Israel. The real reason for the attack

[ymu]

Rachael Corrie 150 mile from Gaza now and offering a deal , I thought they had agreed to change course to Israel through the Irish government ?

http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=177520

Propaganda nonsense - there's no way they will go through Israel. It's Israel's ability to control the flow of aid and goods in and out of Gaza that is the problem - diverting to Ashdod would defeat the object. Valuable as the cargo will be to Gazans (who are only getting a quarter of the aid required to sustain the population whilst under economic siege), there is a much more important political point being made here. If governments will not act, private citizens will - in an attempt to force their governments to finally fucking do something meaningful about the blockade.

 

[Flavour]

its been boarded by the israeli navy

http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=177525

 

[Sesquipedalian]

Propaganda nonsense - there's no way they will go through Israel. It's Israel's ability to control the flow of aid and goods in and out of Gaza that is the problem - diverting to Ashdod would defeat the object. Valuable as the cargo will be to Gazans (who are only getting a quarter of the aid required to sustain the population whilst under economic siege), there is a much more important political point being made here. If governments will not act, private citizens will - in an attempt to force their governments to finally fucking do something meaningful about the blockade.

Excellent post.

 

[Quartz]

They were entirely aware that there were no weapons on the boats. They'd been inspected beforehand.

Clearly they didn't believe it. And the Palestinians were expecting them to not believe it.

 

[dylans]

its been boarded by the israeli navy

http://www.jpost.com/Home/Article.aspx?id=177525

This is incorrect. Please be careful about posting false information. IDF on twitter report contact made but ship not boarded


The Israel Navy conveyed the following message to the 7th flotilla ship a few moments ago via radio transmission:

“This is the Israeli Navy. You are approaching an area of hostilities which is under a naval blockade. The Gaza area, coastal region and Gaza Harbor are closed to all maritime traffic. The Israeli government supports delivery of humanitarian supplies to the civilian population in the Gaza Strip and invites you to enter the Ashdod port. Delivery of the supplies in accordance with the authorities’ regulations will be done via the formal land crossings and under your observation, after which you can return to your home ports aboard the vessels on which you arrived.”

http://ht.ly/1UpNX

 

[cesare]

So the IDF blog now conflicts with what was posted on twitter and reported in the Jerusalem Post a couple of hours earlier. I took a screen grab:

 

[ymu]

There were reports that some of the Rachel Corrie crew had posted on Twitter that they had been boarded. I don't do Twitter - anyone know what has been posted from the ship since last night, and when (if) they stopped posting?

 

[Barking_Mad]

In regard to the original post, this is worth looking at...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MV_Arctic_Sea

 

[cursed]

In my opinion , the OP has got it spot on....

A favorable setting for any kind of Peace Talks is the last thing the Israelis want.

 

[dylans]

To those who consider the scenario I have outlined in the OP to be alarmist or unrealistic, I would urge you to read the following very recent news reports. Notice the dates.

On the 14th of march the Herald Scotland published a story that the US was moving hundreds of Bunker busting bombs to the British island of Diego Garcia in preparation of an attack on iran.

Hundreds of powerful US “bunker-buster” bombs are being shipped from California to the British island of Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean in preparation for a possible attack on Iran.
The Sunday Herald can reveal that the US government signed a contract in January to transport 10 ammunition containers to the island. According to a cargo manifest from the US navy, this included 387 “Blu” bombs used for blasting hardened or underground structures....

Experts say that they are being put in place for an assault on Iran’s controversial nuclear facilities. .......
Crucially, the cargo includes 195 smart, guided, Blu-110 bombs and 192 massive 2000lb Blu-117 bombs....

They are gearing up totally for the destruction of Iran,” said Dan Plesch, director of the Centre for International Studies and Diplomacy at the University of London..... “US bombers are ready today to destroy 10,000 targets in Iran in a few hours,” he added.

Also on March the 4th the New York Times ran a story entitled

Hoping sanctions work but readying gas masks.

Preparations for a strike against Iran’s nuclear program are as evident as ever: the introduction of an attack drone capable of flying hundreds of miles, the frequent open talk of a possible attack, the distribution of new gas masks to the public.

The distribution of new gas masks to Israelis is one sign of war preparations amid concern over a nuclear Iran.
But lately, the real action in Israel on the Iranian issue has been the parade of top American security officials. The chairman of the joint chiefs, the director of the C.I.A. and the national security adviser have all just been here; the vice president arrives on Monday.

“Some have described it as a bear hug,” a senior Israeli official said of the near-daily high-level meetings, speaking on condition of anonymity in order to express himself freely on a charged issue, as did three other top Israeli officials for this article.

