Why Israel Was Right to Invade Gaza

Unlike any other nation in history, Israel was founded after millions of its brethren, Jews, were butchered in mass genocide by another nation. No people have suffered 2000+ years of brutal persecution -- including Pogroms, the Crusades, the Holocaust and Arab terrorism -- like the Jews. And no nation besides Israel has on or within its borders enemies who publicly avow its absolute and violent destruction.

The mantra "Never Again" is something Jewish people live with every minute of every day, especially those living in Israel. Jews of every age, even those born after WWII, are haunted by images of concentration camps, ovens and mass graves. They remember how the world stood idly by and watched as six million were slaughtered like animals. "Never Again" means that Jews would no longer be a passive partner in their own death. The existence of Israel in particular would come to symbolize strength and survival, and ensure that the enemy of the Jewish people would be dealt swift and decisive blows. Which is why Israel's invasion of Gaza is completely understandable and justifiable. Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni describes the conflict in the Gaza Strip as "the right of self-defense of a state."

The violence in Gaza is not borne out of a new found crisis. Rocket and missile attacks into Israeli border towns by Hamas, the terrorist group elected to power in Palestinian elections in January 2006, have been ongoing since 2001, increasing over 500% since that time. Hamas's mission is clear: its charter calls for the destruction of the State of Israel, to be replaced with a Palestinian Islamic state in the area that is now Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. There's no gray area here. Destruction. How do you negotiate with an enemy who will only accept wiping you off the face of the Earth?

Criticism of Israel's strikes into Gaza centers on proportionality. The debate is over how much retaliation is necessary and/or justified. To quote a very smart and concerned young college student I had the pleasure of meeting this week, "when you get shot in the foot, do you shoot them back in the head?" Yes, that's exactly what you do when your enemies have been trying to literally annihilate you for centuries. How exactly should Israel proportionately address this non-stop barrage of rockets into its country from a terrorist group hellbent on its destruction? How should Israel attempt to protect its people, long-term, if it merely acts defensively in a tit-for-tat manner, minimally answering each rocket with another rocket of its own? That would be a horribly naive response given history.

Colin Powell, a decorated war hero, four-star Army general, and former Secretary of State has outlined in what has informally been recognized as "The Powell Doctrine," that when a nation is engaging in war, it should harness every resource and tool to wage decisive military action against its enemy so as to minimize U.S. casualties and achieve a quick resolution to the conflict by overpowering the the weaker force into capitulation. That's precisely what Israel is attempting to do now in Gaza. Strike quick, strike hard and eliminate the enemy threat in an effort to secure its homeland. It's terribly unfortunate that civilians are getting killed, but I suppose that's the collateral damage when a cowardly enemy uses it's citizens as human shields. Israel is striking at Hamas's base of operations. But if that stronghold is centered in densely populated civilian neighborhoods, only Hamas can be blamed for the resulting casualties.

Let's keep in mind history. It is not the Israelis who blow up buses full of innocent people, detonate suicide bombs at restaurants and nightclubs, kill school children or throw old people off of cruise ships. To the contrary, no nation has made more concessions over the years to its arch enemies than Israel. It's given the Sinai back to Egypt, and returned parts of the Gaza Strip and West Bank to the Palestinians. It was also ready to make peace with Yassir Arafat and the PLO in a historic deal with then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak and President Bill Clinton at Camp David in 2000, a deal which would have created a Palestinian homeland with its capital in Jerusalem. A deal which Arafat was widely criticized for rejecting. But in order to achieve real peace, Israel needs a rational, committed statesman-like partner in the process. That partner is not Hamas.

The situation in the Middle East, in particular the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, has been volcanic since the Jewish state was founded 60 years ago. There's been periods of relative calm, followed by frequent violent and deadly eruptions, including many multi-nation wars. The current escalation is no exception. It is just another example of the cyclical tumult that faces this region of the world. Let's hope President-elect Barack Obama can enjoin the parties in a substantive negotiation process that can ultimately, and finally, lead to a lasting peace... if that's truly possible given the centuries-old emotional and cultural schisms that have plagued these nations like a disease. The question is, what will Obama's position be towards Israel and its desire and need to defend itself, and will he support this new action in Gaza... and if so, for how long? And if not, can Israel go it alone without the U.S. behind it? Interesting times ahead....

