Israel defending itself = piracy?
Bill Press, my second favorite progressive radio talk show host, went a long way to prove why the major newspapers are going under yesterday. While I understand that his piece in the Chicago Tribune was of the “Opinion” variety, shouldn’t someone have to at least make a point based on actual facts for a major newspaper to publish the opinion? Otherwise, the Tribune’s Opinion page becomes just a half-assed blog (unlike this blog of course). Mr. Press begins his piece by offering a story:
Forget what country did it. Consider, first, the facts: armed commandos attack an unarmed ship in international waters, open fire and kill nine civilians, including one American.
O.k. Nice hypothetical. What’s your point?
What do you call that? An act of piracy. It doesn’t matter what country did it. It would have been wrong for Iran to do it. It would have been wrong for North Korea to do it. It was wrong for Israel to do it — and the United States should simply say so.
Oh, i get it. You’re going to base your entire opinion piece on a complete misrepresentation of the facts. First, the “unarmed ship” wasn’t simply floating around in international waters, as you imply. It was running a blockade. Also, the “unarmed ship” at issue wasn’t unarmed. In fact, it was carrying quite a few armed passengers who were known associates of terrorist organizations. Also, the blockade at issue didn’t exist in a vacuum. It was put in place to keep rockets from being brought into Gaza, and being fired at Israel. Now that we have stated the actual facts, lets move on.
There is no justification for Israel’s decision to use military force to prevent humanitarian aid from reaching the shores of Gaza, especially after the U.S. had warned Israel to use “caution and restraint.”
Good grief Bill. “Humanitarian aid?” I’m not denying that the flotilla was carrying some humanitarian aid, but if the true goal was to deliver it, Israel would have been allowed to search its contents before an attempt was made at running the blockade. That wasn’t the goal. Instead, the goal was to make some sort of statement that would result in the international community hating Israel more than they previously did. Based upon the already established feelings of the international community, the statement wasn’t necessary.
Mr. Press, your clear agenda is revealed in your hypocritical statement “there is no justification for Israel’s decision to use military force…especially after the U.S. had warned Israel to use ‘caution and restraint.'” Interesting. You, like all liberals, are usually of the opinion that the U.S. throws it weight around too much on the international scene. Israel, though, is apparently a different story.
Press remembers his liberal leanings soon thereafter, though,
Did passengers on board the Mavi Marmara strike first? Yes. But only with knives, iron pipes and slingshots. And only after armed soldiers boarded and attempted to take over their ship. In response, cornered Israeli troops opened fire in what can only be described as a badly botched military exercise resulting in an unnecessary and excessive use of force.
This is a favorite argument of liberals. If your enemy is only using a knife to try and kill you, you have no right to use a gun. Well, tell that to the guy with the knife to his throat. Of course, I’m sure that if the Israeli soldiers had remembered to pack their sling-shots, everything would have been fine. Sorry Bill. When a group of terrorists decides to try and kill Israeli soldiers with a club, they should expect to be shot at…a lot. I would hope you would support the U.S. military doing the same (although I know you don’t).
After running through a couple of Israeli ivory-tower types who are apparently unhappy with the flotilla raid (which only proves that Israel has its share of self-hating elitist liberals just like the U.S.), Press offers the same argument against the blockade that he’s leveled towards the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan: It’s only going to make your enemies hate you more.
Originally sold as a means of making Israel more secure, the blockade of Gaza, now in place for three years, has had just the opposite effect. It has not made Israel more secure, but it has strengthened the hand of Hamas, caused great suffering among the population of Gaza, and further alienated the Arab world against any accommodation with Israel.
No, Bill, I don’t think it’s possible for the haters of Israel to hate them any more than they already do. Netanyahu, unlike you, realizes that, and has decided self-preservation is more important than Gazans having all the building materials they need. Being that he is in charge of his people’s safety, that’s the right decision. Press ends with the following nonsense:
The only solution is a two-state solution. And the only way to get there is by resumption of peace talks.
Mr. Press, past history has proven that the more Israel gives up to the Palestinians, the more they get shelled with rockets. If I put my war-monger hat on, I would say the only solution is for Israel to continue to kill their enemies before their enemies kill them (which is the same thing our military should continue doing). There can be no peace when one of the two parties doesn’t want it (and that party isn’t Israel).
I don’t get it, I really don’t. Why the hatred for Israel? Are they all anti-Semites? That can’t be…not the “we love diversity” liberals. One has to wonder though, why liberals keep coming down on the side of the terrorists when it comes to Israel.