As I reported Israeli submarines armed with nuclear weapons have crossed the Suez Canal to the coast of Iran. This is now reported in Haaretz.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diploma...lear-armed-submarines-off-iran-coast-1.293005


On the 24th May, the Egyptian newspaper Almasry_Alyoum ran this story

Israel Prepares for comprehensive war on Iran, Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas

Israel has started military maneuvers including evacuating thousands of Jewish inhabitants to other cities deeper inside Israel to protect them from missile strikes from Iran and Syria, Hizbullah and potentially Hamas.

Of course this could all be psy ops but in the light of the flotilla attack and Israeli sabre rattling over Syrian sales of ballistic missiles to Hezbollah, I think all the signs are that I am right and we are seeing the groundwork being laid for an attack on Iran.


http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/05/world/middleeast/05mideast.html?ref=global-home

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/world-news/final-destination-iran-1.1013151

http://www.almasryalyoum.com/en/new...ve-war-against-iran-syria-hizbullah-and-hamas

 

[goldenecitrone]

The reports of how many of the protestors were killed show shootings to the back of the head, execution-style, not commandos trying to fend off attack. It certainly looks like there was planning behind these murders.

 

[krtek a houby]

Just want to thank dylans for his incisive posts.

 

[YouSir]

Just want to thank dylans for his incisive posts.

Seconded.

 

[Sasaferrato]

ps how is it trolling to simply paraphrase what the op said.

Cunning liars who kill innnocents deliberately, who break every treaty, and who will scupper any attempt at peace.


Did I get any of that wrong?

Pretty much all of it really.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Interesting posts.

On reflection, I'm not sure that I agree with the OP's conclusions, but cannot find a better explanation.

It all comes down to why.

On the one hand, I can see Israel being dismissive of a relatively hostile, and to a fair degree, hypocritical*, rest of the world, but, Israel cannot exist in total isolation. Fair enough, they will have US support, the fact that they appear not to have British support is a disgrace, but the US is a long way away.

Israel needs markets for its goods, particularly arms. If no one is buying Israeli goods, the country would be bankrupt in a relatively short time, and even the US government cannot do anything to alleviate the situation, the US public would look askance at their government buying Israeli oranges.

So, the unanswered question is; how will Israel benefit from total isolation? Having thought long and hard, I really cannot see a benefit.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

The government has very little to gain from total isolation and it isn't going to happen.

What I think is the problem here is that some people are assuming that brutal actions by a state are indicative of some sort of unusual militaristic insanity, rather than just being business as usual. Killing hundreds or thousands of people to retain control of an area is standard behaviour. It doesn't imply a rampaging out-of-control "rogue state" likely to irrationally invade anywhere even at the cost of its own destruction, any more than it did when the now deceased Mr S. Hussein was in power in Iraq.

 

[dylans]

The government has very little to gain from total isolation and it isn't going to happen.

What I think is the problem here is that some people are assuming that brutal actions by a state are indicative of some sort of unusual militaristic insanity, rather than just being business as usual. Killing hundreds or thousands of people to retain control of an area is standard behaviour. It doesn't imply a rampaging out-of-control "rogue state" likely to irrationally invade anywhere even at the cost of its own destruction, any more than it did when the now deceased Mr S. Hussein was in power in Iraq.

I don't think I have said they are "insane" or "out of "control." I have argued there is a very rational strategic reason for their actions. They see Iran gaining possession of nuclear weapons as an existential threat and they see sanctions as having failed.

There is a belief that Iran must be stopped from possessing nuclear weapons at any cost and that only a military solution can meet that goal.

 

[Sasaferrato]

The government has very little to gain from total isolation and it isn't going to happen.

What I think is the problem here is that some people are assuming that brutal actions by a state are indicative of some sort of unusual militaristic insanity, rather than just being business as usual. Killing hundreds or thousands of people to retain control of an area is standard behaviour. It doesn't imply a rampaging out-of-control "rogue state" likely to irrationally invade anywhere even at the cost of its own destruction, any more than it did when the now deceased Mr S. Hussein was in power in Iraq.

Quite. It is hard to see how Britain and the US can justify Iraq, there was no direct attack, or even threat of attack.

I do not believe for one moment that the use of live rounds on that ship was military policy, therefore it was a situation that got completely out of control, with dreadful results. In the night, with mayhem all around, a shot is fired, the other soldiers do not know who fired, but feel that they are under threat, and open fire at the protesters. Having been in slightly similar situations, I can understand how it could happen. However, these were supposedly elite troops; one expects better.

It is inconceivable that Israel should wish to completely isolate itself, therefore, I do not believe that the tragedy on board the boat was the government's doing, nor do I believe that their intent is deliberate isolation. It simply doesn't make sense.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I don't think I have said they are "insane" or "out of "control." I have argued there is a very rational strategic reason for their actions. They see Iran gaining possession of nuclear weapons as an existential threat and they see sanctions as having failed.