Comments

[atomic]

Israel's position is horrific ... It is massacring children ... there is no justification for war crimes. Israel has fallen . THe eyes of the world can see through their propaganda. It is over. They must retreat and allow for 2 states to emerge. Take their forces out of Gaza and pay for the damage they did.

[EinChicago]

"why Germany was right to invade Poland"

Ostroy may as well have written this exact headline, as he pretty much paraphrsed it.

[hindy]

I don't mind legitimate criticism of Israel. As a liberal myself I am certainly engaging in some. What I do object to is this expose of "liberal fundamentalist intransigence" that refuses to see both sides of the picture. Instead what's being shown is liberalism's one-sided condemnation of Israel while allowing Hamas - an organization bent on the destruction of Israel - to get off scott free. All that's being shown on these blogs is a closed-minded parrotting of the same recycled shallow narrow-mindedness of what's passing for liberalism today. There's nothing liberal about closed minds.

[xxnounxx]

OSTROY,HOW DO RESPECT YOURSLEF IF YOU DONT SPEND TIME LEARNING THE TRUTH???

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6604775898578139565

[Michale32086]

Which "truth" are you referring to??

Whose "truth" should we respect??

In discussions such as this, "truth" is a useless concept because it's one's beliefs and values that determine what is "truth" to them..

"If 'truth' is what you seek, Professor Tyree's philosophy class is right down the hall."
-Indiana Jones

What SHOULD be at issue here are FACTS, not "truth"...

Michale.....

[jeffepops]

Michale, you are addressing a small but busy group of people who are not interested in discussing or learning. They've decided to attack Israel and anything it does -- either because they are anti-Semitic, or they're Jews who can't accept that they are just like other ethnic groups, that sometimes makes mistakes and even do wrong things. The latter group "feels" that Jews have to be morally perfect, and romanticize Israel as being the result of some sort of national immaculate conception.

In a world where large scale massacres, brutal policies of mass rape and child abuse are being carried out even as I write, a certain HuffPo groupies flock to their computers to compare the unfortunate -- and in some cases, negligent -- deaths of Palestinians as genocide, another Holocaust, etc. It doesn't matter that Hamas openly promises to destroy Israel, and has eliberately mingled its military within its civilian population; or that Israel only closed the borders to Gaza after Hamas forcibly took over Gaza in a military coup, and has openly admitted to smuggling arms into Gaza -- and using them against the Israeli civilian population.

The HuffiPo's founder, Ariana Huffington, has stated that Israel had the right to defend itself against Hamas, and that the real issue is that the rest of the region, Europe, and the U.S. have failed to provide a path toward peace. But, you'll always find the extreme left and the extreme right willing to agree on one thing -- the Jews

[Michale32086]

@polaris12

}}}}}
Under your own definition,
}}}}}

OK, great.. That makes things much easier...

Let's examine the facts...

"The Deir Yassin massacre refers to the killing of between 107 and 120 Palestinian villagers,[1] the estimate generally accepted by scholars,[2][3] during and possibly after the battle[4][5] at the village of Deir Yassin"

That pretty much shows that, under the accepted definition of terrorism that you and I BOTH agree on, this act wasn't terrorism..

It may have been a war crime and it may have been a massacre, but it was part of a military battle and it's aftermath and therefore wasn't terrorism...

}}}}
But, I doubt you are interested in really knowing the truth about terrorism in the Middle East,
{{{{{

Yer kidding, right??

You THINK you know about terrorism because you read about.. I KNOW about terrorism because I lived it, worked it, trained for it and breathed it..

Don't EVEN presume to try and lecture me on what is and isn't terrorism..

Michale.....

[The Hedonistic Pleasureseeker]

Today in Israel, from Left to Right, from Likud to Kadima, from the academia to the media, one can hear this righteous fury of a state that is more busy than any other state in the world in destroying and dispossessing an indigenous population.

I'm starting to suspect a collective psychosis on the part of the Likudist hardliners.

[TimSearl]

Or this;
"The exact details of what appears to have been one of the worst attacks of the war – the shelling on Monday of a compound in the Zeitoun district of northern Gaza City in which about 100 members of the Al Samoun family had taken shelter – are yet to emerge."

Or you could maybe read what former President Carter writes in the Washington Post today. Anyone who at this point defends this action by Israel, against bottle rockets, is either ignorant or ...

