One of my commenters says, in re my statement that Israel had cordoned off Gaza, and that people in Gaza were suffering therefrom:
And in any event, the Allied bombing of Dresden is a fact. So if I dwell on it, while ignoring anything that led to it, then I guess I'm properly neutral.
This is a very good example. When I note that the allies bombed the hell out of Dresden, and that a lot of civilians were killed in the bombing, am I a Nazi sympathizer if I don't go into the causes and roots of World War II? Yes, I realize that many people on both sides would like me to attach an editorial to each and every statement of fact about Israel/Palestine noting that their opponents are a bunch of amoral butchers, but I've already gone into why I'm not going to do so.
My repeated objection, repeadedly ignored, is that I'm not sold on the "fact" that Israel is responsible (or, at least, fully responsible) for the humanitarian crises when the border fence that was destroyed was on the Egyptian border. Is there some reason why the Egyptians can't (as opposed to "don't want to") sell food and fuel to their Arab neighbors?
Rob, borders are controlled by two countries. Not one. The Egyptians control the Egyptian side of the border, but the Israelis control the Palestinian side (as they control all of Palestine's borders). And they have closed those borders. The wisdom and fairness of that decision is a matter of dispute. But the fact that it is happening is not. Megan's commenters are acting as though repeating that fact is a bunch of propaganda. But it's the case-- Israel controls the borders, sea lanes and airspace of the territories. Right now, they're being closed by Israel. That's all.
From the original Guardian article in the orignal post:
"Gaza's ruling Hamas faction patrols the border with Egypt..."
Really, if the IDF had "closed" the border, how the hell are all those people crossing? And what were the Israeli soldiers doing when the walls were being cut and the explosives laid?
Rob, the blockade is at Israel's request--you may google "Israel demands Egypt control its Gaza border" if you don't believe me. The fact that Israel is demanding that Egypt close a hole on its own border indicates that Israel is somehow causally involved, no?
At any rate, you don't need to take my word for it. Go read the Israeli press. They all seem to think that Israel is trying to keep Gazans bottled in, and goods out, in order to pressure Hamas to shut down rocket attacks on the South.
One could use this to make a pretty good argument that the humanitarian crisis is the fault of Hamas, not Israel. Of all the possible responses to suicide bombers and rocket attacks on civilians, a blockade is pretty mild.
I agree with you totally, btw, just giving you shit for that unfortunate segue.
Rob, the blockade is at Israel's request--you may google "Israel demands Egypt control its Gaza border" if you don't believe me.
If in fact Israel said to Egypt "stop all food and fuel from going into Gaza," and if in fact the reaction of the Egyptian government to such a request from the Zionist Entity was to click its collective heels and say "Yes, sir!" then your first post is reasonable and neutral.
They want the border closed now because of weapons smuggling; that is not unreasonable.
One could use this to make a pretty good argument that the humanitarian crisis is the fault of Hamas, not Israel. Of all the possible responses to suicide bombers and rocket attacks on civilians, a blockade is pretty mild.
And lord knows that the innocent Palestinians who have never been a party to any of that need to pay for those crimes.
I simply cannot enter the headspace of people who (rightly) believe that innocent Israelis shouldn't be made to pay for the actions of some Israelis, but can't apply that moral reasoning in the other direction. I am so tired of these arguments of moral relativism. According to people like this, absolutely any treatment of the Palestinians is permissible because of suicide bombings undertaken by some small number of terrorists.
Keep moving those goalposts, Rob.
Egypt hasn't the power to stop food and fuel into Gaza-most of the main distribution points go through Israel.
Freddie, how am I moving the goalposts? My point has always been that even if Israel cuts off the Gaza-Israel border, there are other avenues for staving off a humanitarian crisis. Some of them have been cut off by Israel--sea and air, apparently--but Gaza also shares a border with Egypt, which (contrary to your assertions) is not controlled on either side by Israel. Nor do I think it reasonable to believe that the Jews have so thoroughly penetrated the Egyptian government that they can be blamed for its construction of border walls or refusal to send humanitarian supplies.
Now, perhaps it really is impossible for Egypt to meet the needs of Gaza, because there aren't good enough roads or something. If that's true, then perhaps it makes sense to blame Israel. But the post that touched off this fury simply put the responsibility on Israel with no discussion, and while it's possible that both Freddie and our gracious hostess are sufficiently familiar with the details of the Egyptian highway system that they think such knowledge can simply be assumed, the rest of us looked at the article and wondered what Israel had to do with walls on the Egyptian border.
