Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
January 18, 2009
Ceasefire and Score

So the Israelis announced a ceasefire under the condition that the Palestinians in Gaza stop launching rockets. After shooting 17 rockets and mortars at Israel today, to make sure the world gets who won this war, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and others also declare a ceasefire which will end if the IDF does not retreat from Gaza within a week and if the blockade is not lifted.

While it will withdraw the troops, Israel is unlikely to lift the blockade, except for too few 'humanitarian' transports, before the election in February.

The tunnels will be rebuild and the Bedouins will continue to resupply Gaza as long as Gaza has some money which it will get one way or another. Only now more than before.

The U.S. and other 'western' nations signed an MoU with Israel about
the Egyptian border with Gaza and the Egyptian dictator said he will
ignore it.

The situation on the ground after the war will thereby be the same as it was before the war.Except for all those needlessly dead and wounded.

So what is the score.

John Mearsheimer's headline is right Another War, Another Defeat. The Observer editorializes A pointless war has led to a moral defeat for Israel. Colonel Lang says this is was An inevitable outcome in Gaza and he predicted it, as I did on January 2.

While Israel waged an unprecedented propaganda campaign around this war and had significant help of the 'western' mainstream media, a lot of people in this world are in rage about its brutal onslaught and now (again) aware of the plight of the people in Gaza. This seems to include a significant number of Jewish people who before this campaign supported Israel and are now turning against it.

Israel's relations to other countries have suffered a setback that will last a long time. Qatar and Mauritania who had good diplomatic relations with Israel have frozen these. More important, the Turkish president and its prime minister have spoken harshly against Israel. Turkey was the only country in the area with friendly relations with Israel. That is over. The proposed oil, gas and water pipeline from Turkey to Israel is now a dead project.

The war was costly for Israel. Not only because it had to call in reservists which left a lot of the economy dormant but also because of effective boycotts in Jordan, the UK and the Scandinavian countries. The international product barcode number for Israel is 729. People now check for those number on products and will not buy anything where the barcode starts with 729.

Fatah and Mahmoud Abbas have been exposed as the payed Israeli collaborators the are and lost a lot of standing. While Hamas has shown resilience and gained in support.

The war aim of lifting the electability of Livni and Barak might have been achieved (I doubt their poll numbers will hold) but it is still likely that the Likud nuts will come ahead in the next Israeli election. The Israeli public wants more war and their next government is likely to start another one.

After losing in Lebanon in 2006 and in Gaza in 2008/9 losing another one might be the only way for the Israeli people to learn that war is not an answer to legitimate demands.

Comments

(the shorter slothrop john bolton position)
Arnon Soffer, a prominent Israeli demographer who also advised Sharon, elaborated on what that pressure would look like. “When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today, with the aid of an insane fundamentalist Islam. The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day.”
from the mearsheimer article

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 18 2009 17:41 utc | 1

On a similar vein As’ad AbuKhalil (Angry Arab) analysis of the colonizers defeat in Gaza.

So Israel failed in 1) achieving a total surrender of Hamas; 2) in propping up the Dahlan-Abu Mazen gangs who are more discredited today than ever. Early in the campaign, Dahlan appeared on Al-Arabiyya and on Egyptian TV and was quite bombastic because he was expecting that the matter would be over in the first week. When that did not happen, he disappeared, and some say that he went back to Montenegro–his news base. 3) Israel failed in achieving a victory that it needed: a victory that would once and for all put to rest the humiliating defeat of Israel in 2006. Hamas new that its performance was exctremely influential in possibly dramtically altering the image of the Israeli soldiers in the eyes of all Arabs: fighters and lay people alike, and it knew that expectations were in building on the performance on Hizbullah in 2006; 4) Israel failed in creating a rift between the Paelstinian people and Hamas, just as it failed to create a rift between the population of the South and Hizbullah, its silly SMS messages notwithstanding; 5) Israel failed in putting an end to the rockets; 6) Israel failed in smashing Hamas; 7) Israel failed in creating a new pyschological climate in the Middle East: it was expected that Israel would use more massive and indiscriminate violence than before, and that it would try to “shock and awe” more than before because it wanted to kill the image of its humiliation in South Lebanon. That was not accomplished despite the high number of casualties among the civilians. 8) Israeli prime minister today bragged about intelligence successes: but that was inflated. It is true the killing of two Hamas leaders (along with tens of innocent civilians but that is how Israel “assassinates”) was a success for Israel but there are other Hamas leaders. Plus, Israel policy of assuming that an organization would die by killing the leader has always been one of the many dumb Israeli misculations.The most recent case was in 1992 when Israeli terrorist leaders killed Abbas Musawi (and his family) and they got…Hasan Nasrallah instead. I have no doubt that they probably now regret killing Musawi. And Hamas now operates on the assumption that all leaders may die and they have most likely structured the organization on that assumption, unlike the centrally run, say, DFLP or Fatah under `Arafat. 9) Israel failed to build on the years-old Saudi policy of mobilizing Arab public opion against Iran, instead of Israel. That clearly failed miserably. If anything, Arab public opinion is more mobilized against Israel than any other time in memory. 10) Israel failed to sell its slaughter as a legitimate contribution to the “war on terrorism”. Clearly, the scenes of carnage offended pubilic opinion around the wortld with the excepeption of the US and the UN embassy of Mironesia. But there are successes: if Israel was aiming to kill a very large number of women and children, that was achieved to a learge measure.

As you may know he doesn’t like paragraphs :).
And something that if true (even partially) may be remarcable (and make the Dahlan gang return wild dreams more of a fantasy that it ever was):

Very knowledgeable sources in Beirut tell me that only 5% of Hamas’ fighting abilities were damaged in this war thus far, and there will be another round no doubt.

Posted by: ThePaper | Jan 18 2009 18:20 utc | 2

Finkelstein posts the photo comparison. It was linked somewhere here before on a Palestinian blog, but I can’t find that now. Recommended.

Pat Lang made a point I did not make above about the absence of Iranian weapons:

It is claimed by the agitpropers that Hamas is a satellite organization of Iran. If that is so, then Iran has done a poor job of supplying their Palesinian subsidiary. Where are the Iranian product improved and manufactured weapons that Hizbullah possessed in numbers in ’06? Where are they? Impossible to deliver? All of them?
It would seem that political support and encouragement is one thing. Supply is another.

That is not because Iran is incapable of supplying Hamas. It doesn’t want or need to.

Posted by: b | Jan 18 2009 18:41 utc | 3

b, your last paragraph was depressing, but I suppose the forecast is realistic. Hitler also suffered innumerable defeats but kept lashing out madly till the roof caved in on him (figuratively speaking).
When will Israel ‘cave in’ to demands for a free Palestine? Probably sooner than most people expect.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 18 2009 18:44 utc | 4

b (3), this is a point close to my heart. Iran hasn’t been supplying weapons to anyone in the Middle East. It’s been strictly money and know-how. 5 years of relentless accusations by the Pentagon of Iranian weapons supplies to Iraqi insurgents were exposed as lies by Gareth Porter who proved that they had been coming in from Saudi Arabia, as were more than 50 % of the insurgents and suicide bombers (Iran gave up suicide bombing in 1988 after expelling Iraq). If Iran will not supply weapons across an 800 km common border with Iraq, why in Heaven’s name would it be shipping them an extra 1000 km to its proxies???

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 18 2009 18:49 utc | 5

Parviz@5-Thanks!

Posted by: David | Jan 18 2009 19:06 utc | 6

The Paper – thanks.
The most important paragraph from Angry Arab’s analysis:

There is now a point of no-return: Arabs are no more afraid of Israeli soldiers. From that loss, Israel shall never recover and it will expedite the inevitable process of the elimination of Zionism from Palestine. The confrontation with Israel is cumulative, and this culmination is now not in the interests of Israel. Many Arabs now talk about the defeat of Israel: I rarely heard those sentiments before 2006.