This mass murder is shameful.

[TimSearl]

Also from the Independent,
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/bombs-rain-down-as-peace-deal-accepted-in-principle-1232055.html
Army admits there was no firing from school

The Israeli army has admitted privately to the UN that no firing came from a Gaza school where 42 people died on Tuesday after being hit by Israeli mortars, officials of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (Unrwa) disclosed last night.

Publicly, the Israeli army claims that the school, which was providing shelter for around 350 people, was being used by Hamas fighters to carry out attacks. Unrwa officials said they were fully confident this was not the case."

[TimSearl]

" It is not the Israelis who blow up buses full of innocent people.... " No. Israelis blow up houses, schools and worse. From the Independent, Robert Fisk who actually knows what he wrtites about.


"The Sabra and Chatila massacre was committed by Israel's right-wing Lebanese Phalangist allies while Israeli troops, as Israel's own commission of inquiry revealed, watched for 48 hours and did nothing. When Israel was blamed, Menachem Begin's government accused the world of a blood libel. After Israeli artillery had fired shells into the UN base at Qana in 1996, the Israelis claimed that Hizbollah gunmen were also sheltering in the base. It was a lie. The more than 1,000 dead of 2006 – a war started when Hizbollah captured two Israeli soldiers on the border – were simply dismissed as the responsibility of the Hizbollah. Israel claimed the bodies of children killed in a second Qana massacre may have been taken from a graveyard. It was another lie. The Marwahin massacre was never excused. The people of the village were ordered to flee, obeyed Israeli orders and were then attacked by an Israeli gunship. The refugees took their children and stood them around the truck in which they were travelling so that Israeli pilots would see they were innocents. Then the Israeli helicopter mowed them down at close range. Only two survived, by playing dead. Israel didn't even apologise....." And that is just for starters.

Hang your head in shame.

[Michale32086]

@Fein

}}}}}
If WE attacked and killed dozen of civilians, just like Israel, it wouldn't be 'terrorism',

right Mica? If the Pals fight back, it is.

And that seems quite logical to you.
{{{{{

So, your definition of terrorism is "attacking and killing civilians"....

Is that it??

Michale.....

[TimSearl]

Michale,
Attacking civillians who are not a part of the military apparatus is a war crime. It is unfortunate you do not know that.

[Michale32086]

Israel isn't attacking civilians.

Israel is attacking legitimate military targets.. But, because HAMAS places those legit targets amongst civilians, innocent civilians are killed.

The responsibility for those innocent civilian deaths lies completely with HAMAS.

These are the facts...

Michale.....

[Michale32086]

@polaris12

{{{{{
It's interesting how you beat your breast about terrorism, but will never admit to the terrorism of groups like the Stern Gang, the Irgun and the Haganah. Israel was built on terrorism and introduced it to the Middle East. Israel is engaging in terrorism against the Palestinian people right now,
{{{{{

I have already proven beyond doubt that none of the acts then, or now are considered terrorism.

However, if you want to go thru it again, I am willing.

Please point to specific acts, then or now, that you consider terrorist acts and then apply the accepted definition of terrorism.

"Terrorism is defined as ongoing and systematic attacks of violence specifically targeted against innocent civilian persons or property for the purpose of furthering a political, economical or ideological agenda."

If you don't accept that definition of terrorism, then please supply what YOU consider terrorism to be.

We can go from there. I'll be standing bi...

Michale.....

[polaris12]

"On 9 April 1948, Jewish forces occupied the village of Deir Yassin. As they burst into the village, the Jewish soldiers sprayed the houses with machine-gun fire, killing many of the inhabitants. The remaining villagers were then gathered in one place and murdered in cold blood, their bodies abused while a number of the women were raped."

"At the time, the Jewish leadership proudly announced a high number of victims so as to make Deir Yassin the epicentre of the catastrophe - a warning to all Palestinians that a similar fate awaited them if they refused to abandon their homes and take flight."

Ilan Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine. pp 90-91

[Michale32086]

So, you think this is terrorism??

Under what definition??

If you are calling this terrorism, you must know what the definition of terrorism is, right??

So, what is your definition of terrorism??

Michale.....

[Michale32086]

@martinpasha

}}}}
Hamas overwhelmingly won the election, Israel, US and EU refused to recognize Hamas,
{{{{

HAMAS is a terrorist organization. HAMAS refuses to renounce violence and refuses to acknowledge that Israel has the right to exist. OF COURSE we won't recognize their alleged government. Why SHOULD we??

