Israel: “Mistakes Made” In Flotilla Raid
Tweet
Clearly the Israeli government is guilty of anti-semitism, because according to the right wing media, anything negative about Israel smells of anti-semitism.
The investigation, which was headed by Maj. Gen. (Reserves) Giora Eiland, found that while high-level officials had committed errors in judgment, no one in the military had behaved negligently. The report avoids recommendations that would have led to the demotion of military personnel or other strong actions.
‘We found that there were some professional mistakes regarding both the intelligence and the decision-making process and some operational mistakes,’ Eiland said.
50 Responses to “Israel: “Mistakes Made” In Flotilla Raid”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Yeah well, maybe the left next time would do better than to knee-jerk react as they did, using terms like “murderous assault” and claiming Israel killed “unarmed peace activists” when this happened and instead actually wait for an investigation.
Let’s see, people appear apparently out of nowhere on a ship on the high seas, and using violence by the passengers to defend themselves against an assault that is next door to piracy is somehow bad.
Also:
“We found that there were some professional mistakes regarding both the intelligence and the decision-making process and some operational mistakes,” Eiland said.
Parts of the report were declassified and given to reporters Monday by an official who insisted on being identified only as a senior military official involved in the investigation. The full, 100-page report was given directly to Israel Defense Forces head Gabi Ashkenazi and several other high-ranking military officials. Ashkenazi announced that he’d adopt all of its recommendations.
The main incident probed was the IDF’s handling of the Mavi Marmara, the largest vessel of a six-ship flotilla originating in Turkey that attempted to break Israel’s sea blockade of the Gaza Strip on May 31. The Israeli navy stopped all six ships, as well as the Rachel Corrie, which arrived nearly a week later.
The report praises individual commandos who took part in the raid, but cites “flawed intelligence” for underestimating the potential for violence on the Marmara. Despite three months of preparation before the flotilla arrived, various intelligence-gathering units in the Israeli military didn’t communicate with one another, it says.
It says the IDF failed to prepare a backup plan in the event of violence. Among the approximately 600 passengers on board the Mavi Marmara, accounts varied as to how the violence began. Several passengers said the IDF fired on the boat before landing. The report says activists on board were the first to open fire.
Avenger,
Let’s see, people appear apparently out of nowhere on a ship on the high seas, and using violence by the passengers to defend themselves against an assault that is next door to piracy is somehow bad.
With the utmost respect, you are wrong in so many ways, it’s hard to know where to start.
The question of whether or not the Israeli Navy had the authority to board the Mavi Marmara is rather clear cut.
But it can only be addressed by first addressing the most basic question;
Is the blockade of Gaza by Israel legal?
The answer to that question, according to the San Remo Manual on International Law Applicable to Armed Conflicts at Sea, is clearly, “YES”…
Once it is established that the blockade of Gaza is legal, then other portions of the San Remo Manual come into play.
Towhit, Israel is well within it’s rights to board any vessel attempting or intending to run it’s blockade in international waters anywhere in the world. Meaning that Israel could have legally boarded the Mavi Marmara as soon as they cleared Cyprus territorial waters as intent to blockade run was well established by that time.
This is what international law says….
You can read the San Remo Manual here:
http://www.icrc.org/ihl.nsf/385ec082b509e76c41256739003e636d/7694fe2016f347e1c125641f002d49ce
Further, as the San Remo Manual clearly shows, any vessel found to be running a legal blockade or when intent to run a legal blockade is established then said vessel can be legally boarded, seized and, if the blockading party deems it necessary, attacked and sunk.
If the blockade is legal and lawful, then any and all actions that were taken by Israel in this incident are also legal and lawful.
Of course, conversely, if the blockade is an illegal blockade, then it becomes clear that Israel is legally in the wrong..
There is only one part of the San Remo Manual that could, repeat *COULD* make the Gaza blockade illegal..
PART IV, SECTION II, Paragraph 102:
The declaration or establishment of a blockade is prohibited if:
(a) it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival; or
(b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.
Subsection (a) does not apply, because it is clear that sole purpose of the blockade is NOT the starvation of Gaza but rather to stop weapons from reaching Hamas. This is evidenced by the fact that Israel imports thousands of tons of aid into Gaza every month. So, obviously starving the population is not the goal.
