The Flotilla Crisis and Israel’s Would-be Friends
The truth about Israel and the terrorist flotilla is now apparent for anyone who wants to see. The problem, however, is the one various people, like Max Boot, have alluded to. Israel, by the way it dealt with the problem, handed Hamas and its opponents a major propaganda victory. Daniel Pipes makes much the same point. Nevertheless, this leaves no excuse for the various left-wing and liberal commentators who have seized the moment to find new reasons to bash Israel, and to portray it as the aggressor. As Boot points out, “The so-called Gaza flotilla, comprising eight ships and roughly 800 participants, was not put together by peace-loving humanitarians primarily worried about relieving the suffering of Gaza residents.” Rather, it was a project of the Turkish Insani Yardim Vakfi, an ally of various global jihadist terrorist groups, including al-Qaeda.
So what Israel got was a PR disaster, from which it is now trying to recover. Nevertheless, some clearheaded mainstream foreign policy observers have seen the truth without a problem. Leslie Gelb is one of them. Gelb, former head of the Council on Foreign Relations and former New York Times top foreign affairs correspondent, writes:
Israel had every right under international law to stop and board ships bound for the Gaza war zone late Sunday. Only knee-jerk left-wingers and the usual legion of poseurs around the world would dispute this.(my emphasis) And it is pretty clear that this “humanitarian” flotilla headed for Gaza aimed to provoke a confrontation with Israel. Various representatives of the Free Gaza Movement, one of the main organizers of this deadly extravaganza, have let it slip throughout Monday that their intention was every bit as much “to break” Israel’s blockade of Gaza as to deliver the relief goods.
The problem is evidently that there are more “knee-jerk left-wingers” around than Gelb imagines. And many of them think of themselves as mainstream liberals who would not consider themselves part of Gelb’s category. So let us look carefully at the arguments and analysis of this ever growing group.
First, once again, comes Andrew Sullivan. The guilty party of course is both Israel and — you guessed it — the dreaded neo-cons. Writes the brilliant pundit, the people on board the flotilla were defending themselves from invaders. He does not mention that the Israeli commandos carried only paint guns they were told to try and avoid using, and pistols which they had to get permission to use. He claims that the analysis of people like Noah Pollak and Jennifer Rubin “is a function of a mindset warped by paranoia, enabled by utter arrogance, fueled by a sense of impunity.” Sounds like a case of the pot calling the kettle black to me.
On Sunday, Sullivan conceded that the “activists’” violence was “pretty abhorrent,” and that they are not “not followers of Gandhi or MLK Jr.” But he goes on to say that “it is in response to a dawn commando raid by armed soldiers. They are engaging in self-defense.” Sullivan, evidently now an expert in international law as well, sees the Israeli act as the Turkish government does, that of “inhumane state terror.” And Sullivan continually repeats that “the attack took place in international waters,” implying that fact in itself makes it illegal.
Again, as Gelb explained, “blockades are quite legal. The United States and Britain were at war with Germany and Japan and blockaded them. I can’t remember international lawyers saying those blockades were illegal — even though they took place on the high seas in international waters. There would be a general violation only if the hostile actions against the ships took place in waters under the jurisdiction of another sovereign state. Thus, for example, if the Israelis stopped the ships in Egyptian waters, that would have been a violation.”
That point was emphasized as well on Sunday night on the PBS NewsHour by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren, who pointed out: “Under international law, when there’s a case of a military blockade against a hostile entity — and we are talking about a hostile entity … Hamas in Gaza, a country under Article 51 of the United Nations charter…has a right to defend itself. By the same articles of war, the United States blockaded Germany during World War II in the open seas. Israel was well within its international rights.”
Next comes the indefatigable Peter Beinart, whose self-proclaimed commitment to Israel and liberal Zionism seems more and more to mean joining the anti-Israel group and abandoning any support of Israel in favor of portraying it as the aggressor. Beinart blames not the commandos, whom he agrees were attacked by a mob, but the Israeli government and its American supporters. Beinart says the Israeli embargo of Gaza is not meant to keep out arms — how Beinart knows this is something he evidently is alone privileged to have found out — but is meant instead to “to impoverish the people of Gaza, and thus turn them against Hamas.”
If that is the case, why does Israel regularly allow in aid of a humanitarian nature to Gaza, and why did it offer through a week of negotiations to search the ships for arms and then deliver the food and other items of a humanitarian nature to Gaza itself? As Oren noted, “Israel vowed to transfer that aid to Gaza. About 100 trucks of humanitarian aid, food and medicine go into Gaza every day. There’s no shortage of food in Gaza.”
Ron – Yours is consistently one of the most insightful blogs on this or any other website, but I do have one suggestion: Quit writing about Andrew Sullivan! By responding to his every provocation, you & other friends of Israel are rescuing him from the oblivion he so richly deserves. Beinart seems intent on following the Sullivan path to marginalization, but he’s not there yet, and your attention to the NY Review piece & its aftermath has been invaluable.
“The problem, however, is the one various people, like Max Boot, have alluded to. Israel, by the way it dealt with the problem, handed Hamas and its opponents a major propaganda victory. Daniel Pipes makes much the same point.”
Nonsense. I strongly disagree with both Max Boot and Daniel Pipes. Israel was going to be slimed no matter what it did. It was placed in a no win situation. A Goebbels type propagandist would have used their imagination—and blamed Israel even it perfectly responded to the thugs. These “peace activists” deliberately provoked an incident. Moreover, a number of them may have also perceived it as some sort of suicide mission! The overwhelming evidence indicates that a number of them were Islamic nihilists.
