Demographics & Economics
OMB
Congressional Budget Office
The Federal Budget
U.S. Census Quickfacts
Inflation Calculator
CIA World Factbook
NationMaster
State Healthcare Facts
UN HDR stats
US Bureau of Economic Analysis
US Bureau of Labor Statistics
US CDC health stats
US DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics
US DOJ crime stats
Constitution
The Constitution
The Founders' Constitution
The Avalon Project
The Federalist Papers
The antifederalist papers
Founding documents
Politics
ADA (liberal) Voting Records
ACU (conservative) Voting Records
Census Voter Turnout
Congressional Research Service
Memeorandum
NOW list of voting scorecards
PolitiFact
PorkBusters
Project VoteSmart list of voting scorecards
RealClearPolitics
Roll call votes--House
Roll call votes--Senate
Survey USA
WaPo Votes Database
Iraq/Terrorism
CentCom
Brookings Institute Iraq Index
Project on Defense Alternatives War Report
Nat'l Defense Univ Iraq
Nat'l Defense Univ Afghanistan
MERLIN, Nat'l Defense Univ Library Network
STRATFOR
Nat'l Memorial Inst for Prevention of Terrorism
West Point's Combating Terrorism Center
Politics blogs
Baldilocks
Blue Mass Group
Cadillac Tight
California Conservative
Jon Chait
Confederate Yankee
Crooked Timber
Democracy Project
Dinocrat
First Read
Gateway Pundit
GenerationPatriot
Horse Race Blog
Just One Minute
Hugh Hewitt
Michelle Malkin
Patterico's Pontifications
Power Line
Red State
RNCC blog
Scrappleface
Sister Toldjah
Talking Points Memo
The Blogometer
The Corner
The Next Right
The Moderate Voice
Think Progress
Wizbang
Moderate / centrist
Ambivablog
Bipartisan Rules
Booker Rising
Centerfield
Charging RINO
Donklephant
Liberal War Journal
Militant Moderates
The Buck Stops Here
The Glittering Eye
The Iconic Midwest
The PoliGazette
The Walrus Said
Legal & academic
How Appealing
Becker-Posner
Bench Memos
Concurring Opinions
Economists Do It With Models
Legalities
Prawfsblawg
SCOTUSblog
Sentencing Law & Policy
UCFB
The Volokh Conspiracy
Christian
Archbp Dolan: Gospel in the Digital Age
Bp Chris Coyne: Let Us Walk Together
ADW blog
Simon Dodd: Motu Proprio
Fr Zuhlsdorf: WDTPRS
Fr Longenecker: Standing On My Head
Elizabeth Scalia: The Anchoress
First Thoughts
Mirror of Justice
Rorate Cæli
Veritas Rex
Middle East & Muslim affairs
Eteraz
Iraq the Model
Lebanese Political Journal
Michael Totten
Michael Yon
General interest
Althouse
Ambiance
Chris Muir's Day by Day
Instapundit
IowaHawk
JAC
Professor Bainbridge
Prettier than Napoleon
Rachel Lucas
The Right Coast
Science Blog
Sippican Cottage
Whatever
Chances are you may have heard a story about Israelis firing on an aid vessel bound for Gaza. You may have heard about how innocent aid workers were attacked by Israeli commandos. You'd have heard about how the international community is up in arms. Here's the thing:
It's a lie. A filthy lie. Don't get me wrong, the international community is in fact up in arms, but that's because they believed the lie. What else is new? In this clip, you can clearly see and hear the IDF warning the vessel about proper protocol:
The full story is here, and here.
HT: Michael Totten
Our RSS feed
As I said, "this will not end well".....
http://www.michaeltotten.com/2010/06/what-happened-in-the-mediterranean.php#comment-13332
When the dust settles..
1. terrorists even by Turkish standards set this in motion.
2. Israel could have been smarter in planning for the predictable
3. activists started the violence
4. actual laws were not broken
5. world bias is revealed
6. more deer in the headlights from the WH
7. Genocider and terrorists protest?
8. red lines declared and better preparations a must as.....
9. more of this crap will come.
I read that a Palestinian radical in Pakistan tried to kill himself in protest. I can only wish......
What's really amazing Max, is how even serious sources who ought
know better, are spreading this false narrative. The Israelis may have miscalculated, but I'm not really sure what else they could've done. The trap was laid--as far as the "world community" is concerned, anytime blood is shed, it's Israel's fault, so the PR situation was bad going in. However, this was not an humanitarian aid ship. They had weapons, and the moment the Israelis descended (with paintball guns!!), they were beaten. It was a mess, but so many people seem intent on blaming Israel.
I expect clouded thinking on this from Andrew Sullivan, but even he ought to see the facts for what they are. He continues to operate under this idea that if Israel lets herself get punched in the face, then all her problems will go away.
This was coming.....
I told Michael weeks ago that this was going to happen. Red lines need to be made and Patrick on Micheal's comment thread mentioned what the Navy would do. I can't believe the Israelis could not have disabled the ship and towed them in. This was very poor planning given how predictable this was. As far as the response, it reveals what is really at work and why I was so critical of Obama. You must put his positions in relative context of the trend. The Left thinks Obama is secretly on their side. It doesn't matter if this is true. It is about perception. In fact, this terror behavior is being coordinated with Iranian interests as their nuclear program is at break out and under fire. Some have even linked this to NK. A full court press by a coalition of enemies. I didn't see that addressed in Obama's new national security strategy.
And it won't stop. At this point I see the new NSS and our present record as going backwards (despite some smart ideas). I will say again, at this rate our position is not going to end well.