Subsection (b) would be the only section that one could hang their hat on, as far as illegality goes..
According to the subsection, a blockade would be illegal if the damage to the civilian population is excessive in relation to the direct military advantage that said blockade would provide.
The damage to the civilian population is clear. However, it IS mitigated to a great extent by the humanitarian aid that flows into Gaza from Israel on a daily basis..
So, while there IS damage to the civilian population, it is not excessive by any stretch of the imagination.
Now, let’s look at the direct military advantage that the blockade provides to Israel.
This is abundantly and crystal clear. The ability of Hamas to obtain weapons that would, in turn, be used against innocent Israeli civilians is severely curtailed.
Therefore, the damage to the civilian population of Gaza is not sufficiently excessive to out weigh the very real military advantage afforded Israel by way of keeping an excessive amount of weaponry out of Hamas’ hands.
I am also constrained to point out that Hamas STILL can smuggle in weapons thru secret tunnels at the Gaza/Egyptian border. The fact that Hamas chooses to smuggle in weapons and explosives rather than foodstuffs and medicines makes it abundantly clear that Hamas is more interested in killing Israelis than they are in taking care of their own citizens.
Further, I must also point out that many countries in the region, INCLUDING Turkey and Egypt signed off on the blockade as perfectly legal. Up until recently, Egypt actually participated in the blockade, coordinating their efforts with Israel.
All of these facts support the opinion that the Israeli Blockade of Gaze is perfectly legal and in accordance with international law.
And, as I stated at the beginning. If the blockade is legal, then the IHH Flotilla incident that flowed from that blockade is also legal.
Michale32086
The question of whether or not the Israeli Navy had the authority to board the Mavi Marmara is rather clear cut.
The ship was in international waters, but, even granting that they were simon-pure in their conduct, you’re missing the bigger picture, which is that this is a Pyrrhic victory for Israel, forcing them to reconfigure their ‘blockade’ of the Gaza strip, and making the US unconditional support of Israel more difficult to boot:
BTW, according to Pat Buchanan, you’re not an American patriot:
Avenger,
The ship was in international waters,
That doesn’t matter. Once it is established that said vessel intends to run a legal blockade, that ship is no longer a civilian vessel. It becomes a combatant.
The military needs of the blockading party is the ONLY consideration.
If Israel had determined that it was militarily necessary to hit the ship as soon as it left Cyprus territorial waters, then that would have been perfectly legal.
This is what International Law says…
you’re missing the bigger picture, which is that this is a Pyrrhic victory for Israel, forcing them to reconfigure their ‘blockade’ of the Gaza strip, and making the US unconditional support of Israel more difficult to boot:
No one is claiming that there weren’t mistake made. No one is claiming that there have been consequences.
Could Israel have done it better?? Sure.. But hindsight is always 20/20.
BTW, according to Pat Buchanan, you’re not an American patriot:
I could really give a rat’s arse what Pat Buchanan thinks about me..
He has been wrong before…
With regards to Israel in this case, he is wrong again…
In the overall scheme of things, as long as the Palestinians support and initiate terrorist attacks, Israel will always have the legal, ethical and moral high ground.
Always..
Michale32086
But in Oliver-land, the murder of nine unarmed civilians in international waters (ZOMG THEY HAD HAMMERS AND KITCHEN KNIVES!) is a perfectly just and symmetrical response. Because them Palestinians deserve it. Always.
“as long as the Palestinians support and initiate terrorist attacks, Israel will always have the legal, ethical and moral high ground.”
Ah yes, the ends always justify the means.
Many people thought Auschwitz was necessary as well.
Not to mention the immoral concept of “collective punishment” of all Jews ca. 1937-1945.
The moral blindness of the pro-Israel faction is truly startling.
Yeah, that’s exactly what I said. I’ve never ever condemned Israel for a disproportionate response to things. Ever. Also, unicorns.
Too bad the Israelis don’t have the courage of your conviction:
Jaim,
Ah yes, the ends always justify the means.
In the CT world, this is more often than not true.. Any response to terrorism up to, but not including terrorism itself, is justified.
Many people thought Auschwitz was necessary as well.
