Pearl Harbor, continued

by on August 3, 2009 14
0sharesFacebook
0tweetsTwitter
0stumbledStumbleUpon
0sharesReddit
0recommendGoogle
pearl

Yesterday I reported that a letter signed by ten American attorneys general had compared the Hamas attacks on Israel to Pearl Harbor. A reader sent the above photograph, with the caption, "Pearl Harbor."

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.
Posted in Beyondoweiss

{ 14 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. Richard Witty says:
    August 3, 2009 at 8:52 am

    “Pearl Harbor” is a little over-dramatic, simplistic, and misrepresentative of the scale of Hamas attacks.

    In December, 2008, however, it was clear that Hamas INTENDED that Israel respond militarily, in incrementally escalating its shelling of first Sderot, then Ashkelon, then Beersheva, for 10 days prior to any Israeli military response.

    Tragic.

    • MRW says:
      August 3, 2009 at 12:47 pm

      Just plain wrong, Richard.

      On US election night, Nov 4 2008, Israel broke the six-month truce by entering Gaza and killing six Palestinians.

      Read this:

      A new UN report exposes a bit of misinformation peddled by the US and Israel and shatters the Zionist illusion that the Gaza war was legal.

      The report, prepared by human rights investigator Richard Falk, confirms that Tel Aviv was indeed the party that violated the Egyptian-brokered six-month truce in Gaza….

      Falk, who based his findings on Israeli sources, said the number of Palestinian rockets and mortar shells fired into Israel after the ceasefire came into effect in June had considerably declined.

      “The ceasefire was remarkably effective; after it began in June 2008, the rate of rocket and mortar fire from Gaza dropped to almost zero, and stayed there for almost four months,” the report continued….

      Tel Aviv in late December had claimed that it launched Operation Cast Lead on the territory of 1.5 million Palestinians in “retaliation for Palestine rocket attacks on Israel”.

      The UN report confirms that Tel Aviv began the bloodshed by breaking the truce and is thus unable to use claims of self-defense.

    • Shingo says:
      August 3, 2009 at 4:43 pm

      I don’t know why you persit with your worn out talking points Richard. It was Isreal, on November 4th 2008, that decided the ceasefire. It was going too well and as Tzipi Livni said, an extension of that ceasfire threaten Israel’s strategic interests.

      Israel didn’t respond. It initiated the massacre of Gaza.

      • Richard Witty says:
        August 3, 2009 at 6:46 pm

        I’m sorry Shingo. That is self-talk.

        Read the record. On November 4, there was a cease-fire breach. On November 16, the cease-fire was nearly entirely restored, until the formal end of the cease-fire, at which time Hamas incrementally escalated shelling first at desert, then at Sderot, then at Ashkelon, then at Beersheva.

        Israel didn’t respond militarily for 10 days. Hamas INSISTED that Israel respond militarily. The only important question that I had was of extent of military response.

        Hamas initiated war.

      • Shingo says:
        August 4, 2009 at 6:08 am

        Sorry Richard, but you are simply making this up as you go along.

        First, Israel vilated the ceasfire from day 1, having broken the original agreement to lift the blockade, which was one of the fundamental terms of the July 2008 ceasfire agreement.

        Israel then violated the ceasefre on November 4th. The reasons given were so weak, they were clearly false.

        There was no restoration of the ceasefire until January 2009.

        Having already violated the ceasfire at least once, Israel then waited for 10 days, upon which time it launched an attack it had been planning for 6 months. What followed was not an Israeli response, but a deliberate escalation that Israel had planned for 6 months or more.

        Hamas proposed a return to the ceafire as per the Jult 2008 terms, which Israel rejected.

        Israel planned the war for at least 6 months. The blockade itself was an act of war. As part of the July ceasefire agreement, it was understood that a sucessful 6 month ceasfire woud be a pre cursor to a much longer ceasfire, but as Tzipi Livni said, a long ceasefire was never going to be in Isrel’s strategic interests.

        Israel wanted the war,. The planned for it, and made it happen as they always do.

      • Citizen says:
        August 4, 2009 at 9:19 am

        Richard Witty is completely wrong. Here’s the tit-4-tat time line rendered after
        Israel broke the lull on November 4th, 2008 right up to implementation of OP Cast Lead: link to wapedia.mobi

      • Richard Witty says:
        August 4, 2009 at 12:11 pm

        Citizen and Shingo,
        If you read the timeline that Citizen posted above, the timeline EXACTLY conforms to my description of the sequence of events.

        Read about the restoration of the cease-fire by mutual consent, for the duration of its term, on November 17th.

        The question isn’t really who violated the cease-fire. When Hamas resumed shelling Israel, the cease-fire had formally stopped.

        But, the important question that I raised was “was it necessary, was it good judgement, was it courageous” for Hamas to resume shelling.

        And, was it courageous for them to escalate shelling UNTIL Israel responded militarily, and then hide, leaving Gazan civilians to bear the brunt of the Israeli attacks?

        In the article you posted, Citizen, it did NOT describe the cease-fire agreement as formally including the removal of blockade or full normalization of cross-border traffic, but instead used the terms that “Hamas expected”.

        They are DIFFERENT terms.

        I get that you believe what you want to believe, that you don’t bother to question your own assumptions, but in fact, Hamas was a primary party to the instigation of the Israeli response.

        If Hamas had not resumed shelling, Israel would not have had the political cover to undertake a “planned” military operation. (Israel has probably 100′s of plans, unused). They blew it.