As for Democrats, I have moved past embarrassment. If I were Bobby, I would be wondering what the Fvck I'm working towards risking my life. Our game plan here might undermine our strategic position not to mention sweeping aside the great sacrifice Americans have made advancing what they were told is our national security.
And Raf, single out Israel nukes and don't mention clandestine Syrian, NK and Iranian programs? This is a US break from the past media could care less about. I will say that the GOP is far more a friend to Israel than the Democrats. Many of the comments coming from the Left, the Liberals have embraced, are blatant antisemitism.
http://counterterrorismblog.org/2010/06/shooting_the_messenger_a_look.php A deeper look at who sponsored this.....
What else Israel could have done? Nothing.
They sent their commandoes in armed initially with paint ball guns. They were not allowed to open fire even to defend themselves without receiving express authorization from a commander up in the helicopter, and maybe from somebody on the ground in Israel. They didn't ask for and obtain that permission until the "peace" activists (aka, terrorists) had tossed one of their number down a flight of stairs.
The only thing I see they could have done different would have been to have all the commandoes board the ship at the same time, rather than rappelling one by one down the helicopter rope line. It was being isolated for very brief periods that allowed the terrorists to have the upper hand. But I'm not sure, frankly, if that is physically possible, to put 30 commandoes on an uncooperative boat in the open ocean, all at once.
I read somewhere that Turkey is saying it will send another aid ship, escorted by the Turkish Navy. That would be the ultimate signal from Turkey that it no longer wishes to be part of the West. We should expel them from NATO if they do that, because they will be provoking an armed conflict that we cannot (and must not) defend them on.
Right. Some are pointing out that the fact that this was a Turk-
ish flagged ship means that Israel shouldn't have engaged. No, it means that the Turks have decided to send terrorists, pretending to be "peace activists," to provoke Israel, and they plan on doing so again. As you say, Pat, they ought to pay a price.
Best laid plans....,,plus rant
Pat, I don't think Israel will repeat the strategy. The activists had gas masks designed to deal with deck clearing gas. Water cannons from helicopter or fire boats? A frigate along side to get more troops on board at the same time as you suggest? Even slowly sinking the boat or disabling it? Net the idiots from the sea and have commandos wear helmet cams? I am probably wrong and someone would have normally slapped me, but it seems a range of options were available. Then again, Israel is not the US and I'm not even sure the Coast Guard could deal with this flotilla coming to NYC. Think about it.
It's just my gut that thinks this was simply not the best plan. Two more ships are coming. We will see.
The Turks should pay a price sending members of a banned group in Turkey to Gaza so they can kill Israelis. Who would have thought a military coup would be better than Democracy? And what does this tell you about US credibility? Media has failed to note much the terrible state of European economics. Interesting situation.
Just my gut feeling again, but Israel needs to make clear the red-lines and the protocol it will follow to prevent ships from entering Gazan waters. This seems key to countering the biased claims of disproportionate force.
For the record Raf, Republicans are about the only ones I can see actually defending what is right and wrong here. The moral equivalency games the Democrats have so far advanced (for some smart initial reasons) allows for a whole new re-alignment given the fall of the Soviets. The Russians/Chinese can't be impressed with the post Clinton era America. Happy yes, but not impressed.
As for this flotilla event, Obama isn't showing any metal, just (considered)concern at the already growing dissent from the Jewish community. His apparent lack of leverage is showing at the seams.
As I said elsewhere, the Left would have cheered the sinking of all the boats no matter the loss of life if they had been whaling boats. On the Democratic list of importance, Israelis are far lower than whales.......
"“There was a deliberate effort to create an unacceptable intrusion, which Turkey should’ve stopped. The Israelis have been very clear about sustaining a blockade of Gaza, and they have every right to sustain a blockade of Gaza. Hamas is actively every day trying to kill Israelis, and as a matter of international law, Turkey should not have allowed that flotilla to go down there.
"The U.S., through the United Nations relief organization, has been funding food and shelter for the people of Gaza for 60 years now. There was no humanitarian crisis; this was a deliberate political effort on the part of people who want to try to undermine the survival of Israel.” Newt Gingrich
You think Obama could have been that clear? And if you even compare the aid (for the same period) to Haiti v their population and compare that aid to Gazan v their population (not including the illegal materials via the robust tunnel market), the results are staggering. Guess what you would see?
Years ago when Carter visited Hamas during the primary, I posted here the story from AP of Hamas destroying Israeli-supplied electrical and water plants TO MAKE GAZANS SUFFER MORE. The meme of the Holocaust. This was coordinated with Ahmadinejads assault on the topic if one remembers back that far. One of my last links after the Gaza incursion were AP reports of Hamas looting aid for their private stock.
A bit more rant. Thank you.
Abbas says this is a horrible massacre. I also posted links to AP stories during that war of the wanton slaughter of Fatah by Hamas under the chaos of the Israeli invasion and the subsequent disorder. I guess that was what, a mega-super-duper massacre?
Iran has killed tens upon tens of thousands of Sunnis, yet this weekend's coordinated "event", which doesn't require a college degree to see, draws the predictable pre-written wraith of Ahmadinejad, Hamas and Hizb'Allah. Kimmie must sigh some relief.
The Left has turned their propaganda from Bush to Israel. Unfortunately, it is not just OUR narrative gone wild, but that of our adversary's escalating behavior given the "sniff" of victory no matter how wrong.
It may be a successful strategy however. The enemy's network can gather depth and range. The proliferation of technology is inevitable and the enabling political contacts mix in the shady Left Street, a place where only fascism, radical Islam and socialism can cooperate.