I really don’t know how to respond to someone that thinks this…
Not to mention the immoral concept of “collective punishment” of all Jews ca. 1937-1945.
For example……??????
Oliver,
Yeah, that’s exactly what I said. I’ve never ever condemned Israel for a disproportionate response to things. Ever. Also, unicorn
Now THAT was funny…
Avenger,
Too bad the Israelis don’t have the courage of your conviction:
It’s not my place to second-guess the IDF.. If they feel that political considerations are an important consideration, then that is their affair.
I simply point out what International Law says…
While political considerations may dictate that Israel will wait til a ship actually breaches the blockade before taking action, International Law requires no such stipulation.
I can quote the relevant sections for you, if you wish.
What it all boils down to is this. If the blockade of Gaza is legal (which I have clearly shown it to be) then the assault on the Mavi Marmara was also legal.
The responsibility for the deaths on the Mavi Marmara lie solely and completely with the so-called “peace” activists..
These are the facts..
Michale32086
It’s not my place to second-guess the IDF.. If they feel that political considerations are an important consideration, then that is their affair.
Yes, because the IDF did such a great job in defending Israeli interests and advancing the Israeli cause.
Avenger,
What is your beef with Israel??
No one is claiming that they are perfect. Sometimes they can be their own worst enemy..
Irregardless of what you think of Israel, the simple fact is Israel was perfectly within her rights to have Israeli soldiers board the Mavi Marmara.
The fact that it COULD have been done better is solely a factor of 20/20 hindsight.
Michale32086
Irregardless of what you think of Israel, the simple fact is Israel was perfectly within her rights to have Israeli soldiers board the Mavi Marmara.
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country’s antireligious laws.
Your unwillingness to subject the IDF to any scrutiny whatsoever, which has set back Israel both politically and morally, is a troubling blind spot you have, M whatever number you are.
To quote the French diplomat Tallyrand:
“It’s worse than a crime, it’s a blunder.”
Blind loyalty is worse than no loyalty at all.
We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was “legal” and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was “illegal.” It was “illegal” to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler’s Germany.
Ignoring the obvious Godwin, there is a significant flaw in your argument.
We are not talking about one country’s law or another country’s law.
We are talking about INTERNATIONAL LAW..
International laws that all civilized countries have agreed to abide by and honor.
You can argue the fairness of the law all you wish. You will probably have some good and valid points.
But it IS the law… Regardless of your personal feelings about it.
Your unwillingness to subject the IDF to any scrutiny whatsoever, which has set back Israel both politically and morally, is a troubling blind spot you have, M whatever number you are.
I have no problem subjecting the IDF to scrutiny..
But who would you have doing the scrutiny?? The countries that have illogically and irrationally condemned the raid without any regard whatsoever for International Law??
Are THOSE the people you want to sit in judgement of Israel???
Surely you jest…
Blind loyalty is worse than no loyalty at all.
I can agree with this statement. But my loyalty is far from blind. It comes from working closely with the Israeli military for quite a while.
I say what I say about the issues of the region because I have been there and done that.
Can anyone here make the same valid claim??
Michale32086
We are talking about INTERNATIONAL LAW.
Keep defending the indefensible, M whatever your number is, it only makes you appear foolish and out of touch, which is not a help to the Israeli cause.
Keep defending the indefensible, M whatever your number is, it only makes you appear foolish and out of touch, which is not a help to the Israeli cause.
I have cited ample evidence to support my position..
Do you have any factual evidence to support your position?
No??
Didn’t think so…
Michale32086
Do you have any factual evidence to support your position?
Yes, the fact that the Israelis loosened their ‘blockade’ on the Gaza strip after the ‘success’ of the interception of the ship in question, and the recommendation of the Israeli Foreign Office in this case as I posted with a link to my source above.
You’re new around here, so just keep in mind that http://www.pulledoutofmyass.com isn’t considered a reliable source here……….
Let’s approach this from a different angle and see if we can achieve some common ground.
What exactly is your point here?
Is your point that Israel made some mistakes in the raid?
Or that Israel initiated the raid to begin with??
Or that Israel is blockading Gaza at all??
What exactly is your position?