Armed with 20-20 hindsight, it is now clear that Israel should have sunk the ship without warning, or for that matter, explanation.
And if they could have done it with an atomic bomb, so much the better.
A wildly disproportionate response is what was called for. With such (most especially if done with WMD), a whole bunch of governments would decide that they had better not side with terrorists. And a whole bunch of towelheads—-starting with Iran—–would conclude that they don’t really need nuclear weapons after all.
The latter reaction is not what people like us would do, but it certainly is what our enemies would do. Their culture is that much different. When faced with
imminent danger to themselves, they become instant dhimmis.
The downside? It would be embarrassing when the world could see that the biggest dhimmi of all resided at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. But residency there does change on schedule.
This one goes down as an opportunity lost. Lack of foresight is the culprit, not cowardice. But the loss is a severe one.
I’d like to quote from what David Thomson has said: “Israel was going to be slimed no matter what it did. It was placed in a no win situation.”
You may have a point but I think it would be utterly self-defeating to accept it as true. Besides, the fact of the matter is that until it was time for the eight o’clock evening news in Israel, the IDF literally sat on the video that proved beyond any reasonable doubt how right they were in defending themselves against the lynch mob on that ship.
So, IDF released the factual prove of the story at a time when the rest of the world had effectively – and whole-heartedly – sucked up the alternate narrative of Hamas’ little helpers, those petty-fascists on the Flotilla of Tools. Arguably, that was utter ineptness on the IDF’s part but then they’re running an army not a movie studio and I’d always trust in their ability to learn.
You might be intersted in what David Horovitz has to say about the topic at hand over at the Jerusalem Post http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=177187
According to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, 12 June 1994:
SECTION V : NEUTRAL MERCHANT VESSELS AND CIVIL AIRCRAFT
Neutral merchant vessels
67. Merchant vessels flying the flag of neutral States may not be attacked unless they:
(a) are believed on reasonable grounds to be carrying contraband or breaching a blockade, and after prior warning they intentionally and clearly refuse to stop, or intentionally and clearly resist visit, search or capture;
(b) engage in belligerent acts on behalf of the enemy;
(c) act as auxiliaries to the enemy s armed forces;
(d) are incorporated into or assist the enemy s intelligence system;
(e) sail under convoy of enemy warships or military aircraft; or
(f) otherwise make an effective contribution to the enemy s military action, e.g., by carrying military materials, and it is not feasible for the attacking forces to first place passengers and crew in a place of safety. Unless circumstances do not permit, they are to be given a warning, so that they can re-route, off-load, or take other precautions.
Israel complied with all of the international laws pertaining to a blockade. Furthermore, we have listened to the actual radio communication between an Israeli official and their counterpart aboard the ship. The latter bluntly said they had every intention to run through the blockade.
Ahem. Perhaps you missed the “Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea” part?
Which is odd indeed, because it is in the very first line of your post….
Here is another left wing Rabbi
http://blog.beliefnet.com/windowsanddoors/2010/06/israeli-raid-on-gaza-flotilla.html#more
He is a garbage. Disregard him.
It just dawned on me that the Democrats will be severely damaged by the reaction of the Obama administration to this particular incident. Jewish Americans provide both money and intellectual talent to the party. Even a relatively small drop of support should be devastating. Center-left Democrats, of whatever ethnic or religious group, can no longer lie to themselves. They have been effectively marginalized.
A navy can enforce a blockade? Yeah, it can. The blockade was declared to be a 20 mile exclusion zone around Gaza. That ship had not yet entered that exclusion zone when the IDF stormed it and, therefore, even by Israel own (self-declared) reasoning that ship had not yet done anything wrong when it was attacked by the IDF. See the problem, Ron? No, apparently you can’t…..
If the blockade runners broadcast to the world they are intent on running the Gaza blockade, which is what the runners did, then the Blockade runners have announced their intentions before the act.
This makes interception at sea any place after the ship leaves the territorial waters of the port it sails from legal for the country that is blockading because the intention is clear to run their blockade.
If you have someone publically tell you and the world they will trespass on your property and bring items in your yard you don’t want even if you’ve posted signs of NO TRESPASSING while the trespassers are still in their front yard then it would be wise to have the police waiting to stop the trespass before they actually get to your front yard.
Why don’t you review the San Remo Manual – one does not have to wait until the threat is in its territorial waters – http://www.icrc.org/IHL.nsf/52d68d14de6160e0c12563da005fdb1b/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce!OpenDocument
Good night, Johnboy.
That would be the “San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea”, I take it?
You know, the one that is only APPLICABLE when there is an ARMED CONFLICT AT SEA?
That one?
Errrr, where’s the “armed conflict”, sunshine?
Read Daniel Gordis’s article carefully. The IDF didn’t “storm” the boat, they boarded for inspection and to talk. The soldiers weren’t expecting to be attacked and had their weapons on their backs, not at the ready.
“they boarded for inspection and to talk” They fast roped armed commandos onto the deck. That is, by any definition, an “armed assault” on that vessel. It has been an article of law since the hijacking of the Achille Laro that when armed men assault a vessel then ANY deaths that result are attributable to the people who assault the vessel, and not to the crew that is resisting that assault.
Once a ship makes it’s intentions known, it can be stopped and inspected anywhere.