Salas speaks of Chevez' camps training the spectrum of terrorists. Meanwhile just Google "SonofHamas". A new pattern of judgment where son of Hamas is bad and those activists are good. It is a newspeak of an emerging organization drawing energy from a more energetic state of chaos. The new patterns of cooperation and aggression resonates an opportunity to elements of the existing order. This complex historical change might be in part fueled by the shift from a bi-polar order to a multi-ordered world. Orwell kinds predicted something like this historical transformation without the Huntington angle.....The point is that we have entered a new historical state. So much for the end of history.
In any case, how can this come out well for the US? As Liberally led globalization fuels self-destructive narratives, what is the game plan again?
I ask you Raf, do YOU see a coordinated effort by a growing list of groups and regimes? Do you see a dangerous critical mass of westerners who are cool with this? I never thought the victors would unwrite their history.
Thanks all for allowing me the rant.........
Sadly, I can't say I feel that much better.....
In this clip, you can clearly
So, if I show up at your house and warn you that the proper protocol is for me to give you an impromtu prostate exam, does that mean you have to let me?
How certain are you guys about the legitimacy of the blockade in general and whether or not the ship was in waters where the IDF had the right to board it?
What about not boarding the ship the way they did and where they did?
The blockade has been up for three years, WHQ, and while I'm
no expert on the laws of warfare, Israel has been at a state of war with Gaza for some time now, and thus the blockade. The point of the incident was to provoke Israel, and to break the blockade. The IDF warned them about the protocol, and asked them to bring the supplies by land. Keep in mind that Israeli forces eventually escorted the cargo through.
Since you're no expert on the
Since you're no expert on the laws of warfare, and since Gaza is not recognized by Israel as a state, do you have doubts about the legitimacy, moral or legal, of the blockade? Assuming the blockade is legitimate, what do you think about the possibility that the boarding occurred in international waters?
Whether or not the point was to provoke Israel, it doesn't give Israel the right to board a flagged ship in international waters. I wasn't there, so I can't be sure that that's what happened, but that's what I've seen reported. If that is true, the IDF had no protocol to apply. Allowing the supplies through doesn't excuse that, especially after killing members of the crew.
Why did they have to board the ship at all where they did, when they did, and how they did? Isn't there a point at which provocation can be used illegitimately as an excuse for wrongful actions? Provocation doesn't confer carte blanche, does it?
WHQ, I'm not an expert, but I do know some things. Smarter
persons than I have written on this, and I buy the argument. Whether Gaza recognizes her or not--Israel is a sovereign state, and has the right to defend its territory. Maybe there's a case to be made whether the raid was a tactical error, but considering the situation, I fail to see what else Israel could've done.
Changing gears a bit, this great piece by Marty Peretz in TNR is illuminating.
Israel is a sovereign state,
Israel is a sovereign state, but is Gaza? Israel has the right to defend its territory, which I don't think extends 75 miles into the sea. Let's play dueling links:
um, link
I'm no expert either but
I'm no expert either but Reuters did a piece on this subject:
http://in.reuters.com/article/idINIndia-48994620100602
Lifting out the key issue
There is more to the article about the use of force, international waters and possible piracy. In essence, Reuters comes to the conclusion that Israel was within it's rights to protect itself and maintain the blockade.
I also wonder how this weighs
I also wonder how this weighs on anyone's analysis of the situation and the legality of Israel's blockade of Gaza:
There are prohibitions on unnecessary deprivations for the civilian population when instituting a blockade. Impartial expert Marty Preretz wouldn't fail to mention such a thing when defending Israel, his love for which he has said is deep, against charges that Israel is harming Arabs, whom he has said cannot, as a group, be trusted.
"There are prohibitions on
"There are prohibitions on unnecessary deprivations for the civilian population when instituting a blockade."
Dual use materials are out. Materials to build illegal tunnels and weapons are out. You are wrong if you think Gaza is starving. Why don't you float your theories over at Totten and let some knowledgeable people steer you towards the facts.
Israel harming Arabs? Iran and their proxies have murdered thousands of Arabs. Turkey bombed Kurdistan a few days ago. AQ murders Arabs and Egypt and Saudi Arabia are green-lighting Israel action against Iran, Syria, Hamas and Hizb'Allah.
I could ask what planet your information comes from, but sadly I guess it to be the Liberal Western Press. Hey, don't let me stop your adding to that bullshit narrative. In the end, the stubborn facts will be painfully clear....
What do the actions of Iran,
What do the actions of Iran, Turkey, AQ, Egypt and Saudi Arabia against Arabs have to do with the truth of Israel's actions against Arabs? How is it that the "Liberal Western Press" (whatever that mean) is any less valid than your sources, Max? Is this the "world bias" at work that you wrote about earlier? Are you and your sources bias-free?
I don't really claim certainty on this issue. I rather intend to challenge the certainty of others by presenting information and asking questions. Why is it that you respond by implying that I'm incapable of processing information with insulting phrases like "what planet" and "bullshit narrative?"
I don't know why the facts should be painful for me. I don't have a personal stake in this, aside from seeing justice based on truth. Facts would be helpful, moreso than baseless discrediting, en masse without identification, of all sources you don't approve of. Is Totten the only source for knowledgable people and facts?
You post up claims here that
You post up claims here that are unsupported. If you don't understand the bias of the press, I won't bother to explain.
I am not however going to apologize for calling the narrative you are driving bullshit, That's my opinion and I'm free to express myself. If I said such things in Gaza, I could be murdered.
Ayers help set the Flotilla in motion and now Chavez wants to join.