Michale32086
If you can’t get my point from reading what I’ve posted here, then I’m sorry for your lack of understanding..
As you may have noticed, this isn’t kindergarten and I’m not going to hold your hand and help you figure it out if you’re unable to do so on your own.
Yes, the fact that the Israelis loosened their ‘blockade’ on the Gaza strip after the ’success’ of the interception of the ship in question, and the recommendation of the Israeli Foreign Office in this case as I posted with a link to my source above.
And what exactly is this “proof” of??
That Israel had to rethink their strategy because of political considerations??
If so, I have never disputed that point..
http://www.pulledoutofmyass.com isn’t considered a reliable source here……….
I would assume that the actual text of International Law WOULD be a reliable source around here..
Maybe that was a wrong assumption to make..
If you can’t get my point from reading what I’ve posted here, then I’m sorry for your lack of understanding..
As you may have noticed, this isn’t kindergarten and I’m not going to hold your hand and help you figure it out if you’re unable to do so on your own.
TRANSLATION:
My point has already been blown out of the water by the facts of your argument. Since I don’t want to revisit such
utter intellectual devastation a second time, I will simply respond with a childish retort that does nothing to advance the discussion.
Michale32086
I did look at the international law, and I didn’t want to bring this up and embarrass you until now:
In other words, you have to say that Israel obtained a military advantage greater than the damage of killing some people, which on the evidence at hand, isn’t so.
“More tears are shed over answered than unanswered prayers”
— St Theresa of Avila
I already addressed that in my first post..
But I would be happy to do so again, just for you.
There is only one part of the San Remo Manual that could, repeat *COULD* make the Gaza blockade illegal..
PART IV, SECTION II, Paragraph 102:
The declaration or establishment of a blockade is prohibited if:
(a) it has the sole purpose of starving the civilian population or denying it other objects essential for its survival; or
(b) the damage to the civilian population is, or may be expected to be, excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated from the blockade.
Subsection (a) does not apply, because it is clear that sole purpose of the blockade is NOT the starvation of Gaza but rather to stop weapons from reaching Hamas. This is evidenced by the fact that Israel imports thousands of tons of aid into Gaza every month. So, obviously starving the population is not the goal.
Subsection (b) would be the only section that one could hang their hat on, as far as illegality goes..
According to the subsection, a blockade would be illegal if the damage to the civilian population is excessive in relation to the direct military advantage that said blockade would provide.
The damage to the civilian population is clear. However, it IS mitigated to a great extent by the humanitarian aid that flows into Gaza from Israel on a daily basis..
So, while there IS damage to the civilian population, it is not excessive by any stretch of the imagination.
Now, let’s look at the direct military advantage that the blockade provides to Israel.
This is abundantly and crystal clear. The ability of Hamas to obtain weapons that would, in turn, be used against innocent Israeli civilians is severely curtailed.
Therefore, the damage to the civilian population of Gaza is not sufficiently excessive to out weigh the very real military advantage afforded Israel by way of keeping an excessive amount of weaponry out of Hamas’ hands.
I am also constrained to point out that Hamas STILL can smuggle in weapons thru secret tunnels at the Gaza/Egyptian border. The fact that Hamas chooses to smuggle in weapons and explosives rather than foodstuffs and medicines makes it abundantly clear that Hamas is more interested in killing Israelis than they are in taking care of their own citizens.
Further, I must also point out that many countries in the region, INCLUDING Turkey and Egypt signed off on the blockade as perfectly legal. Up until recently, Egypt actually participated in the blockade, coordinating their efforts with Israel.
All of these facts support the opinion that the Israeli Blockade of Gaze is perfectly legal and in accordance with international law.
Michale32086
The damage to the civilian population is clear. However, it IS mitigated to a great extent by the humanitarian aid that flows into Gaza from Israel on a daily basis..
And what military advantage did this episode give to the Israelis?
None whatsoever.
Instead of discouraging challenges to it, they’ve allowed an opening for their enemies to put them to the test, raising the stakes and courting another P.R. disaster.
Since you seem to be do little more than gape at my comments and quote tons of international law, I’m ending this dialog and hope you get a new brain soon:
And what military advantage did this episode give to the Israelis?
Several..
A} It prevented fanatics from getting to Gaza.