One need not delve in to the complexities of the Mandate years to explain that.
Israel has tried to avoid harming innicent Palestinians... that's why the terrorists like to hide among civilians. It works. Given how hard it has been for Israel to get rid of the terrorists, a siege seems like a pretty good way to encourage the non-terrorists to do something.
Not much else has worked. Do you have a better suggestion? Aside from capitulating?
Not sure what all the liberal hand-wringing is about. Surely the Israeli government's foremost obligation is to defend *its own* citizens from attack. If the Mexicans were regularly shooting rockets into El Paso from across the border would we really think a blockade was out of order?
Rob, all of the best information that we have from the media, including from the Israeli media-- even the conservative Israeli media-- tell us two things. One, that the Israeli government is responsible for a blockade that is cutting off Gaza from food and fuel. This isn't particularly controversial at all, and is being discussed freely by the Israeli government. The second claim is that this blockade is causing considerable discomfort in Gaza. Again, not particularly controversial, although the degree of the discomfort, I'm sure, is at issue.
Now, within those things, there is plenty of room for disagreement, as well we know. The wisdom of this action, the legality under international law, the morality-- those things are all up to dispute. But it seems to me, Rob, that you're being an obstructionist on this, questioning these basic facts that are being reported by every major news organization in the world and largely corroborated by the Israeli government. I guess what I mean is that while I expect an argument about the moral consequences of these facts, I find your constant disputes of the consensus facts to be doing no good for anyone.
And let me ask you this. Suppose the reports weren't of an Israeli blockade but of a Palestinian suicide bombing. Would you ask as many questions of that as you do now? Would you be so resistant to the conventional wisdom? If Megan said "A Palestinian suicide bomber killed 10 people today," would you question her wording, looking for hints of bias? I wonder.
Not sure what all the liberal hand-wringing is about. Surely the Israeli government's foremost obligation is to defend *its own* citizens from attack. If the Mexicans were regularly shooting rockets into El Paso from across the border would we really think a blockade was out of order?
No. But if we had occupied Mexico for 40 years and it had caused us so much loss, we might consider withdrawing.
Freddie, let's approach this from another angle: the US has embargoed Cuba for a long time, but it has not blockaded Cuba, except for once a long time ago. And in that time, we have occasionally had the pleasure of having someone or other blame the US for the poor economic situation there because of its cruel refusal to trade with Castro.
But Cuba is free to trade with the rest of the world, and does so, so its poor economic situation most likely does not result from the American embargo.
Now to Gaza: Israel is surely embargoing it. Taking your word for it (which may not be wise), there is also a blockade of the sea lanes and air routes. Is this the cause of the crisis there? If trade can flow freely through Egypt, then no. If trade cannot flow freely through Egypt, then the question is: why not? And if it turns out that Egypt is also engaged in an embargo, then they should answer for it just as surely as Israel--more so, since Hamas does not seek the destruction of Egypt or regularly attack it.
If the basic facts are so obvious, then I would expect that 1) you'd get them right (like Hamas patrolling the border) and 2) you'd be able to summarize them in a single post.
Hey Freddie,
The Israelis have withdrawn. Gaza is Judenfrei as the Palis requested, but the mayhem goes on. Whether you like Israel or hate it, the fact is that they will prioritize the lives of their people over the comfort of those who seek to kill them. Just the way it is.
What the *@#$@#! I thought we were talking about Dresden ;)
Seriously, about Dresden, I have just finished reading Vonnegut's Mother Night, and it and (of course) Slaughterhouse Five made me think about Dresden, and the moral implications thereof. Not in the set-up-the-barricades way, more of a quiet contemplation of horrible things. So it goes.
Rob, I don't have time to go into this, but please, go watch the Israeli government on YouTube. They're saying what I'm saying: this is their foreign policy, and Egypt is being reluctantly pressured by the US and Israel into going along. This is not a fact in dispute by anyone but you, I swear. Whether or not Egypt should--and the policy disputes are many and varied--it is a relief valve, not the main supply route for Gaza, for the very good reason that Egypt and Israel didn't trade much while they were at war, so the infrastructure for Gaza tends to run through Israel. None of this is in dispute. No one is suggesting that Egypt has some sort of secret fuel oil pipeline that it's closing to Gaza, or massive food transshipment facilities that it is declining to deploy.