I suppose that doesn't mean anything about intent.
Memri has a list of terrorists who were aboard. The fact that many "facts" are not being given much bandwidth in the press shows what kind of Press it is. Biden was blasted over at Politico for stating what was supposed to be the administration's view from day one.
As for the many supportive links to facts, go and view them at Totten or elsewhere instead of repeating false claims that not even common sense would accept. And it would be a mistake for you to assume I had no facts. In fact, when Carter visited Gaza to talk to Hamas during the primary, Hamas destroyed an Israeli power plant SUPPLYING POWER TO GAZA. Why? When massive aid followed the last war Hamas was caught hoarding the supplies. Why? Do you even have a clue how much money Hamas makes on the lucrative tunnel market? do you understand the conscious effort by Hamas and its brain-dead supporters to provoke Israel? Do you know what is going on with the peace talks and why Hamas seeks to derail them with Iran?
Repeating filtered excepts is hardly understanding, is it? No, prosperity shouldn't bloom in a place that supports the destruction of one's neighbor. If Tully was here, he would have already handed you your head....
While never excusing Israeli for either her flaws or missteps neither of which amount to the moral equivalency promoted in the World Wide Press, I can sleep better at night knowing I have not sipped the Kool Aid.
Angry, yes. Irrational and rudderless, no.
I never said you weren't free
I never said you weren't free to express your opinion. I just asked why you were being insulting. I also don't recall saying anything about Hamas.
I can at once think Hamas is a horrible, twisted organization while still thinking that the way Israel is treating the people of Gaza is wrong. I can at once think that the flotilla was purposeful provocation while still thinking that Israel responded inappropriately.
I don't even blame the commandos for shooting once they were attacked. What else were they going to do at that point? I just don't think they should have been told to board the ferry the way they did, where they did, and when they did. I consider that unnecessary escalation. But I also don't think Israel is wrong to keep weapons or other militarily useful items out of Gaza. I do think it's wrong to put Gazans "on a diet," even if it falls short of starving them. (How is that an unsubstaniated claim as directly quoted from a high-level Israeli advisor?)
You're attributing arguments to me that I haven't made. I'm not sure how rational that is.
The people of Gaza elected
The people of Gaza elected Hamas who engaged in a deplorable slaughter of Fatah besides starting a war with Israel targeting their population with missiles. The Palestinians have not stopped the illegal flow of weapons or even demanded Hamas change their charter. If you read the comment thread at your link, Heller's argument is pretty much Swiss Cheese. And why try so hard to attack Israelis right to board (we were prepared to do that in the Cuban Missile Crisis) without addressing the far more egregious activities of most who surround Israel?
Are you an expert of how to determine a ship is carrying illegal weapons? What would our Coast Guard do if HMS (His Majesty's Ship) AQ prepared to dock in NYC no matter the declared humanitarian intent?
Falsely attributing irrationality to you? You say you accept the need to prevent weapons (and probably radical fighters) from entering Gaza AND don't accept boarding the ships. Please explain the "other way to board". These guys were prepared and I find it insulting you question the many sources that identify these people as just "activists". So do you base your OPINION on your inexpert speculation of how a Navy boards a ship? If anything these commandos risked their lives to avoid violence.
As far as the diet comment. So? Seems like a peaceful way to pressure Gazans to reconsider THEIR electing Hamas. Totten does have eye-witness accounts and pictures of life in Gaza and I have already indicated how much more Gaza received than Haiti with fewer people, a blockade and no natural disaster hurting them other than their own. That is why repeating the narrative will not get you much here. All Hamas has to do is to tear up their charter which promises the destruction of Israel. For you to not see the submission to Iran, egged on by the Western Left is not irrational, its just either laziness or denial at work.
Or maybe it is the accumulative effect of watching a rather biased media machine.....
These seemed to escape the filter:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704875604575281392195250402.html
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/its-not-about-the-flotilla-turkey-changed-sides-years-ago/
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/joining-jackals
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/ayers-dohrn-helped-organize-flotilla-group-95435639.html
http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=51120
I can supply another twenty that are less than 72 hours old....
The people of Gaza elected
All of them? Even the kids? Do you think that the people of Gaza have very limited options because of the situation they're in, a situation caused in no small part by the policies of Israel? Do you think they chose Hamas from some vast universe of available options in a political vacuum?
What on earth are you talking about? Please cite where I made a statement that had anything to do with this, demonstrating my denial or laziness on this subject?
And are you an expert on boarding ships? Are you telling me Israel had no other options than sending commandos from helicopters 75 miles out at sea? That's the only way they could have handled this? Hey, maybe so, but it doesn't seem likely. How is your hypothetical HSS AQ in NYC at all equivalent? They were 75 miles off the coast.
That's your opinion. Mine differs. I don't like seeing kids suffer.
There are answers.......
Most of your questions are answered here . There are even pictures of vibrant Gazan markets and some talk of deflation from excess of certain goods.
Yes I have had conversation with some naval experts. In fact Information Dissemination just had a great post on naval tactics today developing from Hizb'Allah's acquisition of dangerous arms. There is nothing tactically wrong or illegal about boarding 75 miles out. Why should there have been any violence? Show me IDF struck first.
If there are questions you would like to ask, then ask away at the link above.
Starving babies? If you can't read what is already being delivered, why should I do that for you? They said babies were starving in Iraq. We know better now, don't we? And what of the much tougher blockade off Yemen? All flotilla supplies are delivered. Just dock at the appropriate port.
