View Single Post
Old 06-04-2010, 01:22 PM   #196 (permalink)
Willravel
... a sort of licensed troubleshooter.
 
Willravel's Avatar
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
I don't know what happened and the truth may prove elusive because even eye witnesses may not know the whole story.
So far we have definitive evidence the information coming out of Israel is dishonest (edited tapes, lies about people on the flotilla, stories changing), however we still don't have any evidence the witnesses from the aid shipment are lying. This, to me, signals that, if you are to put the word of one party over the other, logic dictates it should be the civilian humanitarians. A lot of people may be uncomfortable with that answer, but it remains regardless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
Why go in guns blazing on this one ship? If what you share is true, we are talking cold blooded murder. Do you think the Israeli government authorized this act of potential murder as described or was it a case of individuals over-reacting?
Judging by the recent history of IDF reaction to what it perceives as a threat, it seems perfectly reasonable. Please remember, Israel has an admitted policy of asymmetrical warfare, in which they respond much more strongly than what's necessary in dealing with any perceived attack or threat. This flotilla represents a new kind of threat to Israel, one they don't know how to defend against. Consider the case of the young American woman that was run over by an Israeli bulldozer for trying to, using nonviolent protest, stop the bulldozing of Palestinian homes to expand settlements. They didn't hesitate to respond to nonviolent resistance with deadly force.

The simple concept behind the asymmetrical response policy is deterrence. The Israeli government justifies the way it reacts to possible threats with the rationalization that it will deter further possible threats of a similar nature. Consider how it reacted to Lebanon in 2006 or Gaza in 2008. These were not proportional responses by any measure. Similarly, the response to blockade running in the name of nonviolent resistance was always going to be a violent one on the part of the IDF because that's how they respond to anything. What I don't think the humanitarian protesters understood was just how far the IDF was
prepared to go in the name of preventing the next aid flotilla.

The irony is Israel's policy of extreme response is its greatest threat in that it inspires similarly extreme reactions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
Again, a fundamental question is why would they take the high risk of challenging trained military (trained to kill), in the dark, with a radio response of defiance, with innocent people on-board (aged and children), and not be prepared for a potential violent response?
Why? For the people of Gaza. It's the same reason aid workers go into war zones all over the planet, from Darfur to Burma, with the singular mission of helping the helpless. Is it foolish? I can't really say. It's certainly idealistic and it's absolutely brave. The only way this blockade is going to end is if pressure from the rest of the world becomes unbearable, and this incident has certainly set us on that path.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
I am not arguing the politics of the issue, I am just stating what I now see as obvious given the information made available to me. The motivation has to go beyond food and aid. And if so, what was the motivation - I think I know - but do you insist that it was only food and aid?
The primary mission was to get aid to Gaza. The secondary mission was nonviolent protest.
Quote:
Originally Posted by aceventura3 View Post
My questions are simple. I have not read clear responses. Hell, you could even say they where just foolish and reckless. Even if the other party is wrong or responds with excessive force, they should have known the risk and I expect that they did. There was clearly another agenda outside of food and aid - we may disagree on what that is, but how can you honestly take the position that food and aid was the only thing on the agenda?
So the "agenda" of nonviolent protest against a humanitarian disaster should be condemned? I strongly, strongly disagree. These people risked their lives, and some of them lost their lives, in the name of freeing an imprisoned and abused people. They chose to respond to the Israeli government in a much more brave and selfless way than the Palestinian terrorists who fire rockets. We could all learn a thing or two from the agenda they were pushing.
Willravel is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360