There is a belief that Iran must be stopped from possessing nuclear weapons at any cost and that only a military solution can meet that goal.

If you think that they are likely to try to invade or nuke Iran, that *is* saying that they are insane, because those would be insane things to do in that they would lead to the destruction of the Israeli state.

 

[Sasaferrato]

If you think that they are likely to try to invade or nuke Iran, that *is* saying that they are insane, because those would be insane things to do in that they would lead to the destruction of the Israeli state.

Israel will probably end up bombing Iran, as a proxy for the rest of the world.

 

[dylans]

If you think that they are likely to try to invade or nuke Iran, that *is* saying that they are insane, because those would be insane things to do in that they would lead to the destruction of the Israeli state.

I haven't seen any scenario where an attack on Iran would lead to the destruction of Israel. Do you have any evidence of that claim? All the scenarios I have read (and I have read a few) have predicted a tough war and some Israeli casualties but in the end an Israeli victory.

More importantly it is clear that Netanyahu and the rightists in the coalition don't think that either. They do however think that a nuclear Iran would be the end of Israel.

Remember his election promise. It was central to his campaign

It's 1938 and Iran is Germany. And Iran is racing to arm itself with atomic bombs,"
I promise that if I am elected, Iran will not acquire nuclear arms, and this implies everything necessary to carry this out

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/aluf-benn-will-netanyahu-attack-iran-1.273292

I am not sure why you so readily dismiss the prospect of an attack on Iran. This is a country after all who have attacked, Egypt, Iraq, Syria and Lebanon in the recent past and got away with it all.

As far as international isolation is concerned. It is clear that the US is fully behind Israel. They even thanked Obama for his support after the flotilla murders.

We'd like to express our thanks to the United States that worked behind the scenes to water down the [statement] at the United Nations," said Mark Regev, an Israeli government spokesman.

In the end time will tell. I hope I am wrong and I will not be posting on here in a few months to say "told you so"

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I have never ever seen anyone say that Israel could successfully invade Iran, and if I did I'd dismiss them as nutcases because it's patently ridiculous. I don't believe the US could successfully invade Iran either. ("Successfully invade" here being "attack and take over the system of government and control the country".) The election statements of militarists who stake their careers on being Harder On The Arabs Than The Other Lot don't mean anything as to actual actions. They all say they're going to keep people safe and win against terrorism absolutely, too, don't they?

Israel may *attack* Iran in some way - special forces, maybe bombs - but even that is pushing it a bit at the moment.

 

[dylans]

I don't recall suggesting they are going to "invade" Iran.

I said they are going to attack it in order to destroy their nuclear capacity. (or potential nuclear capacity rather)

 

[FridgeMagnet]

The Israeli government can't destroy its nuclear capacity without starting a full scale war, which would destroy them and would not happen in the first place in the foreseeable future - because, coming back to my previous point, the state isn't composed of and controlled by self-destructive fanatics.

 

[dylans]

Why are you so sure a full scale war would destroy Israel?

 

[FridgeMagnet]

It would be militarily unwinnable, engender intense opposition domestically and isolate the country internationally. The domestic opposition in itself means it won't happen.

 

[dylans]

It would be militarily unwinnable, engender intense opposition domestically and isolate the country internationally. The domestic opposition in itself means it won't happen.

Israeli public opinion? Sure about that?

Fully 71 percent of Israelis believe that the United States should launch a military attack on Iran if diplomatic efforts fail to halt Tehran's nuclear program, according to a new poll.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/poll-71-of-israelis-want-u-s-to-strike-iran-if-talks-fail-1.220901

 

[FridgeMagnet]

You will note that even a study carried out by an explicitly Zionist university only even suggested that people were prepared to say they thought the *US* should do something.

Pretty sure, yes.

 

[dylans]

Suppose all diplomatic and economic efforts fail to convince Iran to shut down its uranium enrichment plant. If that happens, would you support or oppose Israeli military action aimed at destroying the Iranian nuclear facilities? (Maagar Mohot Survey Institute, April 23-26, 2009)

Support
75%
Oppose
15%
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Society_&_Culture/ispoiran.html

Poll: 66% of Israeli Jews back attack on Iran
ADL poll finds a majority of those who favor strike would maintain their support even if U.S. opposed strike

.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/poll-66-of-israeli-jews-back-attack-on-iran-1.275298

Still sure?
Please feel free to post a single scrap of evidence for your view.

 

[Dr Jon]

Israel is the Mad Dog of the Middle East.

These trends are likely only to deepen in the coming months and years, making Israel an ever greater pariah in the eyes of much of the world. The mad dog is baring his teeth, and it is high time the international community decided how to deal with him