Even if the flotilla hadn’t already broadcasted their intentions, the mere act of sailing directly towards a blockaded port is sufficient cause.
John,
By your reasoning, the Allies (in WWII) were also breaking “international law” by enforcing a Naval Blockade of Germany many miles away in International Waters. How is it that the USA could be in the right (during WWII) and Israel in the wrong? No treaties or Naval law regarding blockades have changed since WWII.
I’d very much appreciate a cogent response to my question. Thank you in advance!
Blockades have to be legal before any measures taken to enforce them can be legal.
You can’t make a blockade “legal” merely by declaring them, of course, because otherwise any country can blockade anyone’s coastline for whatever reason they wish, and at any time that suits them, merely by declaring that This Is So.
Q: So, when CAN a state legally instigate a blockade?
A: When that country is involved in an “armed conflict” with another country.
Q: Is Israel engaged in an “armed conflict” with Gaza?
A: No, the last such “armed conflict” was Operation Cast Lead, and that ended when Israel declared a ceasefire.
Q: Can you be both in “a ceasefire” at the same time as you are in an “armed conflict”?
A: No, the two terms are mutually exclusive.
Q: So is this blockade “legal”?
A: No. Israel has no more “right” to blockade Gaza than it has the “right” to blockade Lebanon.
Q: So did Israel have the “right” to fast rope onto that boat?
A: No. Israel had no more “right” to storm that ship than the PLO had the “right” to storm the Achille Laro.
I missed Hamas signing the peace agreement, Johnboy. Could you provide a link to that dramatic event?
A “peace agreement” is a legal document saying that all outstanding issues that cause conflict between the two parties have been settled, and so there is “end of conflict”.
That is not the same thing as “end of ARMED conflict”. In the post-1945 world a ceasefire is good enough for that, because in the post-1945 world all that matters is the answer to this question: is there fighting going on, or isn’t there?
Or haven’t you noticed that in the post-1945 nations no longer “declare war”, and that wars innumerable end with a “ceasefire”, rather than a “surrender”?
No? You haven’t once wondered why that is?
Gaza’s fishing boats were set to meet that flotilla as soon as they entered Gaza’s waters. That would have complicated a boarding and just made things worse. But from the legal standpoint, as soon as the flotilla’s captain made clear his intention to run the blockade, the IDF was within its rights to board.
this story was incredible to me. How Sullivan can defend those Islamofascists is beyond my reckoning. Why can’t soldiers inspect a boat? This kind of masochism is nuts.
Will you please stop referring to antisemites as ‘liberals’? They are not. They are medieval reactionaries. And stop wasting time on the utterly infantile Sullivan.
I agree with DT above: Israel would have been blamed either way. In the circumstances, it has to do what it judges to be necessary for its own security, and tell the corrupt UN to take a long walk down a very short pier.
I certainly hope the weak and appeasing Obama – and the ridiculous and appeasing Clinton – are finally seen by the American public for what they are, as a result of their despicable position on the Middle East.
John’s correct in that anti-Semites come from both ends of the spectrum (Right and Left). However I would say that lately, the Left has produced many more of them, and they have declared their being anti-Israel in a far louder voice than any Right-Wing anti-Semite.
The thing about Right-Wing anti-Semites (and I know this because I grew up with many of them), they are wonderfully open regarding their views. And by being against Jews and not “only Israel” they are very honest in their views. In that sense they are an almost “respectable enemy.”
The Left, on the other hand, hides their anti-Semitism by cloaking it in in “merely” being against “the policies of Israel.” This allows them to claim that they are not in the slightest bit racists (as this is a major no-no for anyone of the Left). I view this as underhanded, and I actually have far more respect for the “Hitler-Youth” enemies of my childhood than the “Israel-Apartheid-Week” supporters of today’s Left. The latter cloak their anti-Semitism in these flagrantly abusive terms such as “Apartheid Israel.” If one were desirous of making rational arguments against Israel’s policies, one wouldn’t resort to hateful and highly exaggerated terms like that — and many others — for example Dr Chestler in her current article in Pajamas describes thousands of New Yorker of ALL stripes and nationalities chanting “Palestine will be free, from the River to the Sea!” — implying clearly a Judenrein land (a land “cleansed” of Jews). And indeed when a colleague of Chestler’s asked an intelligent (seeming) chanter what, or where would the Jews then live, she was met only by a “blank stare.” No serious thought had been given to the words, or meaning, or her chant (it appeared) — unless of course the blank stare was kind interpretation of “you know where they’d be – at the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea! But I won’t say that aloud.)”
I would submit that a “Free Palestine from the river to the sea” is every bit as “racist” as “Christ Killer” and all the standard tropes I heard from my anti-Semitic school colleagues when I was growing up. The only problem is as I’ve indicated earlier, these “Hitler-youths” would not only proudly realize and call their beliefs racist, but would (rationally) defend them as being racists (i.e. they did not want Jews in their neighborhood – a view which is at least internally logical, coherent, and honest … and of course racist).
The Leftists chanting they want a Judenfrei Israel (an Israel free of all Jews) will declare that they are definitely not racists in the slightest(!) Mon Dieu! This I view to be a dishonest claim.
Just a personal view.
the attempt to break the blockade had no humanitarian purpose, it is so clear that i am surprised people don’t see it! israelis fell for it, and ended up being the villain. i think, a better aproach for them would have been to have serious victims on their part, on their attempt to board the ships and take control of them, without using live ammo. in that way, the provocation would have been unveiled for all to see that it was all a concerted operation to show present israel in very bad light to the world!