Yep, a psychological sea-change is plausible on the Arab side but also on the Israeli site.
It will take a while for this defeat to sink in on the Israeli site. When it does, emigration numbers will sore (and not get published).
Parviz says above: When will Israel ‘cave in’ to demands for a free Palestine? Probably sooner than most people expect.
They will not cave in. They will leave. The prime engineers and alike are already leaving. The more secular young will follow and the U.S. will welcome them. The Russian mafiosi will leave too when there is no more loot to make and return to their home country. What will be left in the end are maniac settlers and some Orthodox who do not fight and don’t believe in Zionism anyway. The settler-type rednecks will then be defeated and leave too and the Sephardi Orthodox will stay around in a multi-religious Palestine as they did since ancient times.
On the Arab side this change in psych through two Israeli defeats will stiffen resistance against those U.S. paid dictatorial rulers and eventually topple several of them.

Posted by: b | Jan 18 2009 19:27 utc | 7

sometimes robert fisk, for all his work, sometimes says stupid things (on lebanon for example. on al jazeera today he sd he thought hamas thought they were hezbollah. hamas may be many things but one thing it is not is stupid – even rhetorically – it was not confused with comparison with hezbollah – it was living the realities
as b has pointed out on another thread even the number of fighters were relatively miniscule but as fighters they have shown extraordianary courage.
as for the intelligence ‘coups’ i understand that the two men from the political leadership were not in hiding, far from it – one was at home & the other was at his brothers
as for the pr – look at the largest demonstration ever organised in pakistan – millions – oppossing the slaughter of gaza
political islam will have a flood of cadre that policy planners in their comfortable offices cannot even conceive

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 18 2009 19:35 utc | 8

They failed at Lebanon. Now I don’t think they can be really satisfied about the outcome Gaza. Leaving aside that the possibility that the ‘truce’ doesn’t survive the inaguration or, more likely, their own elections (what would the Likud do if it got control of the executive, and how much time it would take to be able to implement their new policies?). And as we know for sure that they will try again …
What will be their next objective? Lebanon? From what happened in 2006, the current high support from almost every party to Hezbollah and the likely increase in supplies due to their success from the last war (sponsors are happy) this time could be even worst for them. Gaza? Only real land invasion or ethnic cleansing would prove succesful and may be too costly for what Gaza is worth of. Would a couple more years starving Gaza through a blockade help to produce a different outcome? Would Hamas let themselves be weakenned that much without producing a ‘provocation’ before that? That even ignoring that the tunnels and smugglers will be on business as usual in a couple or months.
So what is left that has not been tried yet to demostrate to the arab and muslim subhuman that their undefeteable as they were and their racists bases who is the white-man boss? Iran perhaps? Conventional war, they may think, is the good stuff, just bomb the hell out of those persians. No more fourth generation crap where you lose if you ‘win’. Just do what their killer army is really good at, bomb something from thousand meters high. If the history was repeating in reverse Gaza 2008 would be like the Lebanon invasion to get ride of Arafat’s PLO. So what’s next? 1973? But no arab country is going to attack again Israel, not yet at least (unless ‘regime change’ happens sooner than expected in Egypt or Jordania of course). Then what about 1967? A new ‘preemptive’ war to secure the kingdom?
Of course they could try to expel all the palestinians from the West Bank. But unless something happens the West Bank is already completely under complete occupation and fully controlled by colonizer troops and their stoges. So I don’t see how they can create a ‘worthly’ war from that situation.

Posted by: ThePaper | Jan 18 2009 19:36 utc | 9

@Parviz – @5 – Iran hasn’t been supplying weapons to anyone in the Middle East. It’s been strictly money and know-how.
That is true for Hamas and Iraq. I have debunked those Pentagon EFP stories multiple times at this site.
I am not sure about Hizbollah. They seem to have some stuff one is unlikely to get without a nation state support. RPG-27 for example which were used in 20006 against Merkavas and the Chinese cruise missile they used against an Israeli ship. So I do wonder how they procure those and my best guess is that Iran has at least a hand in it.
In my view that would not be illegitimate at all. Hizbollah is the only effective and legitimate national Lebanese Army. The official one is incapable of anything and for purpose kept at that level.
There is also a lot of historic background in the Shia/religious connection and some in the ethnic/intermarriage between Iran and south Lebanese folks. So I tend to think Hezbollah has some, legitimate, supply from Iran.
I have of course no way to prove that and will take your claim seriously.

Posted by: b | Jan 18 2009 19:44 utc | 10

@The Paper @9 – I think the next planed target is Iran.
Hizbollah only if there is a real provocation that will not come. Then again capturing the waters of the Litani is a long term aim that, while it has proven unachievable several times, may still be in Netanjahu’s plans.
Syria only if some strategic aim can be reached but there is none beyond the Golan heights.
Jordan, Egypt, West Bank? Nothing to gain there for Israel beyond what it has.
Iran? To make a point of invincibility but only successfully doable with active US support which is unlikely because of US/Obama’s commitments in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Netanjahu may try that but would likely lose a bunch of planes and – more important – pilots, for achieving absolutely no strategic gain while getting into serious problems with the US.
As said not clearly enough in my post above, the psychological change is not only in Israel and with the Arabs.
This is the first time I have seen disgust and active protests against Israels wars by Jews all over the world in major public outlets. If that continues the Zionist project is busted.

Posted by: b | Jan 18 2009 20:06 utc | 11

they will open the crossings and they will rebuild. there has been a deal.

Posted by: outsider | Jan 18 2009 20:19 utc | 12

An attack against Iran may not even success if the russian provided air defence system proves a bit more successful than expected (or if the russians is handing Iran better stuff and intelligence under hand to weaken the US in the Middle East than what we know right now). That would be deadly embarrasing for the colony.
Flying through turkish airspace (and likely using those georgian bases as backup … in fact that makes even more likely for some surprise pay back from Russia for supporting that crazy georgian) now seems impossible (unless Erdogan receives a ‘deserved’ ration of regime change for his ‘betrayal’, second one after refusing to allow US troops to invade Iraq from the north). In fact given the current mood we could even see NATO F16 fighters downing colonizer F16 fighters for attempting (that would be ‘fun’).
So that only leaves the route through Jordania or Saudi Arabia. Both would be willing to help weaken their main regional rival and let them fly through their air spaces. Flying through Syria would give early warning to the iranian air defences. So that’s not an option unless they first try to destroy the syrian radar installations. But that would require another provocation (and something better than bombing some building in the middle of nowhere) and weeks long air war and that means months or years of preparation/delay.
I doubt they need even implicit support from the US for crossing the iraqi air space. What US general or commander would order to fire israeli planes without orders from the top, it would be career suicide in the AIPAC controlled US, and given the propper conditions it would take some minutes for the president or someone with enough authority in the US to give the authorization. At cruise speed it will take just a few minutes to cross the iraqi space. And there is all that stuff of plausibly deniability (that no arab or irani will believe but that’s a given). The problem is resupply. Does the saudis have air resupply capabilities? I doubt they would go as far as lending their bases. That would be going a bit too far even for them. So it would be a suicide trip? Can their modified F16 reach their objectives so far inside Iran and turn to a friendly ex-soviet republic for an ’emergency’ landing? And if had to happen it would have to be ‘soon’. Before Iraq gets back control of their airspace or at least some control or access to radar stations (aka early warning stations for the iranis).
And that without taking into account that the irani long range missiles and their Hizbollah allies provide a quite credible retaliatory capability. I wouldn’t put pass their capabilities to hit and critically damage Dimona. Though I doubt the irani leadership would actually go beyond the menace given the danger to the palestinian population due to radiactive fallout (and they will want palestinians, and therefore arabs, on their side).
In their strategic planning (at least from what transpires from mainstream media and propaganda media like Debka) Hizbollah and Hamas had to weakened before attacking Iran to remove or reduce the retaliatory capabilities of Iran. They didn’t success. So will they keep the plan going without changes? Or attempt a small plan change and try to weaken the third leg of iranian support in the region Syria? Of course Syria could be bought (and much cheaper) out of supporting Hizbollah, Hamas and their strategic alliance with Iran but right now such realistic approach seems far from their supremacist planning.