        They let their frustration guide their decisions, rather than there benevolent reasoning. (Do you think they apply benevolent reasoning to Israeli civilians?)

      • Shingo says:
        August 4, 2009 at 4:39 pm

        Richard,

        Your timeline is a figment of your own imagination. Your version of events is not supported by any facts.

        There was no restoration of the cease-fire by mutual consent until January of 2009.

        The question is entirely about who violated the cease-fire. Israel doesn’t get to violate the ceasefire by striking at Gaza and then declare the ceasefire to be restored. It is akin to telling your enemy to stand still why you give them a bloody nose and complaining when they decide to retaliate.

        The cease-fire was ended the day Israel violated it, formally or otherwise. Had Hamas struck at Israel and killed 6 civilians, Israel would have most certainly responded.

        The question of what was necessary or courageous is trite and irrelevant. As a resistance organization, it is incumbent upon Hamas to resist Israel violence and occupation. Hamas already had justification for rocketing Israel, given that Israel refused to lift the blockade, having earlier agreed to do so.

        Given the 4 months of calm prior to November 4th, Israel had the option of returning to the ceasefire as proposed by Hamas in December, but rejected the offer. The reason was given by Tzipi Livni – a ceasefire is not in Israel’s strategic interests. Had the ceasefire lasted the duration without incident, the agreement was that it would be extended even further, which would have created pressure on Israel to eventually negotiate with Hamas. This is the last thing they want.

        There is no ambiguity about the fact that the cease-fire agreement included the lifting of blockade and the enabling of cross-border traffic. Whether formal or otherwise, Israel agreed to these conditions.

        If Hamas had not resumed shelling, Israel would have continued inciting Hamas until they got the response they needed. Israel are masters at this game. No one in Israel was even injured by the rockets that Hams fired after November 4th.

        Your argument essentially boils down to the fact that Hamas allowed Israel to vilate the ceafsefire and provoke them into a response. You admit that Israel instigated this violence that ensued, but are perfectly OK with that. In your opinin, Hams are to blame (as always) beasue they didn’t allow Gaza to be bombed.

        Your arguments are pure Israel propaganda and as such are very weak and unpersuasive.

  2. Koozie says:
    August 3, 2009 at 9:13 am

    Speaking of parallels, I wonder if part of the reason why the War in Gaza resonated so loudly in Europe and not so much in North America is that it was so reminiscent of Russia’s brutal punishment of Chechnya and specifically the complete wanton destruction of Grozny. Europeans were transfixed by horrific images from Grozny, a major population center reduced to craters and rubble by Russian aerial and tank bombardments, on their nightly news for years, while in America it only received occasional commentary. For someone who follows European politics very closely, I immediately made the association between Gaza and Grozny. I thought of a story about an approaching pincher movement of Russian tanks forcing an entire village either to face its war machine or walk through a minefield. The villagers walked through the minefield. Reminds me of the ‘choice’ generously presented to Palestinians who were blamed for not heeding the ‘fair warning’ given by the IDF to evacuate their homes before the shelling. Either face the bombs in their homes or face the bombs in the streets. In both Grozny and Gaza, the citizens chose to face death on their terms, thus exercising their only freedom. Having said all that, I welcome the invitation by the ten State Attorney Generals to talk in parallels, because it’s important not to talk about Gaza in isolation. Let’s start with Gaza and Grozny.

  3. Craig says:
    August 3, 2009 at 9:39 am

    Some rocket. It appears to have struck at the upper left corner of the photo, yet the pavement doesn’t even look damaged and the blast radius doesn’t look to be more than 15 feet in diameter, if that. These are the scary rockets that somehow justified flattening Gaza and killing hundreds of people?

    The Pearl Harbor comparison is, not surprisingly, horrendously inapt on several levels. The Japanese attacked a military target, killed many servicemen, and sank ships. You’d have to fire many thousands of those little toy rockets in a single coordinated attack to have any hope of doing comparable damage. Israel has a thoroughly shameless talent for absurdly hyperbolic rhetoric that makes it impossible to take their claims seriously.

    • Thom says:
      August 3, 2009 at 4:29 pm

      Craig, when a country declares war on you, you get to attack them. The fact that they have weapons that are less deadly or destructive than yours doesn’t give them a license to use them.

      You are typical of the Palestinian supporters in that you think “ineffective” or even “less effective” violence is the same thing as non-violence.

      When someone is shooting at you, you get to shoot him in self defense, even if he is a lousy shot and you are not.

    • Shingo says:
      August 3, 2009 at 4:46 pm

      Exactly thom.

      Israel declared war on Gaza two years ago via the blockade, which is an act of war. Before that, Isrel had fired 7,700 deadly accurate artillery shells into Gaza over a period of 12 months. That’s more ordinancy that Gaza have fired n 8 years.

      You are typical of the Palestinian propagandisyts who woudl have the world believe that history only begins the moment an Israeli is hurt.

      When the victim of a rape attack fights back, the rapist dosn’t get to claim self defense.

  4. Citizen says:
    August 3, 2009 at 1:41 pm

    US and Israeli leaders both have major logs in their eyes–here’s “Mister Realist” Bolton on the Daily Show: link to walt.foreignpolicy.com

    Amazing they can’t even look at a world map–say from Iran’s POV. Or Russia’s.

    Where are we Americans going, led by such insensitive and arrogant people?