Jump to content

A New Middle Eastern Dynamic and the Coming of the Turks...., again


christo-f

Recommended Posts

Said this in a convo elsewhere in regards to the Israeli action boarding the Turkish flotilla and figured it would be worth kicking off the discussion here with.

 

 

 

 

This is Turkey fucking with Israel.

 

Turkey is moving to become the new Middle Eastern pole and they are doing that by attacking Israel. Look at Erdogan's lashing out at Peres over Cast Shield for the real start of it all.

 

There were provocateurs on the vessels, soon you will see footage of soldiers fast roping down on to the boats and being immediately set upon with iron bars. The shooting didn't start until they were given no choice but to defend themselves. Israel was placed in a position where they either had to give up their control over Gaza and capitulate to Turkey or invite global condemnation and retain their hold on the area.

 

The US is being fucked with by Turkey as well. The US needs Turkey in the region to balance against Iran and to take over Iraq when the US pulls out instead of handing it to Iran. The US doesn't need Israel so much these days. That relationship is a Cold War relic and is quickly moving out of vogue. The US wants ISrael to STFU and stop developing in East Jerusalem/West Bank and stop giving the militants that reason to recruit and fight. Israel wants to retain its autonomy and not be told what to do by anyone and the left and right don't want to fall victim to the religious zealots either. So the US is already off Israel right now (remember that the last Netanyahu/Obama meeting was not a friendly one) but Bibi is headed to Wash. tomorrow and that will be a very telling meeting as to how the US is going to move forward in the region.

 

There is nothing to say that the US won't eventually dump Israel for Turkey (and even Iran). All the US needs is one power to compete with the other regional powers in order to keep their focus in the region rather than looking to spread influence abroad in a way that may fuck with US interests.

 

The only people that have an interest in seeing the Palestinian issue settled is the Palestinians and Iran. The Egyptians don't want to see Gaza as a state, the Jordanians and Syrians don't want to see the WB as a state. Israel is a country that is stuck in the coastal low lands and without the central massif (West Bank) has no strategic depth and is terribly vulnerable to attack. Iran only wants a Palestinian state so they can then use them as a tool and launching pad against Israel. Tehran only wants Israel to be castrated so Iran is then the regional power.

 

No one gives a shit about the peace process. The US is only pressuring Israel on the issue because they need Islamic support for their goals of settling Iraq and Afghanistan so they can pull out without handing either to Iran or Pakistan. Israel is quickly becoming a whipping boy for other people's agenda.

 

Don't hold your breath for a peace deal any time soon, no one even wants one. Do keep your eye out for the Turks becoming a power, though. Was only 3-4 generations ago that they were an empire....

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This forum is supported by the 12ozProphet Shop, so go buy a shirt and help support!
This forum is brought to you by the 12ozProphet Shop.
This forum is brought to you by the 12oz Shop.
  • Replies 136
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

No doubt the whole "mission" was designed to provoke an isreali reaction. Their response was brutal and excessive. It will put them in the international spotlight, alienate some allies and call into question their strategies.

Turkey will be pissed. And I don't see how the US could support the action.

There's opportunity for the Palestinians to use the situation ti their advantage, but I don't think they have anyone to lead them effectively.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

There were provocateurs on the vessels, soon you will see footage of soldiers fast roping down on to the boats and being immediately set upon with iron bars. ...

 

....The shooting didn't start until they were given no choice but to defend themselves.

 

While i agree with you generally on all the strategic stuff my opinion on this one is different.

 

These were international waters. The IDF has absolutely no business boarding ships stuffed with whatever there. They behaved like pirates and got treated like such. If i had been on the ship i would have tried to throw them off the deck as well. According to Israeli spokesmen the "provocateurs" used iron clubs and fruitknives to "provoke" fully armed soldiers. Imho thats completely ridiculous, they were just defending themselves and their ship against an armed attack!

And why the dead people, a professional commando unit would have just disabled them but not fucking KILLED 19 international peace activists, ffs.

Also, on the ship were 2 German congresswomen, a British nobel peace price laureate, a prominent Swedish author and several other officials from various countries, these persons are hardly "islamist terrorists" like Israeli p-r agents claim. Wtf is wrong with the Israeli gov and the IDF, they behave like lunatics.

 

 

BTW A few months ago we had a little discussion regarding a possible Israeli strike on Iran. I mentioned 3 German-built (and payed) U-boats Dolphin Class that could operate in the Persian Gulf. You said they would not move there because they can not pass the Suez canal, if i remember correctly. Well, guess what. I just learned that these vessels are on the way to the gulf, although i'm not sure whether they'll pass through the Suez canal or choose another route. Technically, the latter is definitely not a challenge for neither the boat itself nor the crew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While i agree with you generally on all the strategic stuff my opinion on this one is different.