B} It prevented Hamas terrorists from increasing their numbers by hundreds.
C} It showed the enemy that ships WILL NOT make it to Gaza.
D} Finally and most importantly, Israel MUST stop every ship that threatens the blockade.
The very law that gives Israel all the rights we have discussed also imposes responsibilities on Israel as well. One of those is the “Paper Blockade” issue..
A party cannot impose a blockade and then pick and choose which ships it will allow access thru the blockade. Israel is REQUIRED to stop every ship from running the blockade or it’s blockade would be deemed a Paper Blockade and therefore would be an illegal blockade under the San Remo Manual we have been discussing…..
Michale32086
A} It prevented fanatics from getting to Gaza.
Really, now, so you’re saying that this fellow probably isn’t a ‘fanatic’?
As a ship chartered by a son of the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi steams towards Gaza,
It prevented Hamas terrorists from increasing their numbers by hundreds.
Yes, the increase in recruiting from this incident has probably been in the thousands.
We do finally get to agree on something. That’s progress!
C} It showed the enemy that ships WILL NOT make it to Gaza.
And that the IDF are capable of making elementary errors in carrying out this kind of operation, or do you think that the next ship will be as ill-prepared to deal with the IDF if they repeat the same tactics that didn’t work so well when the element of surprise was on their side?
D} Finally and most importantly, Israel MUST stop every ship that threatens the blockade.
Yes, because repeating the same mistake and expecting different results is so wise and statesman-like.
Thanks for your risible response that demonstrates my assertions and reveals what a one-track mind you have.
Really, now, so you’re saying that this fellow probably isn’t a ‘fanatic’?
As a ship chartered by a son of the Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi steams towards Gaza,
You wanna lay bets as to whether or not this scumbag makes it to Gaza??
He can steam towards Gaza all he wants.. Right up to the point that he is boarded by Israel…
And that the IDF are capable of making elementary errors in carrying out this kind of operation,
May I inquire as to what level of training and/or expertise do you have that allows you to make such a determination?
Or are you just parroting what someone else has said??
Regardless, as has been pointed out time and again. Hindsight is always 20/20. It’s very easy to play Monday morning quarterback..
But it means very little..
Yes, because repeating the same mistake and expecting different results is so wise and statesman-like.
No…
Because it’s the LAW…
Israel can’t allow one ship to pass and stop other ships. By doing so, Israel would forfeit the legality of their blockade.
Why is this so hard for you to understand?
Michale32086
You wanna lay bets as to whether or not this scumbag makes it to Gaza??
Whether or not he makes it, are you saying that he’d have done it even if the raid hadn’t gone badly in the first place?
Some deterrence effect.
May I inquire as to what level of training and/or expertise do you have that allows you to make such a determination?
What level of training and/or expertise do I need to make such a determination in a comment thread on the Internet?
May I inquire as to why you are unwilling to entertain any criticism of Israel that would be unremarked by you if it was in Haaretz and was written by an Israeli citizen?
I dunno, the word of a Israeli officer is good enough for me, you’re not one of those anti-Zionist nuts who thinks that Jews lie when it suits them, are you?:
Now, you could nit-pick and say that ‘elementary errors’ aren’t necessarily “mistakes”, but that wouldn’t be prudent.
Regardless, as has been pointed out time and again. Hindsight is always 20/20. It’s very easy to play Monday morning quarterback..
It’s even easier to be an idiot and declare Israel above any legitimate criticism, and that didn’t stop you, did it?
I hope you’re not one of those paid MOUSSAD agents I’ve heard about who make pro-Israel comments on blogs such as this one, but then you’d deny it if you were, wouldn’t you?
Thanks for playing!
Whether or not he makes it, are you saying that he’d have done it even if the raid hadn’t gone badly in the first place?
I am sure there would have been no end to these fanatical challenges of the Gaza blockade, regardless of whether or not the Mavi Marmara raid had gone off as planned or not.
May I inquire as to why you are unwilling to entertain any criticism of Israel that would be unremarked by you if it was in Haaretz and was written by an Israeli citizen?
Once again, I have to correct you..
It’s not that I am unwilling to entertain any criticism of Israel. I have admitted on several occasions that Israel has made some mistakes..