And see what happens when activists do that like this morning? The ship goes peacefully to an Israeli port to unload. Can you now understand why last week's mess was a provocation to make a scene? Are video tapes and audio tapes (go back to Auschwitz) not enough for you? Do you not cry for the 14 year old girl who died in a Turkish raid yesterday on Kurdistan? Or let me put it another way. Do you know in 1997 Turkey killed more Muslims than Israel has in modern history? Please excuse me for pointing out that you do have some responsibility to get essential facts straight when commenting on a blog where you know others do study facts....the most important Stubborn ones.
I do not pretend I have all of the facts, but I would invite you to at least take a look at the most glaring ones. I do not see starving babies by preventing their food to be imported to Gaza is one of them. http://www.travelpod.com/travel-blog-entries/debragoff/1/1274064355/tpod.html Yes, the situation in Gaza is not great. Construction materials in the past has been diverted to illegal tunnels so construction is slow under the blockade, but not even Gazan officials complained of starving babies.
Max, your responses to what I
Max, your responses to what I write don't make sense to me, because you respond as though I've written things that are quite different from what I actually have written. You're trying to convince me that the Turkish flotilla was meant to provoke when I've already stated that it was, myself. I've already acknowledged that very obvious fact. You tell me that the Turks have done terrible things, something I wouldn't try to deny and something that isn't relevant to any of the things I've written. You write about starving babies when I've never mentioned starving babies. You tell me that there were passengers or crew members on the Turkish boat shouting anti-Semetic slurs, another thing that I wouldn't attempt to deny and that has nothing to do with anything I've written. Please excuse me for pointing out that you do have some responsibility to read what other people write and make some attempt to understand what they are actually trying to convey instead of arguing with what seem to be imaginary versions of those people you've invented to have some other argument you'd prefer to have rather than the one that's actually before you. Here's some more propaganda from the liberal media for you, just for kicks:
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2915343.htm
WHQ, please find a different
WHQ, please find a different dance partner. You mentioned the comment about putting the Palestinians on a diet and then added directly this: "I don't like seeing kids suffer." I suppose not as human shields either....
I would suggest you reconsider your idea of having Israel allow itself to be encircled by missiles and be punished into not responding until after a brutal attack. In such a situation far more than Muslim and Israeli children are going to die.
And then we'll see what else you don't like seeing.
As I said, if your serious, take your questions to those who are quite prepared to debate the facts.
Oh and yes, you'll say I put words in your mouth but it is not my fault you fail to see the consequence of some of your attitude and comments.
I would suggest you
Yes, I will. It's funny that my main point here is that Israel didn't need to handle the situation the way they did, which is the very same point you made at the top of the thread before I showed up. Somehow, though, you don't accuse yourself of advocating for Israel allowing itself to be encircled by missiles and punished into not responding until after a brutal attack (not exactly sure what that means).
Now, I further think that the blockade is unnecessarily punitive and restricts the economic well-being of Gazans without demonstrable military benefit. The result is collective punishment. I'm not talking about weapons, which I have no problem with being kept out, just to be clear, since you apparently like to assume arguments not made (like turning suffering kids into starving babies to build a straw man).
I also liked your link explaining why the commandos shot when they did, as though that was an appropriate response to what I had written, given that I had already written that I didn't blame the individual commandos for defending themselves. Rather, I blame whoever made the decision to send commandos rappelling from helicopters in the dark of early morning 75 miles at sea.
Had I never showed up, would you still be discussing what a stupid decision the Israelis made, rather than defending it without reservation as you are now, Max, or what?
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2010/06/danish-report-from-gaza-wheres.html
some diet and again, why not just show up at Totten with your same user name and debate your "facts"?
Let's be clear. You criticize the Israeli boarding and didn't offer any solution but arm chairing suggestions. These have already been responded to here and elsewhere, but then you deflect to the argument of "bad diets". It never occurs to you the victimization motif the Palestinians are quite happy to use in their aggression.
What aggression? Weekly acts of violence and the charter of the government of Gaza. Is that clear enough?
Or would you have us abandon reason, accept your version, end the blockade and have Israel encircled by missiles and be forced to respond only after a brutal attack quite possibly killing thousands of Palestinians?
Don't despair, Iran is going to send aid too and hope to pull another stunt.
Oh, and yes I did criticize the Israeli handling of the Flotilla. I was quite upset that Israeli commandos were injured. I was not pleased they fell into the trap. Nowhere did I suggest the ships should have passed and docked in Gaza nor that the Israelis had no right to board. Big difference from your argument......
I'm not deflecting at all.
I'm not deflecting at all. I'm simply pointing out why I think the scope of the blockade is problematic. I never said the ships should be allowed to dock in Gaza. I never said the Israelis had no right to board at all. I just don't think they needed to do it in the time, place and manner they did. I'm also quite clear on the mortar and missile attacks coming out of Gaza and would end them myself if I somehow could. I don't suggest and have never suggested that the blockade should be ended entirely. I don't know how many times I have to write that I have no problem with the Israelis keeping weapons out of Gaza and the hands of Hamas.
As far as I can tell, we only differ on whether or not the blockade goes too far and some of our reasons (only some, since I agree that the commandos didn't need to be injured) why we think the Israelis handled the boarding poorly. I don't think nine people needed to die and don't know that you'd agree with that.
But, apparently, it's more fun for you to argue with someone who has a whole bunch of other ideas you don't like rather than with me, so you just pretend I'm someone else with whatever ideas you want to dispute. (I'm very curious to know how this argument looks to someone from the outside. Anybody?)