 

These were international waters. The IDF has absolutely no business boarding ships stuffed with whatever there. They behaved like pirates and got treated like such. If i had been on the ship i would have tried to throw them off the deck as well. According to Israeli spokesmen the "provocateurs" used iron clubs and fruitknives to "provoke" fully armed soldiers. Imho thats completely ridiculous, they were just defending themselves and their ship against an armed attack!

 

Oh come on dude, you've never seemed naive before. You really think these people were acting against pirate-like behaviour and just defending their ship? Why didn't the same thing happen on all boats then? The shit fight was mostly contained to one boat, why? Regardless, they would have received the same response no matter if in Israeli or International waters. That was their intent before they set off from Turkey. Secondly, Israel needed to hit at night for tactical advantage. If they'd waited till the next night the boats would have already been in port or had been off-loading to Hamas vessels for half a day. For tactical advantage it had to be done then and there and as I said before, the end result would have been no different had they done it in Israeli waters.

 

 

And why the dead people, a professional commando unit would have just disabled them but not fucking KILLED 19 international peace activists, ffs.

Having experience in matters a little similar to what happened here I would argue that your position is overly simplistic. However I would not disagree that there does seem to have been a loss of control here. But not being on the ground I cannot say as to where the blame lies for this.

 

 

 

Also, on the ship were 2 German congresswomen, a British nobel peace price laureate, a prominent Swedish author and several other officials from various countries, these persons are hardly "islamist terrorists" like Israeli p-r agents claim.

So that means that because these people seemed peaceful enough then every other person on the vessel was too? How many of these people that you mention were on the deck and wounded/killed as opposed to staying below deck and remaining calm? That is not a rhetorical question.

 

 

BTW A few months ago we had a little discussion regarding a possible Israeli strike on Iran. I mentioned 3 German-built (and payed) U-boats Dolphin Class that could operate in the Persian Gulf. You said they would not move there because they can not pass the Suez canal, if i remember correctly. Well, guess what. I just learned that these vessels are on the way to the gulf, although i'm not sure whether they'll pass through the Suez canal or choose another route. Technically, the latter is definitely not a challenge for neither the boat itself nor the crew.

 

I remember that we discussed it and I am also aware that these vessels are said to be moving to the PG. Would be better to continue that convo in the same vicinity as previously held so we can assess what has been said and continue on from there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yeah, that interested me too.

 

Bibi would love a friendly and welcoming chat with Obama right now more than ever. The handshaking photos and wonderful words in a post-discussion press conference would be a huge show of support for Israel. That meeting was planned to try and wash away the aftermath of Israel announcing the construction in East Jerusalem during Biden's visit and the ensuing (lack of) welcome that Bibi received at the White House when he visited last time.

 

At first it was announced that the trip had been cancelled and that he would return to Israel. Then it was on again (I'd say that a rethink made them decide that they would try for US support) and then another subsequent cancellation. That final cancellation makes me think that they were told "Don't even think of coming here right now, U is teh lep3rZ!!1!".

 

Also take note of what just happened in NY at the UN. The UNSC made a statement condemning the acts that resulted in deaths, called for an impartial investigation and for the vessels and people to be released immediately.

 

That means the US didn't block this or even insert that there be an explanation from anyone else that is usually called for to balance the issue. That would be like Churchill asking for a full investigation from FDR after Pearl Harbour was hit. Allies back allies regardless of who was in the right or the wrong.

 

This is how the Turkish/Palestinian wedge between Israel and the US works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh come on dude, you've never seemed naive before.

I hope that hasn't changed.

 

You really think these people were acting against pirate-like behaviour and just defending their ship?

I think that the majority of the passengers were peace activists from various countries who got angry that their ship got assaulted in international waters. There might have been some turk provocateurs on board - if so, the most dangerous weapons they had were iron clubs, knives and tools from the machinery room - by all means def. NOT a valid reason for a pro commando to kill at least 10 and injure 60 others, even at night.

 

How many of these people that you mention were on the deck and wounded/killed as opposed to staying below deck and remaining calm? That is not a rhetorical question.