If some country voted in a NAZI government, would YOU want the US to recognize it??

Yea, I know. It's close to a Godwin, but it makes the point..

}}}}
blockaded Gaza for more than one year.
{{{{

I also remind you that Egypt also blockades IT'S border with Gaza as well.. So?? Doesn't Israel & Egypt have that right??

Using your scenario, if a vicious drug cartel took over in Tijuana, Mexico and began cross border raids, killing and kidnapping US citizens in San Ysidro, Chula Vista & National City, the US could NOT close it's border with Mexico.

That's pure rubbish.

}}}}
Accusing Hamas of smuggling weapons illegally, what else you want them to do to protect their country?.
{{{{

How about feeding their people??? How about taking care of the Palestinians the alleged were voted in by??

}}}}
Why shouldn"t Hamas also seek weapons Israel has been a terrorist state from its beginning, and has its foundations in terrorism. Three Israeli prime ministers were or are terrorists:
� Menachim Begin
� Yitzhak Shamir
� Ariel Sharon�.. and the rest
{{{{{

I have already proven, by an accepted definition, that they were/are not terrorists.

These are the facts.

Michale.....

[martinpasha]

Hamas overwhelmingly won the election, Israel, US and EU refused to recognise Hamas, blockaded Gaza for more than a year. Accusing Hamas of smuggling weapons illegally, what else you want them to do to protect their country?. Israel is given billions of dollars worth of weapons from US and other countries, and has maybe 100 or more nuclear weapons most of them are aiming at Iran. Why shouldn’t Hamas also seek weapons. Israel has been a terrorist state from its beginning, and has its foundations in terrorism. Three Israeli prime ministers were or are terrorists:
• Menachim Begin
• Yitzhak Shamir
• Ariel Sharon….. and the rest

[mzmaj7]

…I do not apologize for Hamas and I feel strongly against them. However, if I were them, I would also hide my military equipment and personnel in the best of hiding places – urban locations. After all, Hamas is internationally recognized as a terrorist organization. They’re not supposed to have weapons; they’re not even supposed to be. Thus, hiding their military under the cover of civilians is an existential tactic.

4. It was also ready to make peace with Yassir Arafat and the PLO in a historic deal with then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak and President Bill Clinton at Camp David in 2000

Israel, or Ehud Barak specifically, was about as ready as Arafat to sign any sort of deal at Camp David. Neither side would budge on Jerusalem, for example, because all of the proposed solutions would have been political suicide, as far as they saw it. I am under the impression that Arafat was slightly more obstinate, probably because his life would have been on the line as well if he had conceded anything (he was afraid of suffering Sadat’s fate), but that is just my opinion. Either way, it does not seem as though there is an international consensus for why Camp David II failed. One of many reasons is both sides’ unequivocal refusals to concede, as the frustrated Bill Clinton was fully aware; he had his fare share of heart-to-hearts with and unpleasant comments and blowups for negotiators of both sides.

~Michael Z

[mzmaj7]

I agree with most of this opinion. Hamas’s purpose is to threaten the existence of Israel, and their attacks must be stopped, one way or another. There are just four details I disagreed with. Sorry if I am restating others’ comments…

1. “How exactly should Israel proportionately address this non-stop barrage of rockets”

“Proportionality” is a legal term often misused.
Check out: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proportionality_(political_maxim).
Or Article 52.2 of Geneva Conventions Additional Protocol I: http://www.tamilnation.org/humanrights/genevaconventions/gprotocol1d.htm#9.
It does not refer to the eye-for-an-eye punishment, but to a more nebulous test, to determine what is or is not sufficient to achieve one’s aims. It can get muddy when intent enters the picture. However, the proportional punishment that is referred to in this article is one centered on ethics and is not a legal issue. So when outraged diplomats, Arabs, and protestors talk about proportional attacks and condemn Israel for illegally attacking Gaza, you know they’re not fully aware of what they’re talking about, and they’re confusing law for emotion.

2. Israel has “returned parts of the Gaza Strip”

Israel had returned all of it.

3. “But if that [military] stronghold is centered in densely populated civilian neighborhoods, only Hamas can be blamed for the resulting casualties.”