They’re Not Against War

They’re just on the other side:

Upon boarding the ships, the soldiers encountered fierce resistance from the passengers who were armed with knives, bats and metal pipes. The soldiers used non-lethal measures to disperse the crowd. The activists, according to an IDF report, succeeded in stealing two handguns from soldiers and opened fire, leading to an escalation in violence.

Al Jazeera on Monday broadcasted footage from the Gaza flotilla’s lead vessel, the Mavi Marmara, showing Israeli Navy commandos boarding the ship. Helicopters could also be seen flying overhead.

“It was like a well-planned lynch,” one IDF officer said. “These people were anything but peace activists.”

As Claudia Rossett notes, this isn’t about peace, or freedom, or humanitarian aid. It’s about making a terrorist-supporting political statement, with the added frisson of killing Jews.

[Update a few minutes later]

Here’s more:

In a later search aboard the Marmara, soldiers found caches of bats, clubs, knives, and slingshots used by the rioters ahead of the IDF takeover. It appeared the activists were well prepared for a fight…

…It appears that the error in planning the operation was the estimate that passengers were indeed political activists and members of humanitarian groups who seek a political provocation, but would not resort to brutal violence.

They won’t make that mistake again.

[Late evening update]

A photomontage of “peace” activists.

And it’s time for Israel to stop playing Mr. Nice Guy.

It certainly hasn’t bought them much.

114 thoughts on “They’re Not Against War”

  1. Yes, and in all those case it is only the degree to which you express your true feelings.

    No, that’s not true, even though there may be substantial overlap. There are anti-semites who have nothing against Israel but who would want all Jews to either emigrate to it or to assimilate. Or maybe they are fine with a Jewish minority that maintains its identity as long as they don’t influence American foreign policy through AIPAC. I think there may be a sizable number of those in the isolationist wing of the Republican party. Similarly there are lefties who object to the very existence of Israel, but are sympathetic to a Jewish minority in their own country, as long as they don’t support Israel. And some people merely object to zionism, including some Jews. And then there are people who are opposed to all three. There are many flavours of bigotry.

  2. There are many flavours of bigotry.

    Just different rhetoric for the same hate. 100 people will give you 100 different nuanced positions to conceal their hatred for “the other”, but it’s distinction without difference in the final calculation.

  3. Martijn, you realize that a person, especially one circumspect about his own uncivilized views, can tell you anything, and it’s just hot air, right? If you want to know what a man believes, watch his actions, not his rhetoric.

  4. Sure, I’m just warning about painting with a broad brush. The charge of anti-semitism is a very serious one, and you should avoid using it when you’re not sure (easy to tell) and when you’re wrong (not so easy to tell). In my country the Greens, for whom I have little sympathy, are fond of many minorities: Turks, Moroccans, Jews, gays, lesbians, the handicapped, you name it, but they don’t like Israel. Whenever there’s a conflict they like to side with the underdog. It fits their narrative I suppose. While I dislike them, I don’t suspect them of anti-semitism, it goes against their core beliefs. If anything, they like to cuddle Jews like any ethnic minority, as long as they are a minority, as they are in my country.

    Israel has an annoying tendency to equate criticism of Israel with anti-semitism. In many cases this is right, as there is a lot of anti-semitism that masquerades as criticism of Israel, but it is not nearly always justified. In part this must be calculated use of a useful cudgel, but in some ways it is counterproductive. It is possible to be critical of some of Israel’s actions whilst still being a strong supporter. Tarring those with the label of anti-semite is counterproductive (and hurtful).

  5. Martijn,

    I should have said earlier (and I haven’t read fully the discussion since) that my comment about the article not mentioning Egypt was nothing against you. It was a reasonable article, but without pointing out that Egypt was a part of the blockade, it keeps the narrative as a Israel/Palistinian issue. That’s not the case. This is Israel stopping aid to a terrorist organization. An organization that even another Arab/Muslim country is trying to prevent receiving arms.

    It appears now, with Egypt withdrawing form the blockade, that the stunt worked as planned. Lots of Israeli’s will die in the coming months because of this. Ludicrous claims of “acts of war” will only justify those deaths, and thus increase the intensity and magnitude of them. And of course, that was the intention of the “humanitarian peace activitist” all along.