 

The reason why i mentioned the celebs on board: the flotilla was declared as food, medicals etc. transporter beforehand and the IDF staff certainly knew that there would be 2 German congresswoman, Henning Mankell plus a Nobel laureate on board. This alone should have been a reason for the IDF to let the flotilla pass the blockade for once even IF some provocateurs and weapons (imho HIGHLY unlikely in this case) were hidden on it. This way Israel would have avoided an open diplomatic row with Turkey and the UN and scored positive p-r points within the western public, media and peace movement because they allowed to help Palestinian civilians. But no, they had to board those aid ships in international waters and act like fucking Rambos.

 

That means the US didn't block this or even insert that there be an explanation

Turkey had pressed for international led investigations in the security council. The U.S. watered it down to an "impartial inquiry" (note the absence of the word "international").

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I think that the majority of the passengers were peace activists from various countries who got angry that their ship got assaulted in international waters. There might have been some turk provocateurs on board - if so, the most dangerous weapons they had were iron clubs, knives and tools from the machinery room - by all means def. NOT a valid reason for a pro commando to kill at least 10 and injure 60 others, even at night.

 

Mate, iron bars, clubs and knives are still deadly weapons. Just because you have more efficient weapons than your enemy doesn't mean you're going to allow him to beat you to death or cut your head off. I can tell you straight up that the Mamara had people on board who's mission it was to provoke an incident and draw Israel in to the trap of over-reaction. Stupidly, Israel did just that. I also won't defend the IDF as I do not know exactly what occurred bar the footage that I have seen. however what I have seen is soldiers roping on to a boat and being hit with iron bars and knives whilst their weapons were not yet in their hands. Why was it that the violence was not replicated on the other boats? I'd suggest because there were people aboard the Mamara aiming to cause violent confrontation. If not you would expect the violence to have been replicated on the other vessels.

 

In the text books and historical writings of guerilla war (Mao, Che, etc.) it is a constant that the smaller/guerilla force baits the larger conventional force in to disproportionate responses that elicit sympathy from the general community. This is to promote financial, tactical and moral support from the civilian populace or in the least, sympathy for your cause. The Palestinians have been playing this violin for years and the Israelis have continuously danced along to its tune. Hasn't really changed much but that's the play here. And in this example, the results are pretty obvious.

 

Just to be sure, I'm not supporting the ISraeli action or position, just as I do not support the Palestinian/Turkish. I'm just calling it how I see it.

 

 

The reason why i mentioned the celebs on board: the flotilla was declared as food, medicals etc. transporter beforehand and the IDF staff certainly knew that there would be 2 German congresswoman, Henning Mankell plus a Nobel laureate on board. This alone should have been a reason for the IDF to let the flotilla pass the blockade for once even IF some provocateurs and weapons (imho HIGHLY unlikely in this case) were hidden on it. This way Israel would have avoided an open diplomatic row with Turkey and the UN and scored positive p-r points within the western public, media and peace movement because they allowed to help Palestinian civilians. But no, they had to board those aid ships in international waters and act like fucking Rambos.

 

But that completely ignores Israel's strategic position. Regardless of whether Israel has provoked it and who the holy land belongs to, Israel is constantly attacked from within the Gazan border (rocket last night, two gunmen today and years of suicide bombs) and Gazans are attacked by Israelis. Now, remember, we are not talking about right or wrong or cause and effect. We are talking about the current situation of deadly attacks on sovereign territory, from both sides. So it's a low level conflict situation and Israel has a responsibility to protect its people and part of that logical process is blockading the coastal approach that Iran, Syria and other sympathetic elements have tried and succeeded in shipping weapons that are then used against Israeli interests.

 

Israel has a duty to its citizens to blockade the coast in an attempt to deny the Palestinians access to weapons just the same as any country at war with another will try and blockade their enemy. If Israel let these boats through the blockade is dropped. Firstly because Israel cannot take the risk that the declaration of the shipment being only food was honest and that the European MPs had the training and experience to act as customs and intelligence agents and know exactly what is and isn't aboard that vessel. It's obvious that they are already sympathetic to your enemy, how could you then go and trust their judgement and word on the risk of national security??!!

 

Secondly, they let these boats through and next month there will be thirty. I don't think I need to explain how this would constitute loss of control and a massive threat to Israel's national security.

 

 

 

Turkey had pressed for international led investigations in the security council. The U.S. watered it down to an "impartial inquiry" (note the absence of the word "international").

 

Yeah, I don't doubt that but the fact that it passed is already significant and uncommon for the US on matters concerning ISrael. Also, the call for an international investigation is an attempt to force Israel's back further against the wall. There is no way that any country will allow foreigners to conduct an investigation on the intelligence, special forces operations and overall matters of national security. It was obviously never going to happen, no country would accept that and Turkey is leveraging everything it can, as any other country in its position would.