Posted by: ThePaper | Jan 18 2009 20:51 utc | 13

the thug spokesman for israel, mark regev is so moronic – i imagine he is in a coma

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 18 2009 21:13 utc | 14

I gotta admit, the outcome of this surprised me. I assumed there would be a lot of destruction and all of Hamas would be wiped out. I doubt that has happened unless there were only 500 or so to begin with.
taking a look at the headlines in google, the sentiment seems to be that Israel tried the iron fist approach and it didn’t work. the headlines speak of Hamas giving Israel one week to get out, that sounds a lot different from headlines of yesterday. Even the Israel firsters are oddly muted. i guess they too are trying to figure out what they are supposed to say now. the rockets did not stop and Israel did.
it appears that Israel is going to have to come up with a plan on how to be relevant again. With the US occupying Iraq and having installed puppets there, Israel’s importance strategically is diminished, the only thing left there is the culture of graft and greed cultivated over 30 some years of free money, some of which was used to lobby for more.
at any rate, the only people who could have changed this situation were US Jews and it seems that they did indeed change it.
so, thanks. I just wish you all had thought about it a bit earlier.

Posted by: dan of steele | Jan 18 2009 21:27 utc | 15

dan of steel
there is one point you make that we have not written enough about – & that is the culture of corruption in israel – there are barely one or two national figures in the govt – that are not touched in one way or another by corruption. & you are right it is connected deeply with the free money from the u s
it is a corruption so venal i am szurprised some of them can rear their heads without feeling like the frauds they actually are
netanyahu & omert are just two caught with their hands in the cookie jar & i am sure it is the tip of the iceberg both for them & for the elites of israel. i mean, they are really just common crooks

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 18 2009 21:33 utc | 16

DoS “the only people who could have changed this situation were US Jews and it seems that they did indeed change it.”
There has been much discussion about Obama here at MOA. What follows has probably been said before here at MOA, so forgive me for adding my opinion to those who have heard enough. Lately, I am constantly reminded of Colin’s Powell’s speech at the U.N. before Bush invaded Iraq. Colin Powell was a single person of influence who could have probably prevented the disaster. Likewise, Obama was in a unique position to speak out against the Gaza invasion. I believe in the old saying, “If you see a wrong and don’t try to right it you are part of the wrong.” I don’t fault anyone who was not in a position to speak up or act, but Obama certainly was in such a position. Obama and his team could have spoken up forcefully, but instead, remained silent. He repeated, “There is only one President at a time” yet that did not prevent him from almost on a daily basis, giving statements about the course for economic policy. Obama, in my opinion, has joined the ranks of our elite who have blood on their hands.
Without a doubt, Israel is its own worse enemy. However, as to the American Jewish community as being the ones to credit for the pause or simmering down of this Palestinian slaughter of innocents, I question this. If so, that is not true of the majority of the many retired Jewish people I know around this area. Sadly, the population of all races and creeds around here, including the local media, was terribly silent or pro-Israel.

Posted by: Rick | Jan 18 2009 22:24 utc | 17

There is disconnect between their glorious visions and the bloody reality of war that the Israeli politicans and American Chicken Hawks never get. They start Battles to win elections that are really never ending Wars. All that is accomplished is forging enemies who will fight to the death; never understanding the horror and randomness of death they’ve inflicted. That the Israelis fell lockstep into the AEI battle plan is senseless. Israel is on the cusp of being an encircled corrupt ghetto. American is on the edge of bankrupcy and a forced withrawal from its overseas Wars.

Posted by: VietnamVet | Jan 18 2009 22:59 utc | 18

What I base my comment on Rick, is the way the news of Israel’s attack on Gaza was handled in corporate media. I am one of the tinfoil hatters who believe there is a considerable Jewish influence in US print media and broadcast teevee and radio. Many of the traditional “unqualified support for Israel all the time” papers and teevee stations became critical and questioning of this latest adventure. I am sure many knew that it could not end well and were trying to salvage whatever image was left of Israel as a victim. that victim status has served them very well for the last 40 years or so and you gotta go with what you know.
I do not wish to defend Obama but he is smart enough to know not to take an anti israel stand before he even gets into office. that would truly be political suicide. even better, when you see your opponent is struggling stay out of his way.
your point about the general population being blood thirsty and enjoying the scenes of destruction, I see that too. that will take a bit of time to overcome, after all there has been a very concerted effort over the past decades to carefully craft the Arab as smarmy/subhuman/lazy/crafty/someone wanting to blow himself up so he can have 70 virgins. we have had the same kinds of thoughts about Indians (red), Japanese, Germans, North Koreans, Vietnamese, and Russians. Most of us have got past fearing and loathing any of the aforementioned groups but the stereotypical arab still strikes fear into the heart of the average american.
Also, it has long been forbidden to speak out against Israel because we can not speak out against Jews and nearly everyone equates the two. I remember a colleague who chided me for saying Jew, he suggested I refer to them as Jewish people. Isn’t that odd? I can call someone a Catholic or Baptist or Muslim but I can not call someone a Jew? I believe that is the reason for silence in your local paper more than anything else.

Posted by: dan of steele | Jan 18 2009 23:25 utc | 19

from lancet pdf

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 18 2009 23:33 utc | 20

Someone here recently predicted Israel would call a unilateral cease fire, no? – just in time for the inauguration, avoid any “agreements”, and remain in control, re-enter at will, keep border crossings closed. Looks like just that is what’s happened.
I have some naive questions: How many Israeli fighters were actually in Gaza? Why weren’t more killed? How do they keep themselves supplied, fed, when in hostile territory? Do they live inside their tanks, or what? Was the Israeli cease fire due to the their running out of supplies, fatigue, or some such? I expected there would be more dead Israeli soldiers, disabled tanks, and the like, due to snipers, booby traps, bombs under tanks. Did these things happen?
Also. I don’t understand how the MoU can be legally binding to the Obama admin. Or is its purpose to give BO an excuse to commit the US military even more against Hamas?
Thanks.

Posted by: Hamburger | Jan 18 2009 23:48 utc | 21

Ah, a new nursery rhyme for my kids:
Humpty Dumpty built a great big wall
Humpty Dumpty in Lebanon did fall
In Gaza all of his air force and all of his men
couldn’t makes us fear him ever again

Posted by: mo | Jan 18 2009 23:52 utc | 22

hamburger
the israeli infantry never moved into the centre of towns & villages because they couldn’t the fighting was too ferocious & the idf could not risk a massive loss of life. gaza was bomed from air land & sea but the infantry got nowhere – it is a historic defeat for israel because they were not fighting an army but essentially a relatively small armed group of men – i think b has largely got those numbers correct – it is humiliating
relative to the exercise – israel had enormous amount of men & munitions & all it amounted to in the end was massive death of innocents. in these circumstances all hamas had to do was learn & it appears none, none of the military leadership was touched. the two pilitical figures who were murdered were living out in the open, publically. israel has a long history of coercing in the most brutal way – informers & the very breakdown of society that israel has constructed nourishes informers. the film ‘battle of algiers’ takes on this question frontally because it is a difficult one. no one is immune to this – even during the sieges of warsaw crakov, riga etc – there were jewish informers & sometimes organisations – the judenrat – which operated under & with the nazis
i don’t know but assume the matériel was damaged much more seriouslly than the state of israel would like us to believe

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 0:07 utc | 23

& i think they conciously used a strategy of massacring innocent to try & seperate the people from the organisation
in this they failed quite dismally

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 0:13 utc | 24

RG – Thanks. When it was reported that Israeli troops (tanks?) had cut Gaza in two, I assumed that meant that soldiers (even in armored vehicles) were well inside more urban areas. With you, spouse says they never really entered the cities and towns. Still, how did they survive re food, sleep, supplies? (I wonder how things are organized.)
Still, since their purposes seem achievable by air and sea assaults (massive destruction, dispossession, terror), why send in the army at all?

Posted by: Hamburger | Jan 19 2009 0:32 utc | 25

Hamburger,
Hamas was never going to fight in rural areas, they did not have the advantages of wadis and hills that Hizballah had in 06. Therefore they could only make it an urban fight. As such Israel was relatively free to roam the non-urban areas and therefore supply, rotate and feed as they wanted.
The army was sent in simply because if they could have taken a city it would have been a big propganda coup for Livni and Barak and helped in the elections.
The Iron Fist seems very rusty tonight!

Posted by: mo | Jan 19 2009 0:41 utc | 26

Parviz @5:
Iran hasn’t been supplying weapons to anyone in the Middle East.
This is laughable. They supplied Hezbollah with tow missiles back in the liberation of Lebanon. Like Iran is going to form military pacts with Syria and Hezbollah and then refuse to sell them arms? Watch ya been smoking?