  6. I should have said earlier (and I haven’t read fully the discussion since) that my comment about the article not mentioning Egypt was nothing against you.

    No worries, I didn’t think it was.

    It was a reasonable article, but without pointing out that Egypt was a part of the blockade, it keeps the narrative as a Israel/Palistinian issue.

    A very good point.

    And of course, that was the intention of the “humanitarian peace activitist” all along.

    Yes, but it goes much further than that, as I’ve said before. Recent developments should worry everybody in the West, not just because those who would harm Israel would want to harm the rest of us (that too of course), but because that is what they are trying to do already. The future of Turkey is of strategic importance to all of us.

  7. The Lusitania incident was important because it shifted the diplomatic environment against Imperial Germany, particularly within the US.

    The Germans had issued a naval blockade on the UK, they had
    troops at war, millions were dying and they even posted ads in the papers
    telling people do not enter British Waters.

    The Lusitania was under orders like most british convoys to not defer to submarines but attack and the British were arming merchantmen.

    Lusitania’s manifests revealed she was hauling military supplies.

    yet, the deaths of thousands of passengers dramatically altered the political environment.

    Now the British had an incident with the Exodus, which this case tracks.
    3 died and the ship was forcibly seized.

  8. The future of Turkey is of strategic importance to all of us.

    Agreed. Before it was taken down, I carefully read the Islamic State website. This website was devoted to explaining the ultimate goals of reforming the Khalifa, and the strategy to acheive it. Turkey was a key component of the reformation process.

  9. Jack seems to be harboring severe misconceptions with respect to the laws of war, blockade, and treatment of merchant vessels.

    Yes, Germany was blockading the British Isles. No, that doesn’t allow them to sink merchantmen or passenger liners without warning, no matter how many newspaper ads they purchase.

    No, Laws of War with respect to blockade & Prize Rules do not recognize any distinction with respect to resistance when attacking the target without warning.

    Yes, the Lusitania was carrying a large number of .303 rifle cartridges. That means the ship was liable for capture during a blockade. It does not mean the attacking craft may do so without warning.

    The Laws of War state that a ship carrying contraband through a blockade may be captured or destroyed, but in the latter case all passenger & crew must be safely taken beforehand, and provided for.

    Even a cursory examination of the Laws of War in this case shows that the U-20 attacked a passenger liner without warning, or any attempt to succor the passengers & crew.

    This is ironically relevant, in that Israel was blockading Gaza, was executing a close & effective blockade, and made every effort to capture vessels according to the Laws of War.

  10. It is about detaching Israel from its allies and Turkey from the West.

    Turkey detached itself from the west years ago by electing Islamic leadership. You may remember they put American lives in jeopardy by not allowing a northern route into Iraq?

    True allies of Israel are not going to be fooled by this.

    NATO has served it’s purpose. It’s time for a new organization to deal with the new realities.

  11. Turkey detached itself from the west years ago by electing Islamic leadership.

    Turkey is too strategically important to give up on just like that. Note that the AK Party has made major reforms in order to qualify for EU membership. It too wants to be part of the EU.

    Also note that the “peace activists” want you to react the way you did.

  12. You have a point Martijn. Turkey is strategically important (more so to Russia than us.) I just think it’s not worth the game they’re playing. People choose what they choose and that should have repercussion (as it’s had since we elected Obama.)

    Islam should be on the trash heap of history. I recommend bulldozers. I want allies that are allies. I’d rather have less important allies that I can depend on. There are a lot of good Turkish people and I hate the idea of them having to live in an oppressive regime. I expect they will leave the country.

  13. Tarring those with the label of anti-semite is counterproductive (and hurtful).

    Some bigots in America want to kill black people. Some would merely like to keep them separated from whites. Some would like to, “ship ’em back to Africa,” and other (like those in the Donkey party) would simply like them to, “keep their place,” voting the right way and ruthlessly excoriate those who don’t. Can we safely call all these views anti-black?

Comments are closed.