arabs themselves (or at least their leadership) continued their resistance to a two-state solution for decades before beginning to temper their views. This began when Egyptian President Anwar el-Sadat and Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin signed the Camp David Accords in 1978, with a final peace agreement signed in 1979. So momentous was this step that Sadat and Begin shared the Nobel Peace Prize in 1978. Sadat paid for this bold move with his life when he was assassinated by members of the Egyptian Islamic Jihad in 1981.
Following the first Intifada (from 1987 to 1993) the Oslo Accords were signed by the Palestine Liberation Organization and Israel, wherein each party recognized the other party’s legitimacy and established a framework for future negotiations. There was resistance to these Accords on both sides, and when the second intifada broke out in 2000, the Oslo process came to a halt. While the PLO ostensibly continues to support a two-state solution, Palestinian and Islamicist resistance continues. And yes, there are Israelis who also resist a two-state solution.
More recently, with the Abraham Accords, the historically anti-Israel countries of the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and Sudan each recognized Israel, and diplomatic relations were established. Whether directly or indirectly, the agreements all supported the two-state solution and a negotiated settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Most recently there appears to have been progress in peace negotiations between Israel and Saudi Arabia that included support for a two-state solution and a negotiated settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. There is speculation that Hamas, with the backing and encouragement of Iran, timed its Oct. 7 attack on Israel in part to pre-empt any such agreement.
So, while the Arab nations originally opposed a two-state solution, the trend is in this direction, though painfully slow and with tragic and violent interruptions. Several Palestinian and radical Muslim groups, including Hamas, continue to subscribe to the idea of a single Palestinian state “from the river to the sea,” and the eradication of Israel and the Jewish people. In 2006, the year after Israel unilaterally ended its occupation and settlement in Gaza, Hamas won the first (and so far, only) Palestinian legislative elections. Because of Hamas’ history of violence and its continued intent to eradicate Israel, most of the international community refused to recognize it as the legitimate leadership of Palestinians. But given Hamas’ influence and strengths, it has controlled Gaza ever since.
The barbaric attack Hamas conducted on Oct. 7 has prompted Israel to conduct its retaliation as a full-scale war with the explicit intent to eradicate Hamas. This has resulted in a higher level of civilian deaths, injuries and displacement than past responses. The human tragedy is obvious. But given the goal to eliminate Hamas and given the Hamas strategy of embedding itself among civilians, this is not surprising. Even if one believes Israel is doing its best to avoid such results, which is contradicted by the video evidence, we grieve for those civilians, and we know more Palestinians are being radicalized.
Israel made it clear from the beginning that this would be a war and not a mere retaliation, and that it would continue the war until Hamas had been eliminated. I wish Israel had made it clear to the Palestinians that they could avoid the coming war. How? By rising up and overthrowing their real oppressors – Hamas. This may seem impossible, but so does Israel’s objective of eradicating Hamas. The only people that can do that are the Palestinians themselves. Doing so would almost certainly require a violent revolution and likely many Palestinians would perish in the effort. But after 75 years of dying in a failed and futile effort to destroy Israel, when does it become obvious that another approach is in order? For those Palestinians who recognize two states as the only solution, for their children and grandchildren, they must renounce the Hamas ideology and remove the Hamas organization from power.
So let’s extend our thought experiment. What would result if the Palestinians themselves put an end to Hamas and sought peace with Israel in the framework of a Palestinian state? Again, I’ll leave it to you to think through what can be. For those who support Palestinians from afar, especially politicians and protestors, and most especially those who find it difficult to blame Hamas, what would result?
Americans across the political spectrum have continued to ask about the late financier and convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein’s connections among the political elite. (Angela Weiss/AFP)
Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner speaks to voters at a town hall at the Elks Lodge 188 on June 7, 2026, in Portland, Maine.
McConnell and Platner both feel entitled
The two men could not be more different. One, a Republican, octogenarian, seven-term Southern senator, the other a progressive, millennial Maine oysterman who’s never spent a day in elected office.
But Mitch McConnell, the senior senator from Kentucky who’s been MIA for the past few weeks and Graham Platner, the Maine Senate candidate who’s facing calls to drop out of his race against Sen. Susan Collins, apparently do have something in common: an outsized sense of entitlement.
McConnell, who is 84 and not running for reelection, has been hospitalized for three weeks, and yet we still don’t fully know what he was admitted for or what his condition is. Per CNN, “his office has not disclosed a medical reason for the hospitalization or provided specifics on his health status beyond saying last week that he ‘continues to improve’ and ‘is working closely with his staff on Kentucky and Senate matters.’ ”
While several legislators have said they’ve talked to him and insist he sounds strong, others have said they are completely in the dark. One MAGA influencer, Laura Loomer, posted ”High level source close to the White House tells me ‘Mitch McConnell is officially brain dead. He’s not coming back.’ ”
Meanwhile, up in Maine, Platner has been artfully dodging calls from his own party to drop out of his race after several allegations of misconduct from women, including a sexual assault allegation from a former girlfriend, came to light. While Platner, who has managed to survive a Nazi-tattoo scandal, a sexting scandal, and several old tweets scandals, denies the allegations, he has not quit.
High-profile Democrats including Sens. Bernie Sanders and Chuck Schumer, the latter of whom had unsuccessfully hand-selected Maine Gov. Janet Mills to face Collins instead of Platner, have urged Platner to drop out, while other Dems have accused him of trying to influence the picking of his replacement.
Maine Democratic Party Executive Director Devon Murphy-Anderson released a statement Tuesday, which said in part:
“Unfortunately, Graham Platner’s team has repeatedly reached out to us in an attempt to put their thumb on the scale of what this process looks like. We have repeatedly reiterated to Graham Platner’s team that they have no role in determining our next Democratic nominee for the U.S. Senate nor in determining what this process looks like.”
Both incidents show a deep lack of accountability to voters, who in one case deserve to know whether their senator is capable of performing his duties, and in another deserve a candidate who isn’t being accused of crimes, bigotry and deception.
The offensive and odious entitlement of both McConnell and Platner stands out not because it is particularly unique among today’s political class. Tom Kean, the New Jersey GOP congressman, missed more than 100 votes, only sharing after a three-month mystery absence that he was dealing with depression.
Former President Joe Biden’s Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin failed to disclose a hospitalization for prostate cancer surgery, flouting the established rules for Cabinet members and senior U.S. officials.
From Biden’s insistence on running for reelection despite his obvious cognitive and political weaknesses to Trump’s brazen flouting of laws and norms, few politicians seem to appreciate that their public service job comes with responsibilities to constituents, including transparency and honesty.
But both parties increasingly justify the chicanery, because the stakes of winning elections and keeping power are simply too high. But that’s no excuse. If we’ve learned anything over the past decade, it’s that character and accountability do, in fact, matter. And when we, the voters, stop caring about it, well, so do they.
S.E. Cupp is the host of "S.E. Cupp Unfiltered" on CNN.