Posted by: Sam | Jan 19 2009 1:12 utc | 27

Sam,
Not so laughable if you include the rest of the sentence -“It’s been strictly money and know-how”. Give a man a fish he eats for a day, teach him how to fish……

Posted by: mo | Jan 19 2009 1:34 utc | 28

hamburger
they did what the u s did in fallujah going from house to house by smashing the walls so they are never in the open – there has been much newsreel of the houses that have been left standing – are fulll of the rubbish & the detrius – potato chips, tuna in cans etc etc – their faeces etc etc – much like they did in ramallah in 2002 shitting on photocopying machines in schools, destroying archives – vanadalism as an added extra to their extraordinary violence
they attempted to enter because they thought they could humiliate the population of gaza into submission – it didn’t work – i think that tells us a great deal
yes, as malooga sd the other day they could have totalled it – which by looking today they very nearly did but then the inevitable would have come to israel that much sooner
but i’m like you hamburger – interpreting what is not sd – & the fact that they leave out

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 1:47 utc | 29

sam
essentially parviz is correct & in any case movements of liberation have every right to seek their weapons from anywhere
given what the us gives israel it’s a bit of a stretch to start accusing iran

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 1:49 utc | 30

The score? As far as public relations it does not matter at all. The people who ‘matter’ aren’t bothered and the protesting public will soon go home. They don’t care.
Take a look at
this picture from Angry Arab. Do you think any of them would have been caught dead with Menachem Begin in 1982? Yet here they are, hosted by Man of the People, Hosni Mubarak. I’m not given to emotional writing, but I must say, I wish that man would die slowly, then burn in hell. And I want to see pictures of him burning in hell and demons devouring his charred flesh. Sorry I just had to say that. Now back to my mild mannered self.
And in Haaretz “EU leaders commit to helping prevent Hamas from rearming.” Just go to the page. I can’t link to it. After all this, that’s the only thing that matters. Not the blockade. Not reconstruction of a devastated Gaza. Just that. Sorry. This is not a win. I wish it were. But it aint.
Ok, NOW back to my mild mannered self.

Posted by: Lysander | Jan 19 2009 4:54 utc | 31

Sam (27), just a quickie before I set off for work. I’ll write more later:
You should read ex-CIA operative Robert Baer’s brilliant book “The Devil We Know” (2008), which I’ve just finished, which clearly states that Iran has NEVER DIRECTLY delivered any weapons to its surrogates, whether Hamas or Hezbollah. Also read Lawrence Wright’s equally brilliant “The Looming Tower” which provides solid evidence of sophisticated weapons manufacturing capabilities of Al Qaeda’s predecessors as early as the late Nineties. Finally, bear in mind that no government has the ability to stop the $$$ trillion drugs trade and the $$$ multi-billion weapons trade, so it’s not only weapons of Iranian origin but Russian-made RPGs (b) that are ending up in the hands of the two Hs.
The Mullahs would never leave fingerprints, so everything about direct, government sanctioned weapons supplies from Iran is pure speculation. Ironically, with all this talk of “U.S. Soft Power”, it was actually Iran that invented and practised the concept while the U.S. was wreaking global havoc like a bull in a china ship. If you read Baer, you’ll realize the Mullahs’ sophistication is frightening.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 5:25 utc | 32

Sam & Parvis… Now this is laughable!

Iranian experts devise special containers for clandestine delivery of arms to Gaza
DEBKAfile Exclusive Report
January 18, 2009, 11:09 PM (GMT+02:00)
DEBKAfile’s military sources report that Israel relayed a warning to Hamas through Egypt that any more Iranian or Syrian attempts to smuggle rockets or other heavy weapons into Gaza by land or by sea would be deemed a breach of the ceasefire and generate Israeli military action to stop them.
Our sources further disclose that Iranian marine experts and engineers, after making a study of submerged Mediterranean currents, have designed special containers for the clandestine shipment of arms to Gaza by sea.
The containers are dropped from freighters out at sea, plummet to a calculated depth and carried by the undercurrent to a point close to the Gaza shore. A built-in mechanism then shoots them up to the surface, where Gazan fishermen pick up the bobbing containers. A marine expert on deck of these Iranian freighters guides the captain to the exact location for dropping the container.
This is only one of Tehran’s covert tricks for shipping arms to Gaza. To beat them, the United States, Israel and Egypt will need to set a special military-marine intelligence outfit.
Iran’s huge investment of money and brainpower in this task is a measure of the strategic importance it attaches to its ties with Hamas and through them its presence in Gaza.

Posted by: Rick | Jan 19 2009 5:54 utc | 33

Debka!
Here, pull my finger.

Posted by: Thrasyboulos | Jan 19 2009 6:29 utc | 34

Actually, I am surprised the Israeli spooks have leaked such a juicy bit to Debka. Seems a waste, really, such a good story. Containers at just the right depth to catch the currents to the Gaza shores. Those crafty Iranians.
Usually, said spooks would go directly to the New York Times…oh, I forget. Judith Miller is not working there any more. Maybe they can try the NYT man on Iran, Michael Gordon. He’s reliable on Iran.
Where is Scooter Libby when you need him, eh? Those were the good old days.

Posted by: Thrasyboulos | Jan 19 2009 6:45 utc | 35

And here April 1 is months away.
Jeez!

Posted by: Thrasyboulos | Jan 19 2009 6:52 utc | 36

Israel recruits ‘army of bloggers’ to combat anti-Zionist Web sites

The Immigrant Absorption Ministry announced on Sunday it was setting up an “army of bloggers,” to be made up of Israelis who speak a second language, to represent Israel in “anti-Zionist blogs” in English, French, Spanish and German.

“During the war, we looked for a way to contribute to the effort,” the ministry’s director general, Erez Halfon, told Haaretz. “We turned to this enormous reservoir of more than a million people with a second mother tongue.” Other languages in which bloggers are sought include Russian and Portuguese.
Halfon said volunteers who send the Absorption Ministry their contact details by e-mail, at media@moia.gov.il, will be registered according to language, and then passed on to the Foreign Ministry’s media department, whose personnel will direct the volunteers to Web sites deemed “problematic.”

Posted by: b | Jan 19 2009 6:59 utc | 37

Rick (33), if the story were true it would mean that Iran is the cleverest and most advanced military superpower in the world, which it isn’t, otherwise it would have found a way also to ship the weapons invisibly. (Beam me up, Scottie!).
Thank you, Thrasyboulos, for responding to the so-called ‘report’ with the disdain it deserved!
And after what you did to us poor Persians at Salamis, Plataea and Thermopylae I think only the Greeks could have come up with such a dastardly and effective plan 😉

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 9:39 utc | 38

On a more serious note, and on topic:
remembereringgiap (8), I have to defend Fisk here. If we were watching the same Al Jazeera interview (at about 08:30 Tehran time today or midnight EST) he actually said that there was a huge difference MILITARILY between Hamas and Hezbullah, which is obviously correct. He also added that HAMAS clearly lost the war, which is also technically correct because in 2006 the ratio of Israeli:Hezbollah SOLDIERS killed was 1:1 (= 150 of each), whereas in Gaza it was probably (and questionably) 1:10.
What Fisk went on to say in his usual incomparable self was that Israel may have won this battle but has definitely lost the war.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 9:46 utc | 39

Oh, yes, and he also disparaged HAMAS because he stated that GAZA was teeming with Israeli spies and Palestinian double-agents (traitors) before the invasion who relayed the precise whereabouts of HAMAS’ leaders to Israel which then demolished those buildings (and everything around them). There were many HAMAS leaders among the 1300 killed and 5000 wounded.
This is why, much as we may hate to admit it, in the interests of objectivity one might conclude that Israel’s (short-term) military goals were indeed met (of course, at the cost of Israel’s future security).