 

 

This is all a test of wills between two regional competitors. Whoever slips up will lose. As it stands right now Israel was caught slipping by Turkey/Palestine on this one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The whole ordeal was either fucked up or fucked up, yet they still try to play it off like they had no other choice and what they did wasn't a total mess. I mean I really really fucking wonder what their original objective was.

 

 

"GET THROWN IN THE SEA, GET OVERTAKEN BY CIVILIANS, OPEN FIRE"

 

or

 

"CREATE DIPLOMATIC SCANDAL"

 

or

 

"JUMP IN THE MIDDLE OF WELL ORGANIZED, PREDICTABLE CIVILIANS WITH RIFLES, DONT SHOOT ANYONE, DONT LOSE RIFLE"

 

or

 

"JUMP IN THE MIDDLE OF CHEESEBOLLAH WITH RIFLES, DONT LOSE RIFLE"

 

or

 

"JUMP IN THE MIDDLE OF CHEESEBOLLAH, GET BEAT UP, THROWN IN THE SEA, LOSE RIFLE, TRY TO GET THE WHOLE TEAM SHOT AND/OR STABBED"

 

 

Possibilities are endless and I'm getting confused by my own sarcasm.

But if my son, friend or relative was one of those troops I'd be pretty fucking angry at whoever ordered that "operation"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If Israel sucks at one thing more than anything else its propaganda and not walking into political traps. I know someone who is a part of the Foreign Ministry and he feels powerless at times.

 

This was a set up from the beginning. Israel offered to allow the ships through a different port and delivered the aid, which they did. The last ship was clearly meant to draw political reproach. Israel definitely knew this too but didn't prepare properly for the event or fallout.

 

I think there is a very low opinion of the USA in Israel right now both with officials and civilians. It's ironic that the only people who supported Israel's move was Cyprus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree with almost everything Christo says, it is clear that Israel is ran by a bunch of idiots who seem to have no idea how to improve the world's opinion of their country.

 

The action that Israel took was, as normal, completely over the top and completely dispropotionate. I cannot agree with the action that Israel takes in pretty much any instance, due to their complete inability to accept blame, or even tell the truth about a situation.

 

Personally I feel that Israel is now on borrowed time, they don't have as much support from the west that they have always had, and things will get more difficult for them I feel.

 

Plus I cannot stand the way that Israel treats the palestinians, so what if they fire rockets into Israel, they knock peoples homes down, rehouse them in slums, cut off their means of living, anyone in that situation would fight back against the people oppressing them, because that is all that Israel do.

 

You would think that as a people that have suffered a lot through history that Israel would have some compasion, but they seem to be the most heartless bastards there are (the government not the people, it isn't the peoples fault they voted scum into power)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mate, iron bars, clubs and knives are still deadly weapons.

Guns, tasers, grenades aren't?

Just because you have more efficient weapons than your enemy doesn't mean you're going to allow him to beat you to death or cut your head off.

Just because you have inferior weapons than an attacking pirate doesn't mean you're going to allow him to kill you and capture your ship.

I can tell you straight up that the Mamara had people on board who's mission it was to provoke an incident and draw Israel in to the trap of over-reaction.

Would be nice if you could provide a source on that, if you are allowed to. As long as you cannot i have all right to call bullshit.

however what I have seen is soldiers roping on to a boat and being hit with iron bars and knives whilst their weapons were not yet in their hands.

What iv'e seen so far is soldiers roping on several boats in international waters and behaving like pirates.

Why was it that the violence was not replicated on the other boats? I'd suggest because there were people aboard the Mamara aiming to cause violent confrontation. If not you would expect the violence to have been replicated on the other vessels.

Well, it was. Except that only the IDF committed violence on the other vessels.

from guardian.co.uk:

 

Dimitris Gielalis, who had been aboard the Sfendoni, told reporters: "Suddenly from everywhere we saw inflatables coming at us, and within seconds fully equipped commandos came up on the boat. They came up and used plastic bullets, we had beatings, we had electric shocks, any method we can think of, they used."

 

Michalis Grigoropoulos, who was at the wheel of the Free Mediterranean, said: "We were in international waters. The Israelis acted like pirates, completely out of the normal way that they conduct nautical exercises, and seized our ship. They took us hostage, pointing guns at our heads; they descended from helicopters and fired tear gas and bullets. There was absolutely nothing we could do … Those who tried to resist forming a human ring on the bridge were given electric shocks."