Why do people assume that only one perspective on Israel exists, and it is on this board?
There are dozens of groups that are impacted by what occurs in the middle east, good bad or tragic. For some reason if anyone disagrees with ANY Israeli action they must somehow be Nazi, or holocaust deniers, or rabid left wing nuts, or any of the other labels tossed about.
Israel made a mistake and the world will force consequences on and around Israel as a result, that is the reality. The sooner people accept this fact, the sooner everyone can get on building a better life.
Dear Alex, it seems that you are the one proposing that there should be only one opion—across all boards. Your opinion.
You say israel made a mistake. Many say that across the web and MSM. So good. You have your opinion.
The author, and most of the comments say otherwise. They have their own opinions. So deal with it.
Of course there is something to be said about opinions and argument supported by the evidence on the ground, and mere blackwashes, floating in ether, without any tether to facts. As far as i know, fantasy is not prohibited by law. So go for it. And people will have an opinion on that flight of fancy, too. Stop whining about those opinions, even if they sound counter-intuitive to you.
About fantasy builders and propogators such as you ‘building a better world’—not only you folks have no such ability, but also you have no such intention. (again, evidence of past 100 years). Indeed, the Leftist creed is clearly not just anti-israel and/or anti-semite (those are just convenient things for them to be), it is indeed, misanthropic. So yes. We on this call them such things as they are. Deal with it. Whining is for little babies.
What they’re building is tombstones to civilisation in the form of the mosques appearing like leprousy spots across the West. It has to stop, and stop now.
The mistake is yours, unless your objective is to remove the blockade so that Hamas can once again start firing rockets into Israel.
This is often not mentioned. If the Hamas were to get weapons and start firing scuds, do they think the Palestinians would live better afterwards? The West and many countries in the region are prepared to fight until the last Palestinian. It’s like the kids on the playground that egg a weak kid on to start a fight because they want to see him get stomped.
There are many perspectives but one truth. Why do relativists hate Israel? Anyone supporting the “peace activist” liars hates Israel and is an antisemitic, genocidal enemy of humanity.
Your mask is off.
Actually Alex, the mistake Israel has been making for the last 20 years is to try and make nice and be acceptable to all the Jew haters. Maybe now the Israelis realize that you can’t be nice to people, and all their fellow travelers, that are working to exterminate you. Israel’s tactic back in the 50′s, 60′s and 70′s of going around the world and killing Nazis and terrorists worked a lot better. In fact intransigence has worked well for North Korea, Venezuela and Iran. Why not for Israel as well? The only thing Jew haters respect is strength.
That Israel made a mistake, is your opinion, and yours alone.
The idea that anyone who disagrees with your opinion is in thrall to Israel is also nothing more than your opinion.
Absolutely. As Dave said, Israel should have sunk the ship wothout warning (although using a nuclear warhead would have been overkill; they should save that for Mecca). Vlad Poutine has shown that, if you act like a murderous thug, you’ll get respect — or at least an extreme of fear that can pass for respect — from Eurotrash and the Dunham clique.
“Israel made a mistake and the world will force consequences on and around Israel as a result, that is the reality. The sooner people accept this fact, the sooner everyone can get on building a better life.”
Newsflash: that is not a “fact”. Your opinion doesn’t automaticaly become a “fact”.
Nobody called anybody a “Nazi” for disagreeing with your opinion, however biased and ignorant it is: that strawman, that canard, is what Jew-haters wheel out every time they know they are talking bovine fertiliser. They are the only ones coming out with this silly gambit.
What always amazes me is that “peace” activists today never seem to miss an opportunity to beat the crap out of people and destroy public property. Hundreds of “peace” activists in Copenhagen during the climate summit were arrested for attacking police officers and breaking windows and torching cars. “Peace” activists are always being arrested by the truck load at every economic summit around the world and you would be hard-pressed to find a “peace” activist who hasn’t been arrested at those pro-Muslim rallies in Europe denouncing those silly cartoons. And lets not even talk about the “peace” activists that denounced the Iraq war both here in the United States and overseas, let alone the “peace” activists who want to retain their union benefits in Greece (they only managed to kill three people after they torched a bank). Yes, today’s “peace” activists, especially in Europe, are the very “model” of “peaceful” demonstrations.
The irony in all of this is that, had the people on board that flotilla of ships simply allowed the Israelis to board the ships and inspect their cargoes, then nothing would have happened and nobody would have gotten killed. But no, these “peace” activists had to attack the soldiers with pipes, clubs, and knives as they tried to kill anyone who boarded their ships. How “peaceful” is that?
Imagine if the US Coast Guard boarded a ship in international waters suspected of carrying drugs into the United States. And when the Coast Guardsmen boarded the ship, they were attacked by people wielding knives and large pipes. Then the Coast Guardsmen are beaten and stabbed as the people on board the ship try to avoid capture. What do you think the US Coast Guard would do? Do you think they would just stand there and allow their people to be assaulted and killed while they were performing their duties? I suggest nobody try it, unless they want to get shot.
This was a trap, pure and simple, yet the Israelis had a right to board and search those ships, especially since they made it perfectly clear that this was what they would do if any ships tried to break the blockade. We did the exact same thing during our blockade of Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis. In fact, I think the Israelis acted with a lot of restraint. They had every excuse to actually sink the ships, yet they managed to capture them (not an easy thing to do when people are trying to kill you) and bring them to a port for further examination. It’s exactly what the US Coast Guard would do, especially when faced with a bunch of violent, homicidal, “peace” activists.