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 9:50 utc | 40

B@37 indicates that Israel is losing faith in it’s fifth column the jewish communities in various countries who would normally handle these ‘problems’ thru anti-defamation league volunteers and the like.
Firstly the sheer numbers of angry citizens appalled at the bloodshed are too much for any ad hoc response and secondly the worm is turning, jews in countries that aren’t subject to the 24/7 zionist newspeak are beginning to have doubts, big doubts and probably are not in any fit state to withstand the tide of trenchant criticism from those joe dunderheads who begin” I have always been a big supporter of israel but. . . ”
Yesterday (sunday’s) guardian had a guest column from some amerikan jew who imagines that ‘all reasonable people’ must share her view, gathered after a lifetime of lies and vitriolic hatred of palestinians has been pumped into her at ‘hebrew classes’, a totally mad woman who tried to argue everyone that is critical of the gaza massacre must be a nazi. The guardian is one of the many staunchly pro-zionist english fishwraps who have been hit with a double whammy of reporters in the field who can no longer spin the horror they have been witnessing and angry readers that have had enough of the day after day slaughter of innocents. I suppose the editors imagined that giving this lunatic space was a way to square things up again with their and the english labour party’s zionist backers. Lol read the comments. Page after page of peeps who are mad and aren’t gonna take it anymore.
The guardians editors didn’t know what to do – about half the responses have been deleted. God knows what for since it is difficult to believe that many guardian readers use obscenities. In the end they closed off the comments. A big black mark for the editors’ anti-defamation league or B’nai B’rith award I imagine.
In the future zionist advocacy groups will describe events in terms of before Gaza or after Gaza. This horror has finally brought the reality of what it means to force a jewish state onto Palestinian’s territory home to the head in the sand mob who thought that life was a leon uris novel.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Jan 19 2009 10:05 utc | 41

I’m sorry, ThePaper, but I’ve been reading your and b’s posts, especially your #13, with gratitude for your concern but with some amusement at the dangers you mention of a U.S. or Israeli attack on Iran:
1. So that only leaves the route through Jordania or Saudi Arabia. Both would be willing to help weaken their main regional rival and let them fly through their air spaces.
Every country in the Middle East, including stalwart U.S. allies S. Arabia, Kuwait and Iraq, have officially and loudly refused permission for their territory or airspace to be used for an attack on Iran. The dictatorships are either too scared of Iran and/or too scared of their own people (which includes Jordan, within reach of Hezbollah) to sanction such an attack.
2. The U.S. knows that Iran would hit U.S. battleships in retaliation via numerous Silkworm missiles concealed deep underground along the 1000 km coast. Ex-CIA operative Robert Baer (I’ve quoted him a lot recently) believes Iran would (not could) sink the U.S. fleet, including its aircraft carriers, within approx. 15 minutes and close the Straits of Hormoz which is only 21 km across at its narrowest point. (Hallo, $ 500 oil).
3. The U.S. military in Iraq would be sitting ducks both from within and from outside. That’s the last thing the U.S. needs.
4. The U.S. has generated such global opprobrium for its actions in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan that it can no longer conduct ‘business as usual’. Even the Bush Administration loudly rejected Israel’s request for permission to bomb Natanz.
5. Obama sanctioning an attack on Iran??? This would go against the very core and fundamental beliefs of everyone who supported his candidacy.

CONCLUSION:
If I’m wrong and Iran is attacked, and if you don’t hear from ‘Parviz’ again, it will mean one of 2 things:
a) I’m dead
b) I’m too embarrassed to post.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 10:13 utc | 42

Great post, Rick (17), I too am deeply disappointed about his ‘hands-on’ approach to the economy and his ‘tight lip’ over foreign policy. It’s hypocritical for him to claim there’s only one president at a time when he acts like the already sworn-in president on one issue and feigns incapacity on another that cries for a declaration.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 10:19 utc | 43

Dan of Steele (19), I also see your point. You and Rick are both right :-(((
On the one hand, Obama should have said SOMETHING about the civilian carnage (even if he didn’t directly attack Israel), while your point is valid, in a morbid Machiavellien sense, that he would be foolish to take on Israel at this stage: “that would truly be political suicide. even better, when you see your opponent is struggling stay out of his way.”

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 10:24 utc | 44

remembereringgiap (23):
“…. none of the military leadership was touched”
That’s because they’re in Iran 😉

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 10:27 utc | 45

In the Independent today Fisk says:

And Hamas has had its claws cut. Israel’s informers in Gaza handed over the locations of its homes and hideouts and the government of Gaza must be wondering if they can ever close down the spy rings. Hamas thought its militia was the Hizbollah – a serious error – and that the world would eventually come to its aid. . .

Fisk supplies no evidence at all to support either contention and considering that he is always dodgy ie prepared to not let the facts get in the way of a good story when discussing any activity in the ME where the principals may have been involved with shia muslims. I don’t reckon his contentions need be taken seriously.
We do know that hamas has been weeding out spies over the year plus duration of the siege and that the corrupt fatah (one of fisk’s main sources in Palestine) are far more heavily penetrated by israel than hamas). A good example was the speed with which hamas uncovered the joint israeli/ gaza smugglers plot to kidnap Alan Johnston. While the heavily penetrated and corrupt fatah ran security in the strip the crime remained unsolved yet it was cleared up within 2 days of hamas taking control.
We also know that israel ‘only’ managed to assassinate two senior elected officials, both of who were in the open with their families. Israel would have wanted to kill every last senior elected hamas official but couldn’t because they didn’t have good enough intelligence.
The address of israel’s biggest score Interior Minister Said Siam was given to israel by fatah, not by any mossad agent or hamas double agent.
Fisk is one of those old school english arabists many of whom were gay although I have no reason to think Fisk is even if his relationship with arabs is as exploitative as those old english men who used to take advantage of the endemic poverty in many parts of the ME by encouraging young men to prostitute themselves. A foul practise going back at least as far as TE Lawrence. The difference is Fisk trades in information not sex.
Anyway Fisk shares Lawrence’s sensibilities – he looks down his nose at shia arabs who he considers to be poorly educated and lacking in the genteel behaviour of the sunni ruling classes.
For example fisk has always favoured the crooked Hariri mob, Rafiq was a saudi citizen and a sunni of course, ahead of the poor lebanese who are mainly Shia. Even when arabs live in a community free of sectarianism fisk and his ilk always try and emphasise sectarian difference. In most cases that is to divide and rule, with fisk it is more likely to be simple snobbery.
As long as Hamas are allied with shia political movements in Iran and the lebanon, fisk will disparage them, often just by repeating scuttlebut given him by his fatah ‘contacts’.

Posted by: Debs is dead | Jan 19 2009 10:51 utc | 46

Deb is dead,
I like the comparisons. Anything that can make me laugh is cool. Fisk as a poofer is a funny image, in a sad, sick sort of way that only a nerd like me would find funny and an hour like this.
The average american forgets (if they even knew) that there isn’t just one group of arabs, but a mess of different and competing religious factions, tribal groups and national identities – all have been tweaked and fucked with by western powers to keep the region unstable. The only people who are surprised the Middle East is in such a mess are those americans who still believe in the media illusion that most problems can be solved in a half-hour TV show; harder problems might take a two or three day mini-series.
America is peopled with short attention spans. Anything that can’t be solved or fixed in 18 minutes or doesn’t have an easy B&W solution doesn’t play well.
The score? Everyone loses, as always happens in war.
But Hamas has made quite a last stand, and properly spun, MAYBE this could start changing american perceptions about the cause of the Middle East problems. Americans love an underdog, and watching Israel’s army we have to realize they aren’t it. Plus, with the economic crisis we face, we might finally wake-up to how much money Israel is costing taxpayers and how angry a country it truly is.
Yeah, right. I’d have better luck selling pork sushi friday night in Tel Aviv…

Posted by: David | Jan 19 2009 11:46 utc | 47

Fisk is a brave and honest reporter but he seems to have a severe disliking for Hizballah and Hamas which seems to me that his dislike seems more for those that resist than just those that are Shia. I think, from what I have heard him say and written, it is the Islamic element that he does not like. His Western sensibilities obviously mean that he is drawn to the secular and which blinds him to the obvious corruption and treachery of the likes of March 14th and Fatah. But he’s not gay.
Of course Hamas has its spies. People compare and contrast Hamas and Hizballah but we often forget that Hizballah was formed a good 5 years ealier than Hamas and even then was formed by people who had already been fighting a brutal civil war for the preceding 5 years. They both share the fact that they were born started with 2 immediate enemies who wanted to strangle them at birth, Israel and their fellow people (Amal in Hizballahs case and Fatah in Hamas’s case). But Hizballah had a lot more freedom than Hamas ever had and unlike Hamas’ support among the Palestinians, has the unwavering support of 99.9% of the Lebanese Shia. That makes it that much easier to find the spies. But, it has survived this onslaught and will have learnt from it (and will have a better idea as to who the spies are). And it can only get stronger now.
The iron fist is rusty. The Israeli policy of injecting defeatism into the Arab masses is dying. The Arab world have seen Hizballah take on Israel and show them the door. They have seen Israel send a rain of fire on Gaza but could not get a single Hamas soldier to surrender – Where are the pictures of Hamas soldiers lined up in their underwear like Dahlans men last year? There arent any. It became so ludicrous that it was the Israelis who in the end gave up trying to win. Detterence factor restored? Who do you think you are kidding Mr Olmert?