But, what YOU simply fail to grasp is that everything was done in accordance with International Law.
THAT has been my whole point from my first post..
And you have posted absolutely NOTHING that refutes this one basic fact.
Now, do you have any evidence to refute my claim of legality?
Michale32086
I am sure there would have been no end to these fanatical challenges of the Gaza blockade, regardless of whether or not the Mavi Marmara raid had gone off as planned or not.
And you’re sure that the policy on what is being blockaded by the Israelis would’ve been changed no matter how the raid had gone off.
It’s not that I am unwilling to entertain any criticism of Israel. I have admitted on several occasions that Israel has made some mistakes..
You just haven’t done so on this thread.
But, what YOU simply fail to grasp is that everything was done in accordance with International Law.
And what have you failed to grasp is that the operation was a tactical success, but strategically, a failure.
THAT has been my whole point from my first post..
Then why the insistence on minimizing the fact that this was an operational screw-up, if that was your whole point?
ANd you know what, because something is legal doesn’t mean it’s the smart thing to do, let alone the right thing to do.
“Israel, right or wrong.”
That’s all your postings have been here, M-what’s your name and number, and you’ve been digging yourself a deeper and deeper hole since then.
You really do a lot to advocate for Israel, unfortunately, that’s not apparent if one were to judge you solely by what you’ve written on this thread.
TTFN.
And you’re sure that the policy on what is being blockaded by the Israelis would’ve been changed no matter how the raid had gone off.
Probably not.. But I would think such a change would be a GOOD thing.. So, the botched raid DID have a silver lining, wouldn’t you agree??
You just haven’t done so on this thread.
My second or third post..
“No one is claiming that there weren’t mistake made.
However, if you feel I haven’t been particular clear, allow me to rectify that.
In the raid on the Mavi Marmara, Israel made mistakes. They should have planned the assault better and should have been better equipped and mentally better prepared for the task.
However, I still maintain that, given the context of the raid itself and the political considerations that Israel faced, such mistakes were understandable.
Let’s face facts.. The Palestinian fanatics WANTED a confrontation. And they would have had their confrontation even if Israel had performed a text-book Op..
The ONLY way that such a confrontation would have been avoided is if Israel had let the entire Flotilla sail to Gaza unhindered.
But, as I have proven, Israel BY LAW could not let that happen..
Michale32086
Probably not.. But I would think such a change would be a GOOD thing.. So, the botched raid DID have a silver lining, wouldn’t you agree??
It helps the folks in the Gaza strip, your concern for them throughout this thread has reminded me of Mother Teresa, FWIW.
BTW, you now are saying “the botched raid”, when earlier you wrote:
May I inquire as to what level of training and/or expertise do you have that allows you to make such a determination?
Or are you just parroting what someone else has said??
However, I still maintain that, given the context of the raid itself and the political considerations that Israel faced, such mistakes were understandable.
Again, Israel has good intentions, and therefore mistakes are understandable.
Hey, how would that work in the American office:
“Yes, Mr. Smithers, I did screw up the McMurphy contract, but in the context of the contract and the political considerations I faced, such mistakes are understandable.
The Palestinian fanatics WANTED a confrontation.
Yes, and it ended up with 9 martyrs to the cause, left the IDF with egg on its face, and has caused international repercussions with other countries that Israel can ill-afford to piss off in the first place.
If script had been written by Hamas, it wouldn’t have been a believable movie:
“The guys on the ship have no firearms, and they turn out to be such a threat to the IDF that 9 of them have to be killed during the raid? Even ou audience doesn’t believe the Israelis are that incompetent or blood-thirsty, you know that even propaganda has to have a grain of truth, right?”
That’s your silver lining from the cloud of the botched raid.
The ONLY way that such a confrontation would have been avoided is if Israel had let the entire Flotilla sail to Gaza unhindered.
Keep digging M-number whatever you call yourself, I’m outta here, but, please feel free to embarrass yourself here while I’m gone, your attempts to spin things is quite risible, although the less-charitable than I might term it “a miserable failure”.
This is about the 3rd or 4th time you have claimed to be “out of here”…
I’ll stick around a few to see if you really mean it before I bother responding to the above…
Wouldn’t want to waste my time if you are serious this time..