(not an easy thing to do when [700] people [armed with weapons] are trying to kill [a couple dozen of] you)
If Israel “made a mistake” as Alex says, what should they have done?
They have a blockade, to prevent large weapons (anti aircraft guns? Tanks? Who knows what they’d ship in if they could) from coming into Gaza from Hezbollah, from Iran, from Syria, from TURKEY now.
The blockade is in place to prevent Israel from being attacked by large scale weapons. The smaller ones that are tunneled in from Egypt are bad enough. Israel has a right to defend itself, and Gaza has proven under Hamas that all it wants to do is attack Israel and kill Jews. Sorry, “zionists”.
(that, in case anyone hasn’t noticed, is the nod to the public memory of the holocaust that the anti-semites in the Muslim world make. They don’t admit to hating Jews, but ‘zionists’. In this way they pretend to the moral high ground. But their SCRIPTURE dispenses with veils and tells them to kill Jews.)
So, Alex, what should Israel have done? Nothing? That would open up a FLOOD of ships coming into Gaza, and almost all of them would be carrying weapons. Karin A, anyone? These ships didn’t have weapons on board for obvious reasons. But running the blockade is what counts. Or ‘suffering at the hands of the evil zionist commandos’. either way it’s a win for them, as guys like Alex demonstrate.
There were three options. Do nothing, do what they did (show up prepared to NOT use force), or show up and just use all the force they want to use.
which should they do, Alex?
I have no trepidation in the administratons next step. We all know that it will not be in Israel’s best interest. Luckily Israel is governed by Bibi and he along with his generals will do what is necessary. As far as the likes of Beinart. He is a fool along with all the left-wing liberal Jews in this country. Write them off. They aren’t worth your breath.
Let us remember what Hamas advocates:
Hamas wants the destruction of Israel and the enslavement of all residents under a totalitarian Islamic dictatorship that enforces the strict rules of sharia. These rules include death for homosexuals, death for sex outside of marriage, death-by-stoning for unmarried women seen alone with males, death-by-honor killing for any woman whose conduct is deemed to have dishonored any males members of her family, public lashings and stoning for those who break sharia rules prohibiting listening to music, watching television, reading unauthorized books, failing to pray at the proper times and places, failing to keep facial hair at prescribed lengths, failing of women to completely cover their bodies, failing of women to obtain male permission to be seen in public, women driving automobiles, etc.
Such is what Hama wants: a society of completely rightless creatures living under the absolute tyranny of 6th-century religious barbarians. And Hamas has made it clear that it will slaughter as many people as necessary to achieve this goal.
Anyone who actively and willingly aids and abets such people becomes an accessory to an on-going massive violation of individual rights by an organization seeking to eliminate all such rights. No such accessory may thereafter claim any rights of their own. When you deliberately throw in with — and help — savagely murderous monsters, you have absolutely no right to demand anything of your fellow man. Your fellow man at that point is fully justified in intercepting you anywhere on the planet and exterminating you on the spot.
Such is the moral status of the people on board these “relief” vessels.
Beautiful way to express the savage truth. Thank you.
I am very tired of yelling at my T.V. and brain dead news readers. If terrorists and their useful idiots are in a hurry to die and if Israel will be excoriated regardless of how it attempts to deal with these evil morons, I say sink the next ship after they ignore the warning to surrender. Let Hamas save them.
The Israelis have realized that they cannot win the propaganda war orchestrated by their Arab enemies, encouraged by international leftist scum and amplified by a clueless or more likely, complicit media. The moral imprimataur of ‘world opinion’ is meaningless when one’s very existence is threatened. And it is threatened daily. Israel will do whatever it considers necessary to defend itself. In the past, acting in a restrained way, attempting to avoid civilian casualities, accepting the increased risks to her soldiers, have not earned her any plaudits. The leftwing scum of the world, and the intolerant members of that great religion of peace be warned: your unremitting attacks will eventually provoke a level of violence that will astound you. Will mortally wound you. And there will be no coming back.
Furthermore, it is this same left-wing scum that has extended the conflict for years by supporting people who should have been shunned. If these morally repugnant people didn’t prop up the Palestinians, there would be much more calm in this part of the region.
Of course, for them, it isn’t about peace at all. I haven’t seen anyone protesting in support of the Ahmadi Moslems, truly peaceful people, who were attacked in a mosque two weeks ago with a death toll nearing triple digits. They don’t care about peace; it is all about demonizing Israel.
#8 Dave in Dallas;
If the ships were to be boarded it should have been done just outside the 12 NM limit, establishing Israel took reasonable measure to divert the ships away from justifiably defended borders. They should have been boarded with overwhelming force, heavy weaponry backed by cannons on boats. If anyone fires at them, hits with pipes, knives,etc, Israel shoots to kill. End of story.
If they were not to board but to disable the ships, then warning shots across the bow followed by hits on the ships themselves and then towed to Israeli port and inspected.
The mistake was to board 70NM out to sea, and with small force. This was tactical mistake, something that IDF is surely reviewing in its war room. It could have been Israel that lost people had the terrorists been more heavily armed.