This is not a fact in dispute by anyone but you, I swear.
It's not really in dispute by me, in the sense that I'm making a bunch of factual assertions related to the available infrastructure; I know nothing about it. I just wanted to know why Israel is being blamed for a wall on the Egyptian border. If the answer is that the wall doesn't matter, there are not enough roads anyway, then fine.
"But Cuba is free to trade with the rest of the world, and does so, so its poor economic situation most likely does not result from the American embargo."
Doesn't the bulk of the Cuban diaspora live in the US? Poor countries have largely relied on diaspora investment to drive economic growth. China, for instance, saw its growth jump after reforms largely due to Southeast Asian, Hong Kong and Taiwanese investment. It took a while for Western nations to invest in China in a significant manner. Countries like Ghana, one of the fastest-growing and most stable African economies, receive more funds in diaspora remittances than the government receives in aid. Something similar has happened to a lesser extent with India (think of all of the Kerala residents who end up working in Dubai and sending money back home). Britain, for instance, isn't exactly awash in Cuban cultural influence the way Florida is. Geography is also a factor in trade and investment. After all, Canada has a smaller economy than most other major economies but geography makes them our top trading partner.
Just because the Egyptian government is run by heartless bastards doesn't mean the Israeli government isn't responsible for its own actions. Democracies are supposed to be better than corrupt, cruel dictatorships, after all.
"..countries have largely relied on diaspora investment to drive economic growth."
This is the model that Israel, and Egypt, should be on, as well, replacing their hands from our Treasuries purse..
Treasury's purse, obviously..
Too bad we're not nearly as 'Free Market' as we're led to believe..
There are two types of people who dwell on Dresden:
1. Those who try to reconcile moral dilemmas associated with the bombing, and
2. Those who seek evidence to support pro-Nazi conclusions.
Most people (I hope) fall into Category #1. In fact, given the near-universal hatred of Nazis, it can be safely assumed that the *default* position is #1.
Now, onto Gaza.
Unlike the Nazi "cause", there is widespread support for (or, at least agnosticism towards) the Palestinian "cause".
Therefore, when one talks about the Gaza "issues" in isolation, there is a decent chance that they genuinely do not see what the real problem is.
The Palestinian/Arab goal has been to finish the Jewish genocide started by Hitler; i.e., making the final solution genuinely final. From the anti-semitic textbooks to the continuous threats of destroying Israel to the incessant murdering of civilians, these people say that they want to kill Jews, and they mean it. They have the will, but fortunately, not the way. Yet.
(And, incidentally, if they get their way, don't expect them to establish a Switzerland in the Middle East. If the 9/11 celebrations in "Palestine" were of any reminder, it shouldn't be to hard to figure out where they will direct their efforts next.)
So, dwelling on "poor Palestinians" without context is actually quite suspect. Last time around, Europe stood by and watched the Jews being taken away. It's therefore easy to imagine the defenders of the "Palestinians" behave in a similar fashion for the next attempt. (Although, next time, it will probably end with quite the big bang.)
Be careful of who you feel sorry for. Given half a chance, you too might be at the receiving end of their "frustration" some day.
The laws of war, which really the combatants only need to be concerned with as Curtis LeMay who ordered the frebombing of Tokyo pointed out if the winning side supports them, allow for retribution outide of normally accepted conduct to demonstrate that the other sides breaking of 'the laws of war' will not be tolerated. This is from a book by our chief judge at Nuremberg. Thus Dresen is lawful based on the German bombing of Rotterdam, Coventry and London. That doesn't make it thoughtful, 'right' in some other sense, but does make it lawful. The legally constituted government of Gaza is supporting rocketing of civilians in Israel and the Israeli response is less than in kind. Where is the need for something that feels like an infinite series? It seems to me that the Gazans are comfortable with Egypt. Heh, that's more than you can say for the residents of Protugese Goa in a pocket of land next to India. Give Mubarek Gaza.
