sotb, the USA conducted such a blockade too. The USSR wanted to install rockets in Cuba to fire at the USA. The USA, right there in international waters, blockaded Cuba and made dire threats of killing unless there was compliance.
That's remarkably similar to Israel blockading Gasa. Heck, even the names Cuba and Gaza are similar. It's not like Kazakhstan and Togo which are obviously very different.
But rockets in Gaza of course get to Tel Aviv a lot faster than they would from Cuba to Washington. Note how Iran and President Amendiejihad, which has announced their intention to obliterate Israel, wants to bust the blockade and install rockets with atomic bombs on them in Gaza. If Iran wished to install them on Cuba, do you think the USA would allow that?
The USA also blockaded Japan when Japan Jihad's rampage across Asia was becoming annoying and their empire was growing too much. At some stage, Islamic Jihad's wish to rule the world also has to be stopped. Neville Chamberlain tried a "peace in our time" piece of paper but Germany didn't stop there. They were on Jihad and they had to be stopped. Megalomaniacs are set on victory - do or die. Somewhere, a line has to be drawn in the sand or in the water [I admit drawing lines in water is tricky though BP has achieved it with lines in the water and in the sand].
The Guardian's editors are obviously retarded, making a comparison with Somali pirates. <As the editors of The Guardian rightly observed on June 1, “If an armed group of Somali pirates had yesterday boarded six vessels on the high seas, killing at least 10 passengers and injuring many more, a NATO task force would today be heading for the Somali coast.” In this case, the NATO treaty obligates its members to come to the aid of a fellow NATO country—Turkey—attacked on the high seas. >
When people write things like that, they can reasonably be dismissed as totally ignorant or dishonest lying swine.
The Israeli pirates have not taken the boat and passengers hostage, demanding huge ransoms for their release. That's one significant difference. Another significant difference which seems to have escaped the editors of the Guardian is that the people on the boats captured by the Somalis had no interest in Somalia and were not supporters of killing Somalis by busting a Somali blockade to stop murderers acquiring weapons. The Somalis business is capturing ships which are sailing in the region with no aim other than to get safely past the place.
Perhaps you have trouble seeing the difference like the Guardian editors.
When there are lies and deception, it argues that the liars are intent on evil-doing. People being truthful are more convincing than liars. Comparing Israel's blockade with Somali piracy is a lie. A comparison with the USA's blockade of Cuba is more accurate. What do you think of that comparison? I guess you prefer the Somali theory. What was the ransom demanded by the Israeli pirates?
It is obviously simply anti-Jewish dishonesty or there would be no need to lie - truth would be sufficient.
Mqurice |