 

smaller/guerilla force baits the larger conventional force in to disproportionate responses that elicit sympathy from the general community. This is to promote financial, tactical and moral support from the civilian populace or in the least, sympathy for your cause.

An inferior army in terms of numbers and technology has no alternative. That neutral obversers may side with the underdogs is a small strategic/psychologic advantage that comes automatically with being an underdog.

And in this example, the results are pretty obvious.

In this example, nothing is obvious so far.

Just to be sure, I'm not supporting the ISraeli action or position, just as I do not support the Palestinian/Turkish. I'm just calling it how I see it.

Well then you see that incident just like the Israeli gov and their spin doctors, it seems. You even had to post some Yemenite who holds up his traditional dagger in order to make the peace activists look like islamist fanatics.

 

here are some westerners that were also on one of the boats (probably alongside that Yemenite):

ygamtg7w.jpg

hoj8zk8j.jpg

qxcah3vp.jpg

zv744a9y.jpg

 

 

 

Before you ask:

I support neither side in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict - to successfully argument for one side i lack the required deeper knowledge on the history of the conflict. Also, i have never been in the region. So, if you plan to broaden the discussion towards that whole conflict i'll pass.

My main problem with the current incident is that the IDF attacked the ships in international waters and therefore demonstrated that they don't give a shit about international conventions. If every country would act like that the world would already be a nuclear wasteland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, the call for an international investigation is an attempt to force Israel's back further against the wall. There is no way that any country will allow foreigners to conduct an investigation on the intelligence, special forces operations and overall matters of national security. It was obviously never going to happen, no country would accept that and Turkey is leveraging everything it can, as any other country in its position would.

Agree completely, i just wanted to highlight that the U.S. still supports Israel.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

While I agree with almost everything Christo says, it is clear that Israel is ran by a bunch of idiots who seem to have no idea how to improve the world's opinion of their country.

 

The action that Israel took was, as normal, completely over the top and completely dispropotionate. I cannot agree with the action that Israel takes in pretty much any instance, due to their complete inability to accept blame, or even tell the truth about a situation.

 

They prepared for a non-lethal engagement and were greeted with pipes and knives, that's why shit popped off. And this disproportionate argument is so played, if someone tries to kill you with sticks and you have a gun are you really going to put it down and grab a stick?

 

Personally I feel that Israel is now on borrowed time, they don't have as much support from the west that they have always had, and things will get more difficult for them I feel.

 

They definitely aren't operating on borrowed time and don't make the same mistake most do; Israel isn't solely reliant on the west for money or support.

 

Plus I cannot stand the way that Israel treats the palestinians, so what if they fire rockets into Israel, they knock peoples homes down, rehouse them in slums, cut off their means of living, anyone in that situation would fight back against the people oppressing them, because that is all that Israel do.

The fighting and hatred towards Israel has been around since the 1880's when the idea was first on the table. When Israel entered Gaza they did what they felt was necessary to cripple the Hamas aggressors, its very hard to comprehend fighting a force that enlists civilians and operates out of homes and schools.

 

You would think that as a people that have suffered a lot through history that Israel would have some compasion, but they seem to be the most heartless bastards there are (the government not the people, it isn't the peoples fault they voted scum into power)

That's hardly true, Israel has proposed all sorts of peaceful solutions and have been rejected and burned repeatedly. The Arabs are signaling, some more overtly than others (*cough cough Iran*), that they want Israel to die and not make peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is more the propaganda the government feeds it's own people, one of my main issues with the whole situation is the vast majority of the world see what Israel is doing, and believe it is wrong, yet the Israeli people seem to be feed lies by their government that means the Israelis almost blindly support their own government.

 

I know it is a wide generalisation as I have witnessed Israelis speaking out against the governments actions, but the vast majority of them have left Israel.

 

Also you have Mossad killing people in different countries, falsifying peoples passports and generally acting shady as hell, the world knows they are doing it but the Israeli government completely denies it which is such obvious bullshit.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The vast majority of the world doesn't have a clue whats going on in Israel since there is very little objective journalism about the Middle East and the most critical people on Israel are the Israelis. What Israel's doing in their own country really boils down to who you believe is right. In my opinion if you think anyone is right youre misinformed.

 

The Mossad is no different from any other intelligence agency, even the UK admitted it after dubai, they just happened to get caught.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As he should. Don't you love your homeland?

 

(this isn't to say he's right and anyone else is wrong or vice versa)

 

 

 

Mar: Do you use this?

http://giyus.org/

 

It's part of the Israeli propaganda machine. They

enlisted over 20,000 people the other night to go

to blogs, etc and propagandize Israel's actions.