Some excerpts from Max's link
Some excerpts from Max's link above:
So there's no lack of food, just a lack of affordable food for people who lack jobs. And, of the food there is, much of it is there in spite of Israel's trying to keep it out. And guess what? It's not just about food. It's about the lack of jobs and a sustainable domestic economy. Gazans can't even grow enough food for themselves because of the restrictions on what's allowed in.
It's nice that some Danish reporter went around for a day and saw a bunch of food. Here's something with links backing up what's being written (but it's all untrue because of bias):
http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/06/03/what_exactly_is_the_blockade_of_gaza
I never said that Gaza
I never said that Gaza doesn't feel the pain of electing Hamas. Who said otherwise? I was responding to the topic of diets. As for real suffering, real victimization, try Turkish Kurdistan, Yemen, Sudan, North Korea. The suffering of Gaza is self imposed. Return a soldier, modify the charter and make real peace. Gaza already was returned 100%. Or is that not enough?
As for FP, have a good time with that. They have moved far to the Left and their coverage of the ME is almost hilarious. At least I was not afraid to post a more objective link. There was no narrative blinding the journalist. Quite different at FP....
If you don't like the "diets"
If you don't like the "diets" comment, take it up with Dov Weisglass, Max. Citing sources for presented data, as was done in my link = bias. Anectdota, as presented in your link = objectivity (not that it backed up your assertions, anyway). Got it.
Okay. So Gazans "feel the pain of electing Hamas," but it's not real. How many times do I have to tell you I don't dispute the wrong-doing of other regimes? I suppose if the topic were those places and what goes on in them, you'd have a point. But it isn't, so you don't, regardless of how bad those places may be, regardless of how much worse they might be than Gaza. But I'm the one who's deflecting, right?
I'm not deflecting. Those
I'm not deflecting. Those "other" places put the "realness" of the pain in context. And those suffering in "those places" did not elect a terrorist group. You simply deny any "collective" responsibility and exaggerate the degree the pain of "punishment" is making. Many feel Israel has no right to punish because the cause of Hamas is just or that regardless, there is no collective responsibility of those voting Hamas into power. I don't understand why you make my argument convoluted when its not.
Let's see what you say when Iran sends a sub escort to their next Turkish coordinated provocation Flotilla. let's see the media race to take Iran's word that Israeli subs destroyed the hospital ship. You must think this poker game is being played by amateurs. This is a deadly game in which Palestinians have long ago made themselves pawns. And as for disputing the diet remark, I'm not. I merely put it in the right context. Israel lives under a missile threat. Gazans do not unless their elected officials make good their daily rants. I am quite happy that some price is being paid for that. You are obviously not.
Let's change gears a bit, Max.
Do you think Hamas' profiting is Israel's goal? Here's the thing: Whether or not you think Gazans deserve whatever sufferring they're experiencing, you still need to show that the policy isn't counterproductive. You still need to show that the blockade, as it exists with all of its restrictions, isn't further radicalizing Palestinians, giving Hamas more control, making Israel look bad needlessly, isn't helping to radicalize Muslims elsewhere (against Israel and the West, particularly the US, Israel's biggest supporter).
Are you sure about that, considering the big picture? Is it really "peaceful" when considering the broader consequences for Israel and us? Even if you don't agree that it's immoral, might you agree that it's just kind of stupid?
All gears are part of one steamroller.....
Today the UN imposed more sanctions on the export and import of Iranian weapons. There are more than 400 tunnels designed to smuggle these things in including machinery to produce weapons IN Gaza. The drive to end the blockade is supremely wrong-headed despite the radical rhetoric from hypocritical and duplicitous leaders because the real narrative it is NOT about the blockade. It is about creating HIzb'Allah 2 in Gaza. Have you figured that out yet? Are you even aware that as of today Hamas still refuses to accept the cargo from the Flotilla?
Maybe you should read this including the sidebar articles. Even Iran knows the respect many have for Memri. While I think the blockade could be improved, the narrative of the blockade working against Israel, ignores the greater narrative exposed at Memri and elsewhere.
Go to this following page. (These are steps to avoid translation problems) Go to the Left sidebar of articles. Click the blue tag below the last video frame. On next page scroll down and click on the story called Israeli Naval Commandos (I suggest everyone do this) and then read the comments as well. I see a few pictures have even been removed. Yes, journalists photographed the beatings of commandos not wearing much force and withheld them during the Israeli-bash. Reuters founded by a Rabbi from Germany was even caught removing weapons and blood from their doctored photos. Here Ask yourself if the suggested "capitulation" can be a justifiable remedy to conflict before you ask Israel to accept the predictable result of lifting the blockade in the absence of credible measures to stop the importation of fighters, weapons, dual use materials and commodities included in other sanction regimes imposed when responding to terrorism on the part of elected officials.
The context here is not behaviorism as YOU see it, but as the record and present Intel show. Again, here is an update and I'm sure the Obama administration knows well the strategic implications and evidence. You can't isolate "blockades" from the Iranian strategy. Ending the blockade will be throwing meat to the jackals the Palestinians have allowed in the door. It would take a strategic agreement and credible security measures to lift the blockade and the "let's-make-a-gesture-because-the-enemy-will-spin-it-badly-if-you-don't" fails to see the greater conflict. Exactly the element Obama's original ME plan missed.
I hope that was helpful, but work calls......