Posted by: mo | Jan 19 2009 12:02 utc | 48

Too bad Obama didn’t make Mearsheimer one of his Chicago Boys, Mearsheimer puts the rest of these boys to shame, hands down!

Posted by: Cynthia | Jan 19 2009 13:44 utc | 49

Fisk lebanese ‘patrons’ (at least in the sense of friends or local backers) in Lebanon are the Hariri family. And the Hariri family is a Saudi client. And the Saudi regime completely rejects Hamas, Hizbollah or any other form of resistance to their western power backers … other than phony jihadist groups working as propaganda props for the War on Terror or killing shiites in Iraq.
So as the As’ad in the AngryArab blog uses to says Fisk on Lebanon is heavy biased against Hizbollah but it uses to be quite good for all other arab related issues.

Posted by: ThePaper | Jan 19 2009 14:15 utc | 50

Well, it sounds like you all know more about Fisk than I do, so I defer to your better judgement. I may have been swayed by the absolutely brilliant Fisk articles I’ve read in the past, in which he often defended Iran (but not in conjunction with Hizbollah/Hamas).
Thank you all for enlightening me.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 16:25 utc | 51

my problem with fisk – was this attribution which hamas never made, could never have been made & if they know anything they know their territory – thek now concretely it is not lebanon & they are not hezbollah
it is simply lazy writing & lazy thinking
hamas survived a massacre therefore it won
it hhas been very instructive here in france with all the ‘new philosopher’ but also including cohn bendit – absolute silence on gaza tho i hear a rumour, frightening rumour that bernard henri levy is going to occupied palestine to write as a palestinian – you don’t know whether to laugh or cry

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 17:40 utc | 52

@remembereringgiap
“hamas survived a massacre therefore it won”
I should know when to shut up when I’m losing, but irrespective of Fisk’s remarks I can’t personally help feeling that it’s more a case of “Israel lost” than “Hamas won”. I mean, the Hizbollah:Israeli kill ratio was exactly 1:1 (150 soldiers on each side), while HAMAS seemed to have been taken by surprise and managed to kill only 13 Israeli soldiers (many of them actually killed by friendly fire which reduces HAMAS’s military success to almost zero).
If anything it was the “spirit of Palestine” that won, not any particular individual or group. HAMAS didn’t defeat the Israelis: The Israelis defeated themselves by exhibiting a barbarity that will mark an epochal turning point in global opinion and put them on the political retreat for the first time in 60 years.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 18:19 utc | 53

parviz
you are partially correct but i do not want to shit ink over those who shed blood but i do not believe the friendly fire incidents, there has been no numbering of the wounded, the army never entered centres & hamas contrary to myth are not suicidal – they fought ferociouslly – it is clear – through even a reading of those writers who have no sympathy for hamas. read haaretz – you can sense that
& i think al jazeera (who on iran, latin america & africa are just as bad as cnn) are lazy making a parallel that never functioned. aljazeera luckily has marwin barshir(?) & he has been consistantly incisive & never lazy
what is clear is that israel will drift further & further into being delegitimised as south africa was
south africa was not beaten by arms but by the will of a people, the resilience of those people’s leadership & world that could not afford to have it as a friend. the same will become true of israel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 18:53 utc | 54