Gaza could have been the Singapore of the eastern Mediterranean with an open border and rights of free passage into Israel proper. Instead it became a mafia enclave under crime boss and arch-fiend Yasser Arafat. Fatah was later ousted by a rival gang known as Hamas in what amounted to a turf war between crime syndicates. I am not speaking metaphorically. The main sources of revenue in Gaza to this day are all illicit: kidnapping, carjacking, and contraband to name a few. Why do we maintain the fiction that Hamas and Fatah are “governments” that require due recognition?
And if my grandpa had wheels he would be a truck.
Seriously, the entire notion of “Palestine” is founded upon eternal grievance upon the “Zionist Entity” for the “crimes” committed by its founding. Any notion of peaceful co-existence, regardless of the real and almost certain tangible benefits it would bring, would cause their entire nationhood to implode!
Obama’s response to the incident was entirely predictable. See http://clarespark.com/2009/09/11/oil-politics-and-obamas-view-of-israeli-history/. Ron mentions this frame of moral equivalency between Jews and Palestinians/Arabs toward the end of his essay, and it was already visible in POTUS’s second book. All the “fair and balanced” folk hum the same tired old refrain.
Most readers who have read this essay are shocked to learn that the Arab narrative for the founding of Israel has never changed: The Europeans killed the Jews, the Europeans should take care of the Jewish problem, and the survivors should have returned to their countries of origin. That the nazified Arabs had consistently defied the Balfour Declaration and all similar measures from the outset is not part of their story.
I thought that the saying was if my grandma had balls she’s be my grandpa!
But your point is 100% correct.
100% agreed
Time for Israel to learn from it’s mistakes…
Take out the ships in the middle of the night, no warning, just sink them
The irony would be great if the Rachel Corrie ship was hit with a floating version of the caterpillar.
The Gaza-Jericho Agreement of 1994 says this:
External Security: Israel maintains security control and supervision over the entry of persons, vehicles and weapons at all points of entry. Israel retains security control of the sea as well as control and supervision over all air space.
The 1994 Gaza-Jericho agreement served as the basis for Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza. In it, Israel was given authority to act precisely as it did on Monday. The relevant sentence states: “As part of Israel’s responsibilities for safety and security within the three Maritime Activity Zones, Israel Navy vessels may sail throughout these zones, as necessary and without limitations, and may take any measures necessary against vessels suspected of being used for terrorist activities, or for smuggling arms, ammunition, drugs, goods, or for any other illegal activity…” (from Cal Thomas’ article, “Re-Run,” published June 2, 2010.
Enough said.
“Enough said.”
Oh, yeah, well said indeed.
If Israel is going to argue that the Gaza-Jericho Agreement still applies then it is admitting that it is still the occupying power with authority over the Gaza Strip.
Well, yeah, I agree i.e. Israel is still the occupying power with authority over the Gaza Strip, and the redeployment of troops that took place under “disengagement” did not change that fact.
You **DO** understand what that means to Israel’s claim that it is entitled to lay seige to the Gaza Strip, don’t you?
are you kidding? left wing media is trying to do Israel in? this is ajke evry country on earth is condeming it. but the only people who are right are you and Israleis. news falsh: the commited cold blooded murder.. that the nature of the Israeli government period.
It’s cold blooded murder to shoot in the legs, people who are beating you with pipes and shooting you with rifles?
So what if the majority of countries in the world condemn this. The majority of countries in the world are dictatorships.
I suggest you brush up on the Amalekites so that when you look in the mirror you just might knowingly see one.
Hitler was an Amalekite, even though his ethnicity did not have anything to do with the Middle East. The noises he was making regarding Czechoslovakia were in line with how you and others demonize Israel. Well, the result was, Czechoslovakia had to wait 52 years until it was free from the domination of a hegemonic blight.
So, why should friends of the US (who are currently being mistreated by the current administration) lift a finger to help the US?
the only people affected by this propoganda crap are the jew haters and their slobbering, avid followers, the skank moslems and their apologist supporters.
i do agree that just sink the effing boat is the way to go. hopefully, with this new provocation coming at them, this is precisely what israel will do. the deader the better.
“the only people affected by this propoganda crap are the jew haters and their slobbering, avid followers…”
The trouble is, that just about covers all of Europe, North Africa and South Asia west of the Subcontinent.
It may cover large parts of Europe, but let’s be frank; who really listens to the European elite anyway? They opted on a policy of soft-power to counterbalance American hard-power and found out that their version was just that: soft, flaccid, and ineffectual. I have heard that Merkel and the Taoiseach of Ireland have called for an end to the blockade. Why should anybody care? Do we not enforce checks to make sure our enemies in Afghanistan and Iraq cannot get rearmed? Of course we do. Any “peaceful” flotilla carrying aid to the Taliban would get boarded and commandeered or possibly even sunk and no one but the Chomskies of the world would protest.
Who gives a flying monkey what the ridiculous Merkel and the even more ridiculous Irish government demand? Nobody sane, that’s for sure.
The only serious international aspect in all this, is that the USA now has a president who is either totally ignorant about Jewish, Israeli and ME history – or is deliberately lying about it. I warned about this danger since well before this used-car salesman was elected. Few listened.
No matter what Israel does to defend itself, its hate-filled Islamic enemies will use the killing of a Muslim as a propaganda event, because Islam has always been about total supremacy of Muslims over non-Muslims – so what? The real question is do you stand behind Israel or the Muslims: a no-brainer unless you’re a Muslim.