 

 

I do not condone the actions of Israel the other day. I think

it was brazen and very dumb. They should have thought that

operation through a little more (while scanning this page I think

I saw similar views).

 

6Mm0d.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently there's a lot of denial to go around here.

 

Yes, I would probably fight back if someone tried to board the ship I was on that was on an ostensibly peaceful mission, but I wouldn't be pointing fingers. I'd say "hey, I did what I had to do and you know you would do the same under similar circumstances."

 

And despite the siege mentality that Israelis seem to feel entitled to- and on some levels I can hardly blame them- it reminds me of what my dad said to me one time..."rationalization usually ends up being a stand-in for justification after the fact."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As he should. Don't you love your homeland?

 

(this isn't to say he's right and anyone else is wrong or vice versa)

 

 

 

Mar: Do you use this?

http://giyus.org/

 

It's part of the Israeli propaganda machine. They

enlisted over 20,000 people the other night to go

to blogs, etc and propagandize Israel's actions.

 

 

I do not condone the actions of Israel the other day. I think

it was brazen and very dumb. They should have thought that

operation through a little more (while scanning this page I think

I saw similar views).

 

6Mm0d.png

 

Never seen that site in my life, and that picture is hilarious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

e2e, I don't mean to be an asshole but I do think you are being a bit biased in the way you frame this issue.

 

I agree that what the ISraelis did was a fuck up, they lost control and walked in to a trap. I also agree that the vast majority of people involved in the flotilla were peaceful and sincere in their mission. I posted the pic of the Yemeni with the knife to try and show that there were some aggressors on board yet you seem to take that to the extreme and see it as me implying that all passengers are guilty instead of entertaining the possibility that there may have been aggressors on board the vessel with violent intent. I have argued that the Israeli soldiers were attacked with deadly force before they even threatened people with deadly force and there is undeniable video evidence to back this up yet your response is that people were defending against piracy, as if they weren't aware that the IDF intended to enforce a blockade on an area that is in conflict. I feel at this point you are either refusing to accept the obvious that there were some with an agenda of forcing a fatal confrontation, you seem to imbue these people with an innocent stupidity of what their actions would result in. That doesn't excuse the result but they sure as hell knew what would happen if they attacked special forces soldiers with deadly force. If you can not see the simplicity of this then I can only imagine that you are being biased in your analysis of the situation.

 

When it comes to the theories and practice of asymmetric warfare the topic has been written on thousands of times by those who famously practiced it, those who attempted to counter it and the academics who theorise about it. What I said is a pretty universally agreed upon theory and practice across the spectrum. Your response communicates that you may be unaware of the fundamentals of asymmetric warfare and may be viewing the issue a little superficially. I suggest you read some of Mao Zedong, Kilcullen, Merom and many other's works on the issue of irregular warfare. It's super interesting and will give you an understanding with which you can better discuss the issue.

 

When you view matters from a dispassionate position and without a concept of "right and wrong" different realities very quickly open up and a deeper understanding of motivations and goals begin to emerge.

 

 

Casek's fast roping guide is awesome.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is penned by a friend of mine who has particular insights in to both of the countries involved in the matter.

 

He differs from my view that this is a large under-play by Turkey and pins it more on the Palestinians taking the initiative with Israel. however we both agree that Israel really fucked this one, big time.

 

 

Flotillas and the Wars of Public Opinion

 

May 31, 2010 | 1828 GMT

 

 

 

 

On Sunday, Israeli naval forces intercepted the ships of a Turkish nongovernmental organization (NGO) delivering humanitarian supplies to Gaza. Israel had demanded that the vessels not go directly to Gaza but instead dock in Israeli ports, where the supplies would be offloaded and delivered to Gaza. The Turkish NGO refused, insisting on going directly to Gaza. Gunfire ensued when Israeli naval personnel boarded one of the vessels, and a significant number of the passengers and crew on the ship were killed or wounded.

 

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon charged that the mission was simply an attempt to provoke the Israelis. That was certainly the case. The mission was designed to demonstrate that the Israelis were unreasonable and brutal. The hope was that Israel would be provoked to extreme action, further alienating Israel from the global community and possibly driving a wedge between Israel and the United States. The operation’s planners also hoped this would trigger a political crisis in Israel.

 

A logical Israeli response would have been avoiding falling into the provocation trap and suffering the political repercussions the Turkish NGO was trying to trigger. Instead, the Israelis decided to make a show of force. The Israelis appear to have reasoned that backing down would demonstrate weakness and encourage further flotillas to Gaza, unraveling the Israeli position vis-à-vis Hamas. In this thinking, a violent interception was a superior strategy to accommodation regardless of political consequences. Thus, the Israelis accepted the bait and were provoked.

