marmara 2

Submitted by the Grand Infidel of Kaffiristan (Australia), Sep 29, 2011 at 05:26

'Tim Lock' , writing from Saudi Arabia, expresses dismay that IDF troops sent to inspect the Marmara, having been met with 'martyrs' intent on killing them - used deadly force against their attackers. No one else seems to have a problem with self-defence.

What would 'Tim' from Saudi Arabia suggest the IDF troops have done when they realised they were not being presented with tea and biscuits at all - but with metal poles, bottles ,knives and guns? No doubt people with pro-muslim biases would have liked them to present a glass jaw to their attackers.

The simple fact is that at this stage - only those who were present really knew what happened.

But if the IDF troops - under orders to simply inspect the vessel for contraband and illegal arms supplies - committed cold blooded murder then they would be at fault. And clearly should be jailed. However that was almost certainly not the case - no independent investigators of this incident have found evidence that this occurred. If murder was the intent on the part of the Israelis- they could have quite easily and quite safely have opened fire from the helicopters they were arriving in.

That it eventuated in bloodshed was unfortunate. But on the other hand - given the expressed desire of many of the 'peaceful protesters' to become martyrs - they did get their wish - though for their backers and those who think like them (a better term would be emote, as no real thought is involved) - this occurred without the loss of any Israeli lives. Which would be the sole cause for disappointment for people given over to seeking the death and destruction of an enemy they themselves continue to create - as a solution for their own problems.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".