Michale32086
This is about the 3rd or 4th time you have claimed to be “out of here”…
I didn’t realize you enjoyed my company so much
Wouldn’t want to waste my time if you are serious this time..
I’d like to take you seriously, but you haven’t given me any reason to yet……….
I didn’t realize you enjoyed my company so much
Are you kidding? I love discussing Israel and debating the actions of the country vis a vis her security..
I’d like to take you seriously, but you haven’t given me any reason to yet……….
And yet…. Here you are….
OK, let’s have at it then…
It was a “botched” raid insofar as things didn’t go as planned..
On the other hand, there is an old saying amongst us military types…
NO BATTLE PLAN SURVIVES CONTACT WITH THE ENEMY.
As far as the mistakes being understandable, good intentions had very little to do with it. Regardless of how us military types feel about it, there are political considerations that have to be taken into account.
Intellectually, I recognize this. But that doesn’t mean I have to like it…
“I said I understand. I didn’t say I approve.”
-Spock, STAR TREK, A Taste Of Armageddon
As far as the actual raid itself, have you ever been on one? It’s easy to claim that the soldiers should have done A or should not have done B.
But, unless you have actually done it, it’s all guesswork and vapor.
The fact of the matter is, the IDF soldiers were expecting calm peace activists. They were not equipped to handle what they got because they had never had anything like that before.
It’s easy to say, “Oh, they should have been prepared for ANYTHING”… But, like I said.. Unless you have been there, you really aren’t in a position to say…
Regardless, my only point has been regarding the legality of the raid and the blockade.
Since that doesn’t seem to be a point of contention, I think we’re all done here..
What would you like to discuss next?
Michale32086
The fact of the matter is, the IDF soldiers were expecting calm peace activists.
yes, there’s nothing more calming than strange men dressed in military garb coming out of nowhere on the high seas.
It’s easy to say, “Oh, they should have been prepared for ANYTHING”… But, like I said.. Unless you have been there, you really aren’t in a position to say…
I see that the lack of the factors you mentioned didn’t keep you from calling it a botched raid, so unless you were there, you really aren’t in a position to call it that……
Regardless, my only point has been regarding the legality of the raid and the blockade.
No, you’ve also expressed the opinion that Israel should be given carte blanche for whatever measures they take in their own defense, even if it ends up in legal ‘own goal’ situation that certainly benefits the enemies of Israel, fanatical or otherwise.
Are you sure you’re not a clever Hamas agent, propagating a ‘pro-Israel” line that actually helps the enemies of Israel, fanatical and otherwise?
It sure seems that way
No, you’ve also expressed the opinion that Israel should be given carte blanche for whatever measures they take in their own defense, even if it ends up in legal ‘own goal’ situation that certainly benefits the enemies of Israel, fanatical or otherwise.
Yes, I believe that any response to terrorism, short of terrorism itself, is fully justified.
Nothing, I repeat, NOTHING, justifies, mitigates or excuses terrorism..
Michale32086
Killing nine civilians in international waters is terrorism.
Jaim,
Killing nine civilians in international waters is terrorism.
First off, they weren’t civilians. By arming themselves, that made them combatants. And legitimate targets.
Secondly, as I have already proven beyond ANY doubt, international waters or no, the raid was fully legal.
Finally, I am not sure what definition of Terrorism you are going by, but I can assure you that it’s not the accepted definition.
Michale32086
Armed? With knives? In order to defend themselves from an act of piracy in international waters?
“Secondly, as I have already proven beyond ANY doubt, international waters or no, the raid was fully legal.”
Nope. It was an act of terrorism. It was an act of violence meant to strike terror into the hearts of civilians in the Mediterranean acting lawfully.
Me, I don’t support terrorism either. That’s why I’m highly critical of US financial support for the rogue nation of israel. (And Egypt and Pakistan while I’m at it.)
Armed? With knives? In order to defend themselves from an act of piracy in international waters?
It doesn’t matter WHAT they were armed with. Armed is armed, as far as International Law is concerned..
As far as your claim of Piracy you are, once again, in error.. Piracy involves non-State players…
Nope. It was an act of terrorism. It was an act of violence meant to strike terror into the hearts of civilians in the Mediterranean acting lawfully.