remembereringgiap, we’re on the same wavelength completely, especially your last para, so maybe I was splitting hairs with my cautionary comments on Hamas’s military prowess. Here below is a link I couldn’t open but with the text conveniently provided by the sender (b, if it is already on the Blog please feel free to delete it):
Another War, Another Defeat
by John J. Mearsheimer, The American Conservative
<http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/jan/26/00006/> , Sunday, January 18,
2009
John J. Mearsheimer is a professor of political science at the University of
Chicago and coauthor of The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy. This article was completed hours before Israel announced a unilateral ceasefire. The American Conservative welcomes letters to the editor. Send letters to:
letters@amconmag.com
The Gaza offensive has succeeded in punishing the Palestinians but not in making Israel more secure. Israelis and their American supporters claim that Israel learned its lessons well from the disastrous 2006 Lebanon war and has devised a winning strategy
for the present war against Hamas. Of course, when a ceasefire comes, Israel will declare victory. Don’t believe it. Israel has foolishly started another war it cannot win.
The campaign in Gaza is said to have two objectives: 1) to put an end to the rockets and mortars that Palestinians have been firing into southern Israel since it withdrew from Gaza in August 2005; 2) to restore Israel’s deterrent, which was said to be diminished by the Lebanon fiasco, by Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza, and by its inability to halt Iran’s nuclear program.
But these are not the real goals of Operation Cast Lead. The actual purpose is connected to Israel’s long-term vision of how it intends to live with millions of Palestinians in its midst. It is part of a broader strategic goal: the creation of a “Greater Israel.” Specifically, Israel’s leaders remain determined to control all of what used to be known as Mandate Palestine, which includes Gaza and the West Bank. The Palestinians would have limited autonomy in a handful of disconnected and economically crippled enclaves, one of which is Gaza. Israel would control the borders around them, movement between them, the air above and the water below them.
The key to achieving this is to inflict massive pain on the Palestinians so that they come to accept the fact that they are a defeated people and that Israel will be largely responsible for controlling their future. This strategy, which was first articulated by Ze’ev Jabotinsky in the 1920s and has heavily influenced Israeli policy since 1948, is commonly referred to as the “Iron Wall.”
What has been happening in Gaza is fully consistent with this strategy. Let’s begin with Israel’s decision to withdraw from Gaza in 2005. The conventional wisdom is that Israel was serious about making peace with the Palestinians and that its leaders hoped the exit from Gaza would be a major step toward creating a viable Palestinian state. According to the New York Times’ Thomas L. Friedman, Israel was giving the Palestinians an opportunity
to “build a decent mini-state there-a Dubai on the Mediterranean,” and if they did so, it would “fundamentally reshape the Israeli debate about whether the Palestinians can be handed most of the West Bank.” This is pure fiction. Even before Hamas came to power, the Israelis intended to create an open-air prison for the Palestinians in Gaza and inflict great pain on them until they complied with Israel’s wishes. Dov Weisglass, Ariel Sharon’s closest adviser at the time, candidly stated that the disengagement from Gaza was aimed at halting the peace process, not encouraging it. He described the disengagement as “formaldehyde that’s necessary so that there will not be a political process with the Palestinians.” Moreover, he
emphasized that the withdrawal “places the Palestinians under tremendous pressure. It forces them into a corner where they hate to be.”
Arnon Soffer, a prominent Israeli demographer who also advised Sharon, elaborated on what that pressure would look like. “When 2.5 million people live in a closed-off Gaza, it’s going to be a human catastrophe. Those people will become even bigger animals than they are today, with the aid of an insane fundamentalist Islam. The pressure at the border will be awful. It’s going to be a terrible war. So, if we want to remain alive, we will have to kill and kill and kill. All day, every day.”
In January 2006, five months after the Israelis pulled their settlers out of
Gaza, Hamas won a decisive victory over Fatah in the Palestinian legislative
elections. This meant trouble for Israel’s strategy because Hamas was
democratically elected, well organized, not corrupt like Fatah, and
unwilling to accept Israel’s existence. Israel responded by ratcheting up economic pressure on the Palestinians, but it did not work. In fact, the situation took another turn for the worse in March 2007, when Fatah and Hamas came together to form a national unity government. Hamas’s stature and political power were growing, and Israel’s divide-and-conquer strategy was unraveling.
To make matters worse, the national unity government began pushing for a long-term ceasefire. The Palestinians would end all missile attacks on Israel if the Israelis would stop arresting and assassinating Palestinians and end their economic stranglehold, opening the border crossings into Gaza. Israel rejected that offer and with American backing set out to foment a civil war between Fatah and Hamas that would wreck the national unity government and put Fatah in charge. The plan backfired when Hamas drove Fatah out of Gaza, leaving Hamas in charge there and the more pliant Fatah
in control of the West Bank. Israel then tightened the screws on the
blockade around Gaza, causing even greater hardship and suffering among the Palestinians living there.
Hamas responded by continuing to fire rockets and mortars into Israel, while emphasizing that they still sought a long-term ceasefire, perhaps lasting ten years or more. This was not a noble gesture on Hamas’s part: they sought a ceasefire because the balance of power heavily favored Israel. The Israelis had no interest in a ceasefire and merely intensified the economic pressure on Gaza. But in the late spring of 2008, pressure from Israelis living under the rocket attacks led the government to agree to a six-month ceasefire starting on June 19. That agreement, which formally ended on Dec.
19, immediately preceded the present war, which began on Dec. 27.
The official Israeli position blames Hamas for undermining the ceasefire. This view is widely accepted in the United States, but it is not true. Israeli leaders disliked the ceasefire from the start, and Defense Minister Ehud Barak instructed the IDF to begin preparing for the present war while the ceasefire was being negotiated in June 2008. Furthermore, Dan Gillerman, Israel’s former ambassador to the UN, reports that Jerusalem began to prepare the propaganda campaign to sell the present war months before the conflict began. For its part, Hamas drasticallyreduced the number of missile attacks during the first five months of the ceasefire. A total of two rockets were fired into Israel during September
and October, none by Hamas.
How did Israel behave during this same period? It continued arresting and assassinating Palestinians on the West Bank, and it continued the deadly blockade that was slowly strangling Gaza. Then on Nov. 4, as Americans voted for a new president, Israel attacked a tunnel inside Gaza and killed six Palestinians. It was the first major violation of the ceasefire, and the Palestinians-who had been “careful to maintain the ceasefire,” according to Israel’s Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center-responded by resuming
rocket attacks. The calm that had prevailed since June vanished as Israel ratcheted up the blockade and its attacks into Gaza and the Palestinians hurled more rockets at Israel. It is worth noting that not a single Israeli was killed by Palestinian missiles between Nov. 4 and the launching of the war on Dec. 27.
As the violence increased, Hamas made clear that it had no interest in extending the ceasefire beyond Dec. 19, which is hardly surprising, since it had not worked as intended. In mid-December, however, Hamas informed Israel that it was still willing to negotiate a long-term ceasefire if it included an end to the arrests and assassinations as well as the lifting of the blockade. But the Israelis, having used the ceasefire to prepare for war against Hamas, rejected this overture. The bombing of Gaza commenced eight
days after the failed ceasefire formally ended.
If Israel wanted to stop missile attacks from Gaza, it could have done so by arranging a long-term ceasefire with Hamas. And if Israel were genuinely interested in creating a viable Palestinian state, it could have worked with the national unity government to implement a meaningful ceasefire and change Hamas’s thinking about a two-state solution. But Israel has a different agenda: it is determined to employ the Iron Wall strategy to get the Palestinians in Gaza to accept their fate as hapless subjects of a Greater Israel.
This brutal policy is clearly reflected in Israel’s conduct of the Gaza War. Israel and its supporters claim that the IDF is going to great lengths to avoid civilian casualties, in some cases taking risks that put Israeli soldiers in jeopardy. Hardly. One reason to doubt these claims is that Israel refuses to allow reporters into the war zone: it does not want the world to see what its soldiers and bombs are doing inside Gaza. At the same time, Israel has launched a massive propaganda campaign to put a positivespin on the horror stories that do emerge.
The best evidence, however, that Israel is deliberately seeking to punish the broader population in Gaza is the death and destruction the IDF has wrought on that small piece of real estate. Israel has killed over 1,000 Palestinians and wounded more than 4,000. Over half of the casualties are civilians, and many are children. The IDF’s opening salvo on Dec. 27 took place as children were leaving school, and one of its primary targets that day was a large group of graduating police cadets, who hardly qualified as terrorists.
In what Ehud Barak called “an all-out war against Hamas,” Israel has
targeted a university, schools, mosques, homes, apartment buildings,
government offices, and even ambulances. A senior Israeli military official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, explained the logic behind Israel’s expansive target set: “There are many aspects of Hamas, and we are trying to hit the whole spectrum, because everything is connected and everything supports terrorism against Israel.” In other words, everyone is a terrorist and everything is a legitimate target.
Israelis tend to be blunt, and they occasionally say what they are really doing. After the IDF killed 40 Palestinian civilians in a UN school on Jan. 6, Ha’aretz reported that “senior officers admit that the IDF has been using enormous firepower.” One officer explained, “For us, being cautious meansbeing aggressive. From the minute we entered, we’ve acted like we’re at war. That creates enormous damage on the ground . I just hope those who have fled
the area of Gaza City in which we are operating will describe the shock.”
One might accept that Israel is waging “a cruel, all-out war against 1.5 million Palestinian civilians,” as Ha’aretz put it in an editorial, but argue that it will eventually achieve its war aims and the rest of the world will quickly forget the horrors inflicted on the people of Gaza. This is wishful thinking. For starters, Israel is unlikely to stop the rocket fire for any appreciable period of time unless it agrees to open Gaza’s borders and stop arresting and killing Palestinians. Israelis talk about cutting off the supply of rockets and mortars into Gaza, but weapons will continue to come in via secret tunnels and ships that sneak through
Israel’s naval blockade. It will also be impossible to police all of the goods sent into Gaza through legitimate channels.
Israel could try to conquer all of Gaza and lock the place down. That would probably stop the rocket attacks if Israel deployed a large enough force. But then the IDF would be bogged down in a costly occupation against a deeply hostile population. They would eventually have to leave, and the rocket fire would resume. And if Israel fails to stop the rocket fire and keep it stopped, as seems likely, its deterrent will be diminished, not strengthened.
More importantly, there is little reason to think that the Israelis can beat Hamas into submission and get the Palestinians to live quietly in a handful of Bantustans inside Greater Israel. Israel has been humiliating, torturing, and killing Palestinians in the Occupied Territories since 1967 and has not come close to cowing them. Indeed, Hamas’s reaction to Israel’s brutality seems to lend credence to Nietzsche’s remark that what does not kill you makes you stronger.
But even if the unexpected happens and the Palestinians cave, Israel would still lose because it will become an apartheid state. As Prime Minister Ehud Olmert recently said, Israel will “face a South African-style struggle” if the Palestinians do not get a viable state of their own. “As soon as that happens,” he argued, “the state of Israel is finished.” Yet Olmert has done nothing to stop settlement expansion and create a viable Palestinian state,
relying instead on the Iron Wall strategy to deal with the Palestinians.
There is also little chance that people around the world who follow the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will soon forget the appalling punishment that Israel is meting out in Gaza. The destruction is just too obvious to miss, and too many people-especially in the Arab and Islamic world- care about the Palestinians’ fate. Moreover, discourse about this longstanding conflict has undergone a sea change in the West in recent years, and many of us who were
once wholly sympathetic to Israel now see that the Israelis are the
victimizers and the Palestinians are the victims. What is happening in Gaza will accelerate that changing picture of the conflict and long be seen as a dark stain on Israel’s reputation.
The bottom line is that no matter what happens on the battlefield, Israel cannot win its war in Gaza. In fact, it is pursuing a strategy- with lots of help from its so-called friends in the Diaspora-that is placing its long-term future at risk.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 19:15 utc | 55