Always pointing the finger back at Israel is counterproductive
[quote]You still need to show that the blockade, as it exists with all of its restrictions, isn't further radicalizing Palestinians, giving Hamas more control, making Israel look bad needlessly, isn't helping to radicalize Muslims elsewhere (against Israel and the West, particularly the US, Israel's biggest supporter).[/quote]
I agree with you that Israel's actions are often counter-productive, and they need to use less strong arm tactics to deal with what they perceive as external threats. When Palestinians as a whole are punished for the actions of Hamas, it does nothing to help resolve the conflict. In the 30s, when the US government was fighting Al Capone, we didn't punish city blocks for falling under the control of the mob, and it would have been unconscionable to do so, because we would be punishing American citizens. That Israel feels so easy in punishing Palestinians makes it seem like they don't welcome them as citizens.
But, the truth is still that Israel has really no interest in this matter but security, their policy is just the result of overzealousness, and the conflict would be over _tomorrow_ if Hamas just laid down their arms and Iran stopped shipping them arms. When the press doesn't recognize this fact in their reporting, it does nothing but validate Hamas, because the tone of the reporting is to paint Israel as a one-dimensional oppressor and the cause of the conflict. Because of the tone of a lot of the information out there, people miss sight of the fact that security is the only interest, and it gets spun into a narrative of Israelis targeting Palestinians just because they're bigots and hate them for racial/religious reasons, or whatever.
So, when Israel does some action that's within their right, and its the other side that's the aggressor -- such as in the case of the flotilla -- we should defend Israel, instead of trying to turn the story around to complain about the blockade and make it seem like its Israel's fault. Just like Israel should be responsible for its actions, Israel's enemies need to be responsible for their actions.
The press is at fault this time for not reporting the story the right way.
If Israel doesn't feel its enemies are being held accountable for their actions by the press or the UN, how can they feel like they can back off? The international community needs to give Israel _room_ to back off.
Always pointing the finger back at Israel doesn't help the conflict, just like always pointing the finger back at the US doesn't help our conflict with Iran. In fact, its counter-productive, too.
I also ran across this after
I also ran across this after one of your previous comments and thought you might find it amusing:
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/06/israel-derangement-syndrome.html
Or maybe it is the
Why do you get to have filter, but I don't? I have to say, I could probably spend my day googling for sources refuting yours, but I honestly can only devote so much time to Proving Someone Wrong on the Internet (TM).
Google is a wonderful thing...
Well, I'll end this for now with a dedication to a former Stubborn Facter. I hereby declare the term IDS coined in Tully's honor.
I Israel
D Derangement
S Syndrome
filed under BDS
I can only wonder if I will one day soon add
JDS I guess that's a question I'd ask Barney
And I thought I was being original.......nope
http://www.yourish.com/category/israel-derangement-syndrome
I'm adding this as a new
I'm adding this as a new comment rather than replying because I can't take the skinny format and don't feel like hitting reply every time I want to read something in a normal format.
Anyway, I guess I'll have to give up trying to get you to respond to me as though you have read and understood what I'm saying. You accuse me of buying the "liberal media's" version of things and then you link (sometimes, not always) to clearly partisan websites. You attribute arguments to me that I haven't made. You imply that I somehow share the views of various other people and regimes I haven't mentioned and whose views I do not share or endorse (e.g. "capitulation"). You engage in irrelevant relativistic justifications for actions I've criticized Israel for (in so many words, "But those guys are worse"). You keep telling me things I've already acknowledged and agreed to. You don't respond directly to specific points and questions I've raised. You speculate on what I will think of things that haven't happened yet, usually in a "have you stopped beating your wife?" way. You're all over the map, Max. Even when I put aside certain points of disagreement to find some common ground with you, you give me the same incoherent, manic, insultingly insinuative crap. You're probably a nice enough guy, but I don't think it's possible to have a straightforward, rational discussion with you about certain topics, one being Israel's treatment of Palestinians if it involves any criticism at all, since it apparently implies that any or all other criticisms of Israel can arbitrarily be assumed by you to be part of the package.
I can't explain your
I can't explain your confusion. You imply or directly state that Israel made a mistake and should consider ending the blockade. You imply that collective punishment is wrong and that somehow lifting the blockade will promote "peace". You even imply such a move would be to Israel's ultimate security advantage.
I claim that plays right into the BS strategy of the enemy which should be pretty well understood by reading the links. If you call the links partisan which show the real intent and "facts" concerning the Flotilla, then again, you are drinking the Kool-Aid. I have no doubt about the planned violence Turkey and Hamas put into motion. Whatever tactical mistake Israel made pales beside the strategic one it would make by taking your advice. I never said the blockade was eternal nor modifications could not be added. Gates said yesterday cement has been diverted to building bunkers not homes. But hey, Israel just lifted the ban on soda and chips so Palestinians can relax, consume them while they read the report of Turkish duplicity and drift and decide which new hero, Iran or Turkey they would prefer to name their children after....
The logical result of removing the blockade would be to encircle Israel in weapons it won't be able to stop while Turkey and Syria move towards deploying conventional weapons that would threaten Israel's numeric advantages. The anger against Israel generated by the Liberal Press and the Muslim Press (that is another story) seeks not to provide a solution but rather to promote a narrative that is factually wrong and weakens Israel's options in defending itself.
That's just it, Max. I've
That's just it, Max. I've told you over and over again that I don't think Israel should allow weapons in. I've told you over and over again that I don't think the blockade needs to be ended entirely. You may disagree with me that Israel is unnecessarily punishing Gazans with other sorts of restrictions, and I can live with that sort of disagreement. What I can't take is how you just don't want to understand what I'm actually saying no matter how many times I say it.
Now, three times for good measure:
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ISRAEL KEEPING ALL WEAPONS OR OTHER DEMONSTRABLY MILITARILY USEFUL ITEMS OUT OF THE HANDS OF HAMAS OR ANYONE ELSE THEY REASONABLY THINK WILL TRY TO HARM ISRAELIS!!!
