My score is 50-50. I thought there would be well more than the originally anticipated 60,000 at yesterday’s Rally for Israel, and more than the updated estimate of 100,000. It turns out that there were 290,000 who attended (unofficial estimate) and that, if we had not been drafted for unexpected grandparent duties, there would have been 290,002. Score one for me.

On the other hand, I was concerned that there was a lack of clear focus, that a rally for Israel, for hostage release, and for antisemitism might get confused. The confusion never seemed to arise. Hostage release and antisemitism were separate, but not conflicting, subjects, and each of the speakers, as far as I could see, stayed away from talking about the current war in ways that could antagonize others. In other words, no one talked about an immediate ceasefire, and no one talked about nuking Gaza. So I lose on this one.

I don’t know how many watched the rally from afar – I assume it was televised by C-Span (it’s their sort of thing), but we watched it streaming on the Jewish Federation of Greater Washington website. I didn’t watch every minute of it. Or rather, maybe I did watch every minute of it, at least out of a corner of my eye, because the computer was on, but I didn’t listen to every minute of it, because I only turned up the sound when there was something I thought would be interesting.

I didn’t watch, for example, the relatives of the hostages talking about the necessity to get their loved ones back. I have heard enough of that over the past month. I didn’t listen to any of the music (although I started to several times) because I didn’t like any of the music.

I did hear most of the other speeches, I think. I missed Van Jones (I am sure he gave a good talk), and I couldn’t understand most of what Natan Sharansky said. But I thought that Deborah Lipstadt gave a very good talk, as did all of the Congressional representatives, and even Rev. John Hagee.

Hagee, a Christian Zionist with very strong feelings, was – I believe – the most controversial of the speakers, and I can only assume that there was a good reason to invite him to talk. He gave a fine rally pep talk, avoiding the stridency of some of his views and the details of his theology. I was relieved at that. I had earlier read that no rabbis or other Jewish clergy were invited to speak. I can’t say that I understand that, either. But I also can’t say that they were missed. This was a political event (with sociological overtones) and not a religious gathering.

I was also pleased to see that logistics (even with such great numbers) created no problems, although I did hear that a number of bus drivers at Dulles decided to refuse to carry attendees from Detroit to a rally for Israel. I hope they found other ways to get to the Mall.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the fighting in Gaza continues, and skirmishes with Hezbollah threaten the north of Israel and the south of Lebanon.

Israel continues to be criticized for its activity near Gaza hospitals (or within them), including recent criticism from Trudeau in Canada. This is understandable, of course, because both the images and the facts are hard to grasp. But this is war and I don’t know that you can hold back from what you think needs to be done, just because people will be hurt. As I have so often said, we firebombed Dresden and Tokyo and Hamburg, and dropped atomic weapons on Nagasaki and Hiroshima, and look what we did to Vietnam. Just sayin’.

And, of course, Hamas is egging Israel on by using people, including children, as shields, traveling in ambulances, and having major headquarters and warehouses beneath schools and hospitals. This, I don’t think is speculation; by now, it seems clearer than clear. And it is not normal, although neither is Hamas’ statements that it is not responsible for the welfare of its people – let Israel and the UN worry about them, they said.

Plus, although attacking hospitals seems like a terrible thing to do, is it any different from other attacks? Does it make sense to say that a healthy civilian can be collateral damage, but an injured or ill civilian shouldn’t be? Does that make any sense when you come to think of it? Why would sick people be treated differently from those who are well? OK, this is a rhetorical question – no answers required.

Last night, I began to read through one of the C-Span Booknotes volumes, and I was reading an excerpt of the program with Elliot Cohen (Director, SAIS, Johns Hopkins University) about his book Supreme Command: Soldiers, Statesmen and Leadership in Wartime (I don’t know the book). He wrote about, among others, Churchill, Lincoln and Ben Gurion, as exemplars of wartime leadership. Each of these leaders of different countries at different times were confronted with military necessities that required decisions that would result in many, many deaths and injuries. In all three cases, where military necessity required it, the leaders did not shy away from authorizing the actions. Sadly, this is just what war requires.

We will see what happens in Israel. And we will continue to see what the repercussions will be for Jewish communities outside of Israel. In an hour, I am going to attend the first session of a four session class on the development and increase antisemitism on American campuses. I hope to learn something and, if I do, you can be sure I will write about it here.

But not today.