 

The ‘Exodus’ Scenario

 

In the 1950s, an author named Leon Uris published a book called “Exodus.” Later made into a major motion picture, Exodus told the story of a Zionist provocation against the British. In the wake of World War II, the British — who controlled Palestine, as it was then known — maintained limits on Jewish immigration there. Would-be immigrants captured trying to run the blockade were detained in camps in Cyprus. In the book and movie, Zionists planned a propaganda exercise involving a breakout of Jews — mostly children — from the camp, who would then board a ship renamed the Exodus. When the Royal Navy intercepted the ship, the passengers would mount a hunger strike. The goal was to portray the British as brutes finishing the work of the Nazis. The image of children potentially dying of hunger would force the British to permit the ship to go to Palestine, to reconsider British policy on immigration, and ultimately to decide to abandon Palestine and turn the matter over to the United Nations.

 

There was in fact a ship called Exodus, but the affair did not play out precisely as portrayed by Uris, who used an amalgam of incidents to display the propaganda war waged by the Jews. Those carrying out this war had two goals. The first was to create sympathy in Britain and throughout the world for Jews who, just a couple of years after German concentration camps, were now being held in British camps. Second, they sought to portray their struggle as being against the British. The British were portrayed as continuing Nazi policies toward the Jews in order to maintain their empire. The Jews were portrayed as anti-imperialists, fighting the British much as the Americans had.

 

It was a brilliant strategy. By focusing on Jewish victimhood and on the British, the Zionists defined the battle as being against the British, with the Arabs playing the role of people trying to create the second phase of the Holocaust. The British were portrayed as pro-Arab for economic and imperial reasons, indifferent at best to the survivors of the Holocaust. Rather than restraining the Arabs, the British were arming them. The goal was not to vilify the Arabs but to villify the British, and to position the Jews with other nationalist groups whether in India or Egypt rising against the British.

 

The precise truth or falsehood of this portrayal didn’t particularly matter. For most of the world, the Palestine issue was poorly understood and not a matter of immediate concern. The Zionists intended to shape the perceptions of a global public with limited interest in or understanding of the issues, filling in the blanks with their own narrative. And they succeeded.

 

The success was rooted in a political reality. Where knowledge is limited, and the desire to learn the complex reality doesn’t exist, public opinion can be shaped by whoever generates the most powerful symbols. And on a matter of only tangential interest, governments tend to follow their publics’ wishes, however they originate. There is little to be gained for governments in resisting public opinion and much to be gained by giving in. By shaping the battlefield of public perception, it is thus possible to get governments to change positions.

 

In this way, the Zionists’ ability to shape global public perceptions of what was happening in Palestine — to demonize the British and turn the question of Palestine into a Jewish-British issue — shaped the political decisions of a range of governments. It was not the truth or falsehood of the narrative that mattered. What mattered was the ability to identify the victim and victimizer such that global opinion caused both London and governments not directly involved in the issue to adopt political stances advantageous to the Zionists. It is in this context that we need to view the Turkish flotilla.

 

The Turkish Flotilla to Gaza

 

The Palestinians have long argued that they are the victims of Israel, an invention of British and American imperialism. Since 1967, they have focused not so much on the existence of the state of Israel (at least in messages geared toward the West) as on the oppression of Palestinians in the occupied territories. Since the split between Hamas and Fatah and the Gaza War, the focus has been on the plight of the citizens of Gaza, who have been portrayed as the dispossessed victims of Israeli violence.

 

The bid to shape global perceptions by portraying the Palestinians as victims of Israel was the first prong of a longtime two-part campaign. The second part of this campaign involved armed resistance against the Israelis. The way this resistance was carried out, from airplane hijackings to stone-throwing children to suicide bombers, interfered with the first part of the campaign, however. The Israelis could point to suicide bombings or the use of children against soldiers as symbols of Palestinian inhumanity. This in turn was used to justify conditions in Gaza. While the Palestinians had made significant inroads in placing Israel on the defensive in global public opinion, they thus consistently gave the Israelis the opportunity to turn the tables. And this is where the flotilla comes in.

 

The Turkish flotilla aimed to replicate the Exodus story or, more precisely, to define the global image of Israel in the same way the Zionists defined the image that they wanted to project. As with the Zionist portrayal of the situation in 1947, the Gaza situation is far more complicated than as portrayed by the Palestinians. The moral question is also far more ambiguous. But as in 1947, when the Zionist portrayal was not intended to be a scholarly analysis of the situation but a political weapon designed to define perceptions, the Turkish flotilla was not designed to carry out a moral inquest.

