Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Meanwhile, in Sudan, the Associated Press reports that 9,000 people have been killed in the last six months. And the United Nations migration office reports that 4.5 million have been displaced inside Sudan, and 1.2 million have sought refuge in other countries. It has created, in the words of U.N. humanitarian chief Martin Griffiths, "one of the worst humanitarian nightmares in recent history." He has said that "for six months, civilians ... have known no respite from bloodshed and terror. Horrific reports of rape and sexual violence continue to emerge."

With all due respect to those suffering in the Middle East, where is the coverage of this human crisis?

Mark Storry, Monticello

I'd like to ask a simple question: How many Palestinian civilians have to die for each Israeli murdered by Hamas' barbaric actions, in order to avenge them? What is the calculus here? 2 to 1? 10 to 1? 100 to 1? At what point do these actions on the part of a nation leave the realm of proportional retribution and enter the domain of collective punishment so favored by the tyrants of history? Will this tragedy degenerate into a de facto ethnic cleansing of an entire people already reeling from seven decades of subjugation, humiliation and oppression? Or maybe saner minds will prevail, and perhaps out of the ashes of this abject conflict a realization will emerge for both sides that peaceful and mutually respectful coexistence is the only viable path forward? My question may not be that simple after all ...

Walid Maalouli, Eagan

•••

Saturday's lead article addressing the suffering of the Palestinians in Gaza was powerful and painful ("Thousands flee northern Gaza," front page). I have no doubt of the accuracy of the reporting; however, I believe that its casual reference to "nakba" ("catastrophe") requires comment. Identification of the very creation of the state of Israel in 1948 as a "catastrophe" is at the very core of the Hamas charter. Commitment to undoing that "nakba," negating the existence of Israel, makes reasonable peace efforts impossible.

In this context it should be recalled that the response of the Arab world in 1948 to the creation of a two-state solution in the United Nations was not one of peaceful welcome to a Jewish state; rather, it was one of all-out war. In the course of that war there were painful relocation of citizens, both Muslims and Jews. There were substantial, thriving Jewish communities in Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon and elsewhere, communities that had been established for hundreds of years. By the end of the 1950s none of those communities existed; the Jewish population had been driven out.

The crucial difference between the displacement of Jewish communities and Palestinian communities is that the displaced Jews were promptly assimilated into the state of Israel and the United States, whereas the displaced Palestinians who remained in the Middle East were kept in refugee camps by their Arab hosts. It is fair to raise the question of why there has been no effort to assimilate the Palestinians in Sinai and, specifically, why Egypt continues to deny them admission.

Michael Ormond, Minneapolis

•••

Many thanks to Prof. Joel Sipress for his truth-telling regarding history and common sense regarding the urgency to drop dogma and commence constructing a new reality, now ("Why I've had to give up my Zionist beliefs," Opinion Exchange, Oct. 17).

Israel proper, plus the occupied West Bank, plus Gaza, plus the Golan Heights together are less than one-fifth the size of Minnesota (and the Dead Sea is about the size of Lake Mille Lacs).

The two-state solution, recently called "fiction" by Tom Friedman, is as dead as Ariel Sharon and allies who long ago vowed to render it.

There is but one de facto controlling entity for all four segments mentioned above, governed by a 120-member legislature. But, only half of the governed get to vote for that legislature.

The annual $3.8 billion baseline U.S. handout should continue only for building a one-state solution, nonsectarian, with liberty and justice for all within it.

Darryl G. Carter, Minneapolis

•••

Prof. Sipress' commentary "Why I gave up my Zionist beliefs" seems to have created an altered form of reality. In 1948 after the genocide of 6 million Jews, who had been exiled or displaced for centuries and whom few countries even after the Holocaust were willing to accept, a righteous person would have said, Let them have a place where they can live in peace and prosper. The displacement of the existing Arab population was of their own decision not to live in peace and instead choose conflict, which has yet to end. And as a professor of history, has he not read Hamas' manifesto? It does not want a two-state solution. It wants a one-state solution: eliminate Israel from the face of the Earth.

As former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir was once quoted, "If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel."

Stephen Vincent Elston, Golden Valley

Will someone please redefine affordable housing for low-income citizens? Income limits for 2020 in Minneapolis, St. Paul and Bloomington define "low income" for one person as $54,950. There are two lesser levels of low income; "very low" is $36,200 and "extremely low" is $21,700. These don't seem to be part of the calculation for providing low-income housing. Programs like the 4D Affordable Housing Incentive Program and Section 42 are not realistic solutions for those who are at the 2023 federal poverty level of $24,860 in income for a household of three. Section 8 is almost unattainable. Rent caps are not politically popular because many (not all) politicians vote with the money sources. We can spout numbers and laws, programs, statistics and so on, but boots on the ground facts tell the true story. Affordable housing, as it is presented right now, is no longer affordable.

I moved into my apartment in a Section 42 building in April 2022, my rent being $1,329 per month. In April 2023, the rent was raised to $1,471 per month. These increases are based on the area median income (AMI) determined by Department of Housing and Urban Development annually. My net Social Security is $1,336 per month. Seniors on Social Security fixed income should not be part of this calculation. The AMI is largely based on two-income families in a given area (in my case, the AMI area is Minnetonka, which is typically considered at a higher income level than other Twin Cities areas). As a single senior on a fixed income, I am maxed out on what I can afford for housing.

The developer draws in tenants by advertising affordable senior apartments, then bleeds us dry of all available resources. I am only one of many thousands in this situation. Most baby boomers have worked very hard all their lives and don't expect handouts, but no one could have predicted this for our retirement years. The financial burden is insurmountable. The emotional burden is overwhelming and a threat to our mental health. Many communities don't want low-income housing, fearing the loss in property values. But many poor people do take pride in their homes and maintain them well. The negativity attributed to poverty makes us feel as if we are not worthy of a decent home in a safe neighborhood.

We are looking for help to find and institute an equitable solution so that we don't become a part of Minnesota's homeless population.

Sandra Helle, Minnetonka