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ISRAEL KEEPING ALL WEAPONS OR OTHER DEMONSTRABLY MILITARILY USEFUL ITEMS OUT OF THE HANDS OF HAMAS OR ANYONE ELSE THEY REASONABLY THINK WILL TRY TO HARM ISRAELIS!!!
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ISRAEL KEEPING ALL WEAPONS OR OTHER DEMONSTRABLY MILITARILY USEFUL ITEMS OUT OF THE HANDS OF HAMAS OR ANYONE ELSE THEY REASONABLY THINK WILL TRY TO HARM ISRAELIS!!!
(Frankly, almost no American liberals have advocated for weapons to be allowed into Gaza in any press coverage I've seen. Nothing I've ever cited suggested that Israel should allow weapons into Gaza.)
And how about this, too:
HAMAS IS A BUNCH OF RADICAL DICKS WHO ARE SCREWING OVER THE GAZANS WHO WERE STUPID ENOUGH TO ELECT THEM AND HAMAS CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!!
HAMAS IS A BUNCH OF RADICAL DICKS WHO ARE SCREWING OVER THE GAZANS WHO WERE STUPID ENOUGH TO ELECT THEM AND HAMAS CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!!
HAMAS IS A BUNCH OF RADICAL DICKS WHO ARE SCREWING OVER THE GAZANS WHO WERE STUPID ENOUGH TO ELECT THEM AND HAMAS CANNOT BE TRUSTED!!!
(I also haven't seen much from American liberals talking about what great people Hamas is composed of or what wonderful people the Iranian regime comprises.)
Who are you arguing with, Max??? Why do you keep telling me I'm suggesting things that I'm not? You very inexplicably have me confused with someone else. That's what's driving me up a friggin' wall here. Are you just playing games, or are you really that unable to understand me?
Well, then we've nothing to
Well, then we've nothing to argue about, have we? Israel should continue to blockade until security allows its lifting. Israel could modify the blockade. It would be betrayal for US policy to advocate anything that would endanger Israel. More in fact must be done to slow weapons and materials for "resistance" from getting into Gaza.
Gee, I just don't know what we are arguing about then. I could have sworn you criticized the blockade and questioned its utility (pointing to Israeli mistakes) as well as mentioning the children who suffer.
I guess I was completely misunderstanding your earlier comments. So I am glad you have clarified in triplicate.....
Try this one out to get an
Try this one out to get an idea of some of what I'm getting at:
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2010/06/08/the-blockade-keeps-working/
Nice try WHQ. So I take back
Nice try WHQ. So I take back my comments above. This article advocates against EVERYTHING about the blockade. I disagree with its claims for all the reasons I will not post again. You post this now after your last post which said. "I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH ISRAEL KEEPING ALL WEAPONS OR OTHER DEMONSTRABLY MILITARILY USEFUL ITEMS OUT OF THE HANDS OF HAMAS OR ANYONE ELSE THEY REASONABLY THINK WILL TRY TO HARM ISRAELIS!!!"
"EVERYTHING about the blockade ensures that the political conditions in Gaza can only get worse, but lifting the blockade depends on the improvement of those conditions." I don't see anywhere your link defends keeping weapons or military-related supplies like concrete out of Gaza. Nor do I see any discussion of what would follow a lifting everything about the blockade. The writer assumes people would be happy and be less inclined to change their view about Israel -A COMPLETELY UNSUPPORTED POSITION. So please no more cries of unfairness. You have been saying contradictory things and I called you on it. Be less sloppy and we could have a debate......but this dance has taken up far too much of my time.....
Max, I didn't say the article
Max, I didn't say the article expressed my sentiments exactly. I said it would give you an "idea of some of what I'm getting at." That being how restrictions preventing a reasonable domestic economy in Gaza are not helpful; to Israel, to Gazans or to the West; in the long run. What exactly do you think I'm trying to do? Trick you into agreeing to allow weapons into Gaza or something? What would be the point of that? What am I going to do? Get you to agree with what I wrote and say, "Aha! I linked to an article that can be read to advocate a total lift of the blockade/embargo! Now you admit that Hamas should be allowed to receive any weapons anyone would be willing to send them so they can attack Israel! I always knew you had it in for Israel!" Doesn't that seem kind of silly?
I've already said that I think we only disagree significantly on two points: 1 - whether or not the blockade is overly restrictive of items not useful in attacking Israel, and 2 - some of the reasons why we think Israel botched the boarding of the flotilla ship. Cool?
Very well.
This whole debate does have some positive educational value. Glad you stuck it out. Yes, I can agree with that which you posted below. I think this is where the counter-narrative begins and it is surely needed because the narrative at work is heading in the wrong direction.
There is new video out with activists firing slingshots. Goliath is not an imitation of David, nor David wise to play a silent fool or a careless defender. And Judt's (see NYT op-ed) disturbing Post-Zionism Bullshit must be revealed as part of the Left's promotion of that dangerous and wide spread narrative. This is why being very clear, is critical in making sure the counter-narrative emerges.
Raf, Judt's piece is worthy of your fire........
And I'll add, in a spirit of
And I'll add, in a spirit of conciliation, that I'm sorry for not qualifying my intent in presenting that link. I personally don't think Daniel Larison is, in fact, advocating allowing weapons into Gaza, but it most certainly can be read that way. Without considering the context, I'd even say that would be clearest, most literal reading. It's only that the idea of allowing an uncontrolled flow of weapons into Gaza is so absurd that I tend to think the he doesn't really mean that.