 

Instead, the flotilla was designed to achieve two ends. The first is to divide Israel and Western governments by shifting public opinion against Israel. The second is to create a political crisis inside Israel between those who feel that Israel’s increasing isolation over the Gaza issue is dangerous versus those who think any weakening of resolve is dangerous.

 

The Geopolitical Fallout for Israel

 

It is vital that the Israelis succeed in portraying the flotilla as an extremist plot. Whether extremist or not, the plot has generated an image of Israel quite damaging to Israeli political interests. Israel is increasingly isolated internationally, with heavy pressure on its relationship with Europe and the United States.

 

In all of these countries, politicians are extremely sensitive to public opinion. It is difficult to imagine circumstances under which public opinion will see Israel as the victim. The general response in the Western public is likely to be that the Israelis probably should have allowed the ships to go to Gaza and offload rather than to precipitate bloodshed. Israel’s enemies will fan these flames by arguing that the Israelis prefer bloodshed to reasonable accommodation. And as Western public opinion shifts against Israel, Western political leaders will track with this shift.

 

The incident also wrecks Israeli relations with Turkey, historically an Israeli ally in the Muslim world with longstanding military cooperation with Israel. The Turkish government undoubtedly has wanted to move away from this relationship, but it faced resistance within the Turkish military and among secularists. The new Israeli action makes a break with Israel easy, and indeed almost necessary for Ankara.

 

With roughly the population of Houston, Texas, Israel is just not large enough to withstand extended isolation, meaning this event has profound geopolitical implications.

 

Public opinion matters where issues are not of fundamental interest to a nation. Israel is not a fundamental interest to other nations. The ability to generate public antipathy to Israel can therefore reshape Israeli relations with countries critical to Israel. For example, a redefinition of U.S.-Israeli relations will have much less effect on the United States than on Israel. The Obama administration, already irritated by the Israelis, might now see a shift in U.S. public opinion that will open the way to a new U.S.-Israeli relationship disadvantageous to Israel.

 

The Israelis will argue that this is all unfair, as they were provoked. Like the British, they seem to think that the issue is whose logic is correct. But the issue actually is, whose logic will be heard? As with a tank battle or an airstrike, this sort of warfare has nothing to do with fairness. It has to do with controlling public perception and using that public perception to shape foreign policy around the world. In this case, the issue will be whether the deaths were necessary. The Israeli argument of provocation will have limited traction.

 

Internationally, there is little doubt that the incident will generate a firestorm. Certainly, Turkey will break cooperation with Israel. Opinion in Europe will likely harden. And public opinion in the United States — by far the most important in the equation — might shift to a “plague-on-both-your-houses” position.

 

While the international reaction is predictable, the interesting question is whether this evolution will cause a political crisis in Israel. Those in Israel who feel that international isolation is preferable to accommodation with the Palestinians are in control now. Many in the opposition see Israel’s isolation as a strategic threat. Economically and militarily, they argue, Israel cannot survive in isolation. The current regime will respond that there will be no isolation. The flotilla aimed to generate what the government has said would not happen.

 

The tougher Israel is, the more the flotilla’s narrative takes hold. As the Zionists knew in 1947 and the Palestinians are learning, controlling public opinion requires subtlety, a selective narrative and cynicism. As they also knew, losing the battle can be catastrophic. It cost Britain the Mandate and allowed Israel to survive. Israel’s enemies are now turning the tables. This maneuver was far more effective than suicide bombings or the Intifada in challenging Israel’s public perception and therefore its geopolitical position (though if the Palestinians return to some of their more distasteful tactics like suicide bombing, the Turkish strategy of portraying Israel as the instigator of violence will be undermined).

 

Israel is now in uncharted waters. It does not know how to respond. It is not clear that the Palestinians know how to take full advantage of the situation, either. But even so, this places the battle on a new field, far more fluid and uncontrollable than what went before. The next steps will involve calls for sanctions against Israel. The Israeli threats against Iran will be seen in a different context, and Israeli portrayal of Iran will hold less sway over the world.

 

And this will cause a political crisis in Israel. If this government survives, then Israel is locked into a course that gives it freedom of action but international isolation. If the government falls, then Israel enters a period of domestic uncertainty. In either case, the flotilla achieved its strategic mission. It got Israel to take violent action against it. In doing so, Israel ran into its own fist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...