(Untitled)

[boundfate]

Analysis: High-seas raid deepens Israeli isolation - Yahoo! News
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100531/ap_on_an/ml_israel_fallout_analysis

Israel's bloody, bungled takeover of a Gaza-bound Turkish aid vessel is complicating U.S.-led Mideast peace efforts, deepening Israel's international isolation and threatening to destroy the Jewish state's ties with

Comments

[ayoub]

There is so much history to this conflict, and atrocities have been committed on both sides of the equation

[boundfate]

Your whole post is conserning settlement activities. My understanding is that the disputed settlements are occuring in west bank, east jeruselum, and golan hights. Those locations are all different than Gaza. Israel stopped building in Gaza in 2005 and forcibly evacuated their people

[ayoub]

It's awful because it's seen as a bully preventing poor people from getting food and aid... While I can see the Israeli point of view, there is no good solution for them in this situation. They were always going to look like the bad guys, while those who were taking aid to the oppressed were always going to look like heroes.

If Israel had instead simply searched the flotilla, and agreed to let them through, this mess would never have happened.

[boundfate]

Israel asked repeatedly to be allowed to search the flotilla. They were denied, over and over again. They sent warships to escort the group overnight, trying to show they were serious as they continued to ask to search the aid and were denied.

When they finally sent their commandos onto the boat, they armed them with paintball guns, not assault rifles.

Despite being attacked and having to fight back, they are currently taking the ships to their port where they will search the aid and then give it to Gaza. What more could you have expected them to do?

Having the worldwide media punish Israel for being put in an impossible situation and then doing the least violent option at every turn seems like, well, crap. Good PR campaign by the palestinians and boo for all of the people falling for it.

[boundfate]

I'm not familiar enough with the Boston Massacre to comment.

*edited to add* The internet is lovely - thank you for making the comparison. You are right. Mobs attacking armed soldiers is pretty much always a stupid idea. I'm on the side of the british on that - calling it a massacre was nothing but PR. I'm partial to the results of the PR (being American and all) but that doesn't make the term Massacre correct or the people who were killed any less combatants.

I'd also argue that the colonists were simply living in the colonies and then invaded, where these ships were deliberately trying to run through a known military blockade. How much military action do you need to do in order to quit being a civilian?

[ajaxtalbot]

By in large, yes, it was.

[fireglideflht]

You know, there is no way to settle the whole thing. It isn't going to happen, ever. I used to say when I was in college (umm 30 years ago) that the only way to get peace in the area would be to nuke the whole place back to the Stone Age, the old "Kill 'em all let God sort 'em out" mentality because there are both many 'guilty' and many 'innocent' on both sides of the equation here. I'm more mature than that now, of course.

The reason why this event gets the coverage and slant that it is getting? Do you really have to ask that? Look at who is saying what.

[boundfate]

I do have to ask that though. I've never seen such verifiably biased reporting from places like the BBC or CNN. I know people scream bias at the drop of the hat, but I've always thought we were more or less accurate. (If both sides scream bias, you must be about middle, right?)

That isn't happening here. Its frightening given how America's current war is largly a PR war - If we can be this slanted in extremist viewpoint here, how corrupted are our media channels regarding Iraq and Afgahnistan?

[fireglideflht]

They're hugely biased for sure-on both sides. I don't think that'd be "corruption"-they aren't that I can see taking money or other valuta for espousing their respective positions-but they are being suspect in their biases. And it seems the bias is much more left of center than right of center; although talk radio is much more right of center than left (NPR notwithstanding).

*shrugs* it's easy to label as "liberal media bias" or "reactionary right" whenever someone disagrees with your point of view, and it's easier to cater to what your desired audience wants to hear, than to be boringly reporting facts only.

I suggest you read a book by John Ringo called "The Last Centurion"-although it is a work of fiction in its entirety, read it, and then tell me whether or not it casts the media in a different light to you.

Nice to see you're alive 'n' thrivin' btw. :)

Fire

[boundfate]

The problem is almost all of our news media is for profit. Is it corruption when catering to a certain political bent gets you more advertising dollars?

I've just ordered The last centurion. I can't promise when I'll get to it - my reading list is huge - but I love book recommendations.

*hugs* I've missed you and all my friends on LJ as well. I've missed journaling - I love having so many intelligent people around to bounce ideas off of and correct me when I'm wrong. I think that although class gives me less time to write, it will provide enough fodder that I'll end up here much more regularly.