If that is what you want to believe, by all means..
But it has absolutely nothing to do with the facts of the situation or the reality of the issue..
Me, I don’t support terrorism either. That’s why I’m highly critical of US financial support for the rogue nation of israel. (And Egypt and Pakistan while I’m at it.)
So, how do you define terrorism??
Michale32086
“Armed is armed, as far as International Law is concerned.”
Please continue to make things up.
“Piracy involves non-State players.”
OK, let’s call it state-sponsored terrorism then.
“So, how do you define terrorism??”
I already did — violence intended to have a psychological impact on other civilians.
Murdering nine civilians in international waters is terrorism. Moral absolute. I’m not a relativist like you.
Please continue to make things up.
So, it’s your opinion that someone who is armed with a knife really isn’t armed??
And you accuse ME of making things up??
OK, let’s call it state-sponsored terrorism then.
As has been established by the San Remo Manual of 1994, the act wasn’t an act of terrorism, but rather a legal action taken that stemmed from a legal blockade..
You can call it terrorism all you want. But that doesn’t change the absolute fact that you are wrong.
I already did — violence intended to have a psychological impact on other civilians.
Under that definition, a horror movie would be considered an act of terrorism.. Further, practically ANY act of violence will have a “psychological impact” on civilians.
Rape, murder, grand theft, home invasions. Under your definition, all of these acts would be classified as terrorism.
Terrorism is defined as ongoing and/or systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda.
As I have proven, an armed civilian is a combatant.
Hatred of Israel appears to have blinded you to the facts..
Your position is based in hysteria and emotionalism. It has nothing to do with reality.
Michale32086
“Terrorism is defined as ongoing and/or systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda.”
Wow. Best description of the Israeli government’s treatment of Palestinian civilians I’ve ever read. Thank you!
Wow. Best description of the Israeli government’s treatment of Palestinian civilians I’ve ever read. Thank you!
Once again, your hysterical hatred of Israel blinds you to the reality..
But it’s rather ironic..
You DO realize that Hamas has killed thousands of Palestinians and been responsible for the deaths of tens of thousands more…
Where is your condemnation of Hamas???
I guess you don’t really CARE about the Palestinians. You just want to use them to beat Israel over the head with…
Everyone always uses the Palestinians…
Michale32086
As far as “making things up”??
Unless I made up the Third Geneva Convention of 1949, you are once again, in error.
or inhabitants of a non-occupied territory, who on the approach of the enemy spontaneously take up arms to resist the invading forces, without having had time to form themselves into regular armed units, provided they carry arms openly and respect the laws and customs of war.
That’s the definition of a “combatant” that is relevant to this particular incident.
Michale32086
I condemn Hamas.
I also condemn the collective punishment of innocent Palestinians by the Israeli government.
See? Not so hard.
I also condemn the collective punishment of innocent Palestinians by the Israeli government.
For example??
You see, for you to prove your case, you would have to prove the INTENT of the Israeli government.
You would have to get into the leaders’ heads and know for certain exactly what the intent was..
If you can’t prove intent, you can’t prove collective punishment..
As for Hamas, if you truly condemn Hamas as you claim, then the elimination of Hamas should be your goal… Just as it is Israel’s goal..
You and Israel are on the same side…
The great thing is, if you and Israel are successful, EVERYONE wins….
Especially the Palestinians…
Michale32086
“For example??”
Daily life in Gaza and the West Bank.
Daily life in Gaza and the West Bank.
I was hoping you could be more specific…
Regardless, the simple fact is Palestinians could live in peace side by side with Israel, if they would just be content to live in peace side by side with Israel..
As long as the Palestinians give tacit support and approval to terrorists and terrorism, Israel will always have the legal, ethical and moral high ground.
ALWAYS..
The Palestinians could stop ALL of this with 3 simple actions.
1. Stop the terrorism against Israel.
2. Release Cpl Schalit or afford him POW Status.
3. Concede Israel’s right to exist.
None of these actions are irrational or burdensome in the least…
But until such time as the Palestinians take these actions, Israel will always be in the right…
It’s really that simple..
Michale32086