Keep up with the evolving threat with the Historyscoper:
http://historyscoper-islamwatch.blogspot.com/
Reasonable people know that Israelis will be blamed for any and all ills across a wide spectrum. I’m surprised the Israelis haven’t been blamed for the Gulf spill by now.
It’s to be expected from Europe and the Muslim nations – a fact that has become so predictable, I could have written their script for them from the boiler plated files.
Obama’s worthless and corrupt cabinet on the other hand, are not quite as predictable. While lefty ideologues, Israel is one fence they straddle. The self-loathing Jews of the Obama cabinet are still trying to gauge how many Jewish votes it will cost them in the 2010 elections, if any, if Obama were to condemn Israel for its actions.
I predict in the end you’ll get some muddled response from Obama which will amount to no response. It’s the easiest way to never take ownership of the problems they help create by their appeasement of radical Islam.
“It’s to be expected from Europe and the Muslim nations”
These are increasingly one and the same.
Stopping a gaggle of ships at your 12 mile blockade limit is fine unless one or more of the ships is carrying weapons of mass destruction, chemicals, radiologicals, biologicals or even just plain oil is inviting an attack.
If the wind is blowing towards the beach then that’s where the weapons effects will go.
IHH is so clever in their ruse as a genuine aid group, that they diverted millions of the dollars they usually give al qaeda to Haitans after their earthquake. And Israel is the only country smart enough to have found out that thye’re a terror group. Every other nation on earth considers them a legitimate aid group. Whoa, you’re one smart feller.
Apparently the New York Times “figured it out” today also. So count them as a second “smart feller!”
State Department Press Briefing, June 2, 2010
Crowley: “Well, we know that IHH representatives have met with senior Hamas officials in Turkey, Syria, and Gaza over the past three years. That is obviously of great concern to us. That said, the IHH, which stands for the Humanitarian Relief Foundation, has not been designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States.”
Reporter: “So the U.S. does not believe it has connections to al-Qaida?”
Crowley: “We cannot validate that.”
You were saying?
I am really getting tired of people blaming Israel for “handing” a bunching of lying, blaspheming murderers “a propaganda victory” every time said murderers jump up and lie their a$$es off.
Israel hasn’t handed anybody a victory: that job has been taken up by Mr. Radosh, today.
Why not just call the liars on their lies?
“. . . I wait in trepidation for the administration’s next step.”
Ron, even if Obama were suddenly to turn on a dime, condemn Turkey, defend the blockade, call the so-called “peace activists” and their “humanitarian aid mission” a fraud, and support Israel all the way, it would be a lie. But have no fear — he’s condemned Israel already.
http://weaselzippers.us/2010/06/01/obama-administration-america-supports-un-condemnation-of-israel-over-gaza-flotilla-assault/
S.O.B. Now they (we) are SUPPORTING the breaking of the Gaza blockade! IN other words “they” W O N with this little piece of agitprop, they were able to turn / change the policy of the strongest nation on earth. Well, one certainly needs to give credit where credit is due. Bravo IHH — you fake Turkish Aid Agency and front for the Islamic Brotherhood. You have outdone yourselves this time. But we will learn…
Indeed, Israel must learn from this the POWER of Agitprop and instantly transmitted images! They are EVERYTHING. They set the “frame” of the ensuing story completely. We simply must learn from this!
Those who wish to push Israel into a corner had better rethink their position.
If Israel is isolated and can no longer rely on the support of the United States,
it will have little choice but to strike first. No matter what its consequences,
such action by Israel will provoke counteraction by Iran, Syria and its fake
“humanitarian” fronts, Hezbollah and Hamas. From there no one knows, but history
demonstrates that the consequences will be devastating.
this is not an ordinary time. it is a dark and scary time. we don’t know what the consequences will be. we only know, for sure, what happens when you can’t fight back, when you can’t defend yourself against aggression, when you have to board trains and walk into gas chambers and watch your children murdered.
obama and his peculiar cabinet are no longer factors. jews can no longer count on the united states because we have a president who may not be mentally stable.
israel must use its military strength purposefully and must not equivocate.
we don’t know the consequences. we do know what they are if we take no action.
On the whole, I think that the jihadists have failed, once more.
It seems to me that the power of the Internet in spreading true information is growing and that the hopes of the jihadists to create a colossal case against Israel have hit a colossal wall.
Yes, I am aware of the giant propaganda campaign that the jihadists are still building and I am aware of the mainstream media support to them…but the images released by Israel have been seen around the world, the pro-jihadist trolls must stay in their dens.
Nobody in the world gives a damn for the images of the usual burqa clad idiot women yelling in the streets: we have seen them too many times already and we know exactly what they want: death for Freedom, death for Israel.
The responsibility for the tragic results of this jihadist operation fall entirely on its organizers.
More and more people around the world understand that.
Sorry
“the responsibility …fallS“
The level of paranoia is self-evident, IDF made mistakes,They have made mistakes before, they will make them again, deal with it.
In any conflict, there are two completely separate perspectives; the actual battle, and the political/public spin placed on it. Winning both is required to maintain and claim victory, take a look at international publications and the perception changing regarding Israel. This government does not have the finesse required for middle eastern politics.
This was poorly handled and its showing. I know 99% of you cannot accept any criticism of Israel for some unknown reason, but if mistakes cannot be admitted, the nation of Israel will never see its situation improve.
Egypt will fling open the borders, turkey will seek revenge, public support for Israel will drop…all because of a mishandled flotilla interception.
Disagreeing with your ignorant and unfounded opinion means we don’t tolerate any criticism of Israel.