Is the Power Off in Gaza? [Noah Pollak]
Based on all the hysterical news stories today, almost all of which are complemented by gratuitous pictures of Gazans posing by candlelight, one would think so. The LA Times (headline: "Gaza dark amid Israeli blockade"), the AP, Reuters, and, of course, the Guardian, have all run such stories. (It should be mentioned that in the rogues' gallery of Middle East reportage, the Guardian's scribbler in Israel, a hack by the name of Rory McCarthy, is possibly the worst — just about everything he writes from here is grotesquely cheap and unfair and dripping with a contempt for Israel that McCarthy barely bothers to conceal.)
Anyway, the contours of this story are as follows: Israel supplies about two-thirds of Gaza's electricity, an amount that, contrary to the news stories, quite simply has not been reduced. The rest of Gaza's power is generated at an electricity station inside Gaza. Hamas chose yesterday to shut that power station down, in protest of Israel's reductions in diesel fuel supplies to Gaza. The voluntary shutdown by Hamas of a plant that supplies less than a third of Gaza's electricity is the source for all the lachrymose photos of children sitting in candle-lit rooms in Gaza and sensational news stories of Israel's "collective punishment" of Gaza.
Of course the question becomes: Why did Hamas shut down Gaza's only power station? Look at the international media reportage from Israel today and you have your answer. And then the question becomes: Who is worse, those who create propaganda, or those who help disseminate it? Over to you, Rory McCarthy.
Prior to the first Intifada, Gaza had strong economic relations with Israel, with trade and particularly workers crossing the border. This was gradually curtailed and stopped after suicide bombers were smuggled in along with the workers. Now, after 15 years of terrorist attacks, Gaza is surrounded by a fence with armed guards - for good reason.
||
Megan, Freddie, Rob...
I did, as Megan suggested, google "Israel demands Egypt control its Gaza border"
None of the top hits seem to say anything like that, and most of them go like this:
In 2006, when Hamas was elected, Egypt and Israel both closed their borders with Gaza. Now that the Egypt border has been breached, Israel is tentatively happy, thinking that now Egypt will be more responsible for Gaza. Egypt responded with "no way, we're putting things back the way they were."
Now like Rob, I'm not coming at this with a lot of baggage from one side and trying to assert some crazy agenda, I was simply unaware of what you and Freddie seem to claim is a completely uncontroversial fact.
But in our attempts to discuss it, we've gotten nothing more than repeated assertions that "TRUST ME, NOBODY disagrees with this. Really. No no, TRUST ME you're wrong."
I know we seem to be placing a burden of proof on you and you're reluctant to accept the "homework assignment", but Google did not say what you seem to assume it would. Could either of you provide an actual link to some sort of credible article explaining that Egypt only closed its Gaza border because Israel asked them to?
You're right as far as you go, Megan, but IMHO you don't go far enough. What would you propose as an alternative to the blockade?
Leaving aside the history of provocations and responses, the facts on the ground now is that the government of Gaza, such as it is, is at a state of war with Israel. Ignoring yesterday, what is Israel supposed to do about today and tomorrow?
I'm honestly curious, and am hopeful that the blockade isn't the best solution. I just can't think of any better ones myself.
The most plausible alternative is probably to come up with some kind of monitored crossing at the Egyptian border that lets food, medicine and consumer goods through, but stops most weapons. This has the advantage of being more humane to the Gazans, but the disadvantage of allowing the Gazan government to continue to wage daily war on Israel while supporting its people though the international welfare dole. It *might* be the best of a bunch of bad options, but I'm not confident enough to say that I would support it if the Gazans were firing rockets at me.
Megan: The flaw in your argument is that there aren't large numbers of commentators and world "leaders" pretending that the Germans had no responsibility for starting WWII.
Israel wanting Egypt to control the border--because it has been a major source of weapons for Hamas--is not the same as wanting it to close the border and participate in a siege.
I'm not coming at this with a lot of baggage from one side and trying to assert some crazy agenda
Oh, I definitely have a crazy agenda, but it has nothing to do with Gaza.
welcome back to USCableNewsCorp... I've just been handed this bulletin... several large, vocal coalitions of readers have hijacked a blog entry seemingly about the nature of news coverage in the United States... it appears that they've commandeered it and have dragged it into a messy, centuries-old conflict... cleanup crews should be arriving shortly to tend to the irreconcilable differences scattered about the superhighway...
please stay tuned to our program... after a short commercial break we will show you how you can spice up that stale old pound cake recipie...