Bill McGurn · Jun 2, 2010 at 11:53am

I confess that my first impressions of the peace flotilla were colored by a general distrust of anything with the word "peace" in the title. Perhaps it is a holdover from the Cold War, when every Soviet front was the Peace-This or the Peace-That. All the cheap sound and fury emanating from world capitals, so predictable, today does little to make me rethink that instinct.

The real problem with so many of the events that gain such disproportionate coverage -- e.g., Abu Ghraib -- is that they are really important not for what happened in that specific incident but as a convenient proxy for something much larger. Perhaps Israel handled this badly, as even many of her hawkish friends suggest, and may have made it harder to sustain the blockade. Israel was unwise to allow herself to be baited. But we're never going to get to the truth of what happened and why, until we start out with some honesty, e.g., that this "peace" flotilla was designed by its backers to further a war.

  • Comment Filters
Contributor Comments
Member Comments
Comment Popularity

Comments :

Pat in Obamaland
Joined
May '10

Re: Peace

Pat

Bill, given the seemingly obvious cover the "peace flotilla" and its kind provide for openingly smuggling weapons and combatants, do you believe the international condemnation to Israel's actions is honest? I guess to phrase my question another way, do you think, say, the French government is actually outraged by the Israeli assault or is merely posturing because it has a deeper axe to grind with the State of Israel?

I know the question varies from country to country, but I guess I would limit the question to Europe. I think we understand the rationale behind Iran, Syria, etc.

Re: Peace

Bill McGurn

They are honest in the sense that they can always be counted upon for such a denunciation. By contrast, could we see a French denunciation of Iran? Or Hamas?

Brandon Zaffini
Joined
May '10

Re: Peace

Brandon Zaffini

Peace so motivated the people on these ships that they resisted Israeli soldiers with iron poles and clubs. At any rate, I agree Israel’s action in this ruckus was imprudent at the very least. My question: does the fact that this whole event took place in international water make the actions of Israel illegal under U.N Convention law?


Would you like to comment on this Conversation?

Become a Member for $3.67 a month.

Join the Conversation
Already a member? Sign In
Loading
Welcome Visitor

Already a Member?
Please Sign In

Become a Member to enjoy the full benefits of Ricochet:

Join Ricochet today!

Already a Member? Sign In