The most important objective of Hamas in this massacre was to survive and survive with as much of their original capabilities intact as possible. If it had been weakened (military, politically, people support or moral) they would had send the Dahlan dogs back to Gaza. From what we know and ignoring propaganda from the pro colonizer media this objective has been fulfilled and with a pretty good score.
The second objective was to make the point that reducing Gaza to rouble and massacring hundred of childs even with the backing of all the rotten western ‘civilization’ wouldn’t work for stoping the launch of rockets on their former villages and fields. The point was made yesterday when they kept the rocket launchs for a few hours after the politicaly motivated colonizer ‘truce’. They run out of time, and didn’t fulfill anything. So the rotten europeans and the US are now saying that they are going to help defend the criminals and stop the smuggling of weapons for the resistance? What’s new about that?
The two other objectives remaining would be first to reduce civilian casualties and I hope that as primary a social movement, not just a resistent movement, they did all on their hands to protect and help the civilian population. Building ‘bunkers’, helping to distribute aid, stop anyone from profiting from the chaos, etc. All inside their limited capabilities. And last would have been to produce as much casualities on the colonizer murderous gangs as possible inside their very limited combat capabilities (no their forces aren’t Hizbollah, nor they have the supplies Hizbollah has) and against an enemy that will do everything to reduce those casualties to zero. Including not fighting (that is what the murderous gang did for most of the time) and just bomb everything (preferibly schools and kids) from a safe place.
All that ‘friendly kills’ excuses only mean that the murderous gang is either stupid or lying. More likely both. The wounded I think are likely to be around 100 or 150 from their official reports. I haven’t been following what they have reported after the first week and the normal media just ignored the topic if there was any update (it’s likely that YNET would have a daily casualty report on their new updates but I wasn’t checking).
Whatever has been the true final result (we don’t know how many actual fighters from Hamas or the other resistence groups died) anything better than 1:10 would have be oustanding or a miracle. And in any case it’s so secundary for the outcome of this conflict that I don’t even think is so important to analyze in detail the matter.

Posted by: ThePaper | Jan 19 2009 19:23 utc | 56

I don’t want to belabour the point, but Mearsheimer places more emphasis on Israel’s folly than Hamas’s military achievement, concluding: no matter what happens on the battlefield, Israel cannot win its war in Gaza.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 19:26 utc | 57

I think a statement that all of us can agree with is that “Israel lost, Palestine won”.

Posted by: Parviz | Jan 19 2009 19:29 utc | 58

Prof Walt of Walt/Mearsheimer “The Israel Lobby” fame on The myth of Israel’s strategic genius
recommended … as are the other pieces on his blog …

Posted by: b | Jan 19 2009 19:45 utc | 59

not only is the state of israel a murderous one but it is also possesses all the infantilism of vandals
they destroyed hundreds of houses & farms after their stupid fucking murderer of a prime minister ‘apologised’ to the people of gaza
i have mentioned this before but this is so much like the last ten years of apartheid south africa – massacres, murders, vandalism
to see what was once a beautiful orchard in central gaza that was used as a military base for the 22 days & as a field kitchen & then they were destroyed in thelast 24hours of withdawal of israeli forces,
there is something like 5000 houses completely destroyed, farms uprooted
it is a war of anhilation

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 21:10 utc | 60

fuck israel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 21:22 utc | 61

“But the main achievement of the war planners lies in the very barbarity of their plan: the atrocities will have, in their view, a deterrent effect that will hold for a long time.
Hamas, on the other side, will assert that their survival in the face of the mighty Israeli war machine, a tiny David against a giant Goliath, is by itself a huge victory. According to the classic military definition, the winner in a battle is the army that remains on the battlefield when it’s over. Hamas remains. The Hamas regime in the Gaza Strip still stands, in spite of all the efforts to eliminate it. That is a significant achievement.
Hamas will also point out that the Israeli army was not eager to enter the Palestinian towns, in which their fighters were entrenched. And indeed: the army told the government that the conquest of Gaza city could cost the lives of about 200 soldiers, and no politician was ready for that on the eve of elections.
The very fact that a guerrilla force of a few thousand lightly armed fighters held out for long weeks against one of the world’s mightiest armies with enormous firepower, will look to millions of Palestinians and other Arabs and Muslims, and not only to them, like an unqualified victory.”
uri averny

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 21:39 utc | 62

that barbait exposed in full view is iisrael’s sharpville, is israels soweto

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 21:40 utc | 63

that barbarity exposed in full view is israel’s soweto, ramallah its sharpevill
a fighter for the anc who became a writer spoke about something that perhaps only a palestinian could really understand. how time & space was different under apartheid. how you did not know if you started a journey whether you would reach the end. whether you would be stopped. whether your whole existence would be questioned
i would suggest that israels confining & constricting of this time & space, will in the end be its very destruction

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 22:07 utc | 64

remembereringgiap
I don’t think I’d classify the israeli army as one of the world’s mightiest, it certainly is much more dangerous than Hamas which has little more than hand weapons.
If it wasn’t for israel’s nukes, nobody would really take them seriously. Boots on the ground are what decides wars, even in this modern age. The Arabs have the israelis beat on this front. And after years of fighting I give the arabs the edge in battle too. They may lack israeli technology, but I’d bet they’d more than make-up for it in repressed anger.
Air forces are punishing, but aircraft don’t hold real estate, as we’ve seen in battle after battle since vietnam.
Even with american backing (quite a long way to resupply) israel wouldn’t have a chance in the region if it weren’t for their atomic “spoilers.” With the cold war over, imagine what could be happening if every major super power tried to install their puppets into the region.
So far it seems like russia and china are sitting on the sidelines waiting to see what happens, but if either of them thought there was an opportunity to do some real damage to the west by helping arm israel’s regional enemies, don’t think for a minute they wouldn’t.
Image how different things would be if russia were strong-arming the UN in favor of the region’s arabs like the US is doing for israel. Oooh it makes me shiver… like someone walking on my grave.

Posted by: David | Jan 19 2009 22:40 utc | 65

i don’t know if people can remember it but after the resistance in soweto – you would have these brutal & creepy spokesman for apartheid suggesting murders were not murders, massacres weren’t massacres, deaths of people in custody was not deaths of people in custody etc etc
& in these last three days the apartheid south africa’s brother in arms bring out the same sort of monsters – with for these ears – an eerily similar accent
the worm has turned for me, i have always seen the palestinian cause as a just one but israels actions in the last eight years under the patronage of bush has revealed them for what they really are – not the democracy they pompously pretend to be – but a sociopathic & racist tyranny that is not fit to govern
this racist israel ought to be delegitimised & dismantled

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Jan 19 2009 23:02 utc | 66

ISRAEL GUILTY OF ACT OF WAR AGAINST THE USA
Israel, a foreign State has attempted to exercise control in the USA against the Interests and Security of the USA .
Anyone with as much power and Influence over US is dangerous and is the greatest enemy. These are mainly Jews but have supporters in the American Right, Protestant Fundamentalists and American power imperialists.
The USA is in more danger from this Lobby’s threat than from any other.
Israel is a proven murderous state. Anyone supporting it is a murderer. Congressmen , Representatives, Students get trips to Israel to indoctrinate them. If Russia did this it would be stopped.
There is no question but that there are wonderful patriotic American Jews whose allegiance is totally to America.
There is no question that there are scheming manipulative Jews who will damage the US to aid Israel.
We know the difference between Zionists and Jews .
This must be the end of it. They have gone too far. Their tentacles thro American Society and institutions is all pervasive and must be dismantled by Patriotic Americans.
In the2 World war, in the first half of the last century, 60 million died. 19 million were Russian, 2.5 million were Poles, 6 million were Jews, etc. The Holocaust Brand to-day refers to Gaza where approx. 1500 were deliberately massacred by Israel and thousands maimed. This included 400 little innocent Children. Children, murderers, children. You are not soldiers but sadists. Some died in agony burned with phosphorous and many shot deliberately at close range by the Jewish soldiers. These monsters should be isolated and condemned with their supporters and die of shame.
Jews who all now know just how cruel and controlling the Israeli Government is now have a chance to publicly separate themselves from being seen as Unpatriotic and Treasonous. Patriotic Jews must join with us in scrapping the Jewish hold on The US or they will all get dragged down by it.
America must be taken back from all these traitors and their collaborators and returned to the ordinary decent people
We need to know who has been brought to Israel by Jewish organisations. Who is in Israel’s pocket. Who puts Israel before America. Anyone involved must be publicly registered as agents of a foreign power.

Posted by: boindub | Jan 20 2009 14:15 utc | 68