Were you born paranoid, or did it come on you in old age?
No she won’t, contrary to what the Jew hating crowd wishes. She offered to dock the ship and the offer refused.
Is she does, she’ll pay for it in spades.
Nothing will change in opinion. The sides are already chosen. You just happened to choose the wrong side.
Spare me the sanctimony. If you believe the cause just, I suggest you sign up for duty and grab a life preserver. I give Israel credit for its restraint. Had it been any other country, the passengers would already be bobbing.
Israel’s only mistake has been the same one they’ve been making for the last 60 years. They continue to let their mortal enemies exist. Israel has nothing to lose now, they will never garner the favor of lefty press in Europe or the US.
What Israel needs to do is take these jew-hating thugs at their word and accept that they will never recognize the existence of a Jewish state and treat them like the mortal enemies they are. Israel needs to annex Gaza and go in there and kill every hamas, fatah and what ever else Jew-hating group that exists along with their supporters. Those remaining should be transported to the West Bank to be settled.
Gaza, from then on, would become Israeli soil summarily settled by Israelis only. That would take care of the ability of terrorists to smuggle in rockets etc. from the sea and have a base in which to fire them. The Israelis would turn it into a beautiful resort in no time instead of the s#&t hole that it is now.
Next, Israel should annex the West Bank as sovereign Israeli soil and govern it as such. Arabs that truly want to live in peace and harmony should be granted Israeli citizenship and treated as equal citizens. Those who can’t acquit themselves to live in a Jewish state peacefully should immigrate out or be killed. Any acts of terrorism would be capital offenses for the perpetrators and their family.
There will never be a two state solution. A complete victory for one of the sides is the only way to end this thing and if I have to choose sides, it’s the Israelis hands down every time.
What utter nonsense, Alex. I do criticise the IDF for going in too softly. They should have put on a vastly greater show of force, told the jihadist terrorists not to move – and shot anyone who did. Or told the captain – from a fighterplane or gunboat – to stop at once on pain of being torpedoed.
However, Israel was 100% entitled to do what it did. Anyone who disagree is simply disagreeing with Israel defending itself, and that person is beyond the pale of civilised humanity.
#29 John,
In the next few days Israel will be forced to make up for its mistakes, because IDF mishandled the situation, it is that simple.
also, anyone that disagrees with you is beyond the pale of of Civilized Humanity?? that statement reflects more about the frame of mind that foments wars and injustices than proving your point.
Time will prove my points accurate, and yours incorrect. No country can do as it pleases, IDF made the Nation appear badly and Israel is in full damage control as you read this sentence.
Poor Alex.
I hope the Obama government has noticed that Turkey is the instigator behind this invasion. Turkey is no longer our friend. It should be kicked out of NATO ASAP, and the U.S. government should no longer share any military information with it.
Reference a column by Caroline Glick dated Jan. l5, 2010. She details the activities of Code Pink and Jodie Evans, head of the leftist feminists. She details the peace activity of Code Pink which left Cyprus with l,300 “peace activists” to Egypt. The Egyptians did not allow them to “rally” in favor of the Palestinians. About 100 did arrive in Gaza only to serve the propaganda purposes of the terrorist organizaton Hamas. Their activity is connected with the American left. Jodie Evans has access to the White House. Somehow Bill Ayres and Bernadine Dohrn were involved.
WMDs! Holocaust! 9/11! Al-Qaeda!
As a UN spokesman in Brussels said a few days ago, Gaza residence are totally dependent on their Hamas government and on outside aid. This state of affairs in Gaza is FORCED UPON THE PALESTINIANS BY THEIR HAMAS GOVERNMENT. They are not allowed to own land or run commercial enterprises for profit. If the Palestinians were allowed these freedoms by Hamas, they would become peaceful with their customer-neighbors because land ownership would then depend upon their business successes. They would then not simply be puppets of Hamas whose livelihoods depend solely upon creating friction with Israel.
boooooooooorrrrrrrrrrriiiing.
Simple – a-bomb the sand people
Murray, that is sad but it’s no one’s problem to correct but their own.
It’s funny – question Obama, and you get called a “racist.” Go to a Tea Party and you’re a “racist.”
But people who toss the word racist around with such abandon are the very same scum who defend and support people whose greatest wish is to wipe Israel off the map. But oh no, you can’t call Alex or the other terrorist apologists anti-Semites or self-hating Jews! Why now, that’s not very PC of you folks! They demand that Israelis always behave perfectly, while turning a blind eye to the Hamas barbarians. But gee, whines Alex, that’s not anti-Semitic at all and how dare we wingnuts suggest it is!
Well, perhaps it isn’t anti-Semitic, per se, as much as it is simply another example of leftist hatred of themselves and their civilization and their self-abasement and nauseating a**-kissing of anyone who wants to destroy that civilization. They’re ready to grovel and they hate and despise any other Westerners who dare to defend themselves.
A “peace agreement” is a legal document saying that all outstanding issues that cause conflict between the two parties have been settled, and so there is “end of conflict”.
That is not the same thing as “end of ARMED conflict”. In the post-1945 world a ceasefire is good enough for that, because in the post-1945 world all that matters is the answer to this question: is there fighting going on, or isn’t there?
Or haven’t you noticed that in the post-1945 nations no longer “declare war”, and that wars innumerable end with a “ceasefire”, rather than a “surrender”?
No? You